House of Commons - Foreign Affairs

Select Committee on Foreign Affairs Sixth Report

5 Foreign, Security and Defence Policy

94. The Treaty establishing a Constitution makes provision for a Minister for Foreign Affairs, whose work on behalf of the Council would be supported by an external action service.[126] Lacking the legal base which would have been provided had the Treaty been implemented, the EU has been unable to proceed with the establishment of the External Action Service and the appointment of the Foreign Minister. Mrs Beckett agreed that the EU External Action Service "cannot go ahead" without the Treaty that provides for it.[127]

95. Nonetheless, the European Commission has continued to open and to staff 'representative offices' overseas. And High Representative Solana—who would certainly have been appointed as the EU's first Foreign Minister—has taken on an increasingly prominent role, as evidenced by his June 2006 mission to Iran. The Foreign Secretary referred to the "very valuable contribution" made by Mr Solana on behalf of the EU.[128] It is not unusual for Mr Solana to be referred to informally, but incorrectly, as the EU's 'Foreign Minister'. Similarly, the Commission's representatives in non-member states are frequently referred to as 'ambassadors': indeed, the Commission's office in Washington DC refers to its representative to the USA, Mr John Bruton, as "Ambassador Bruton".[129]

96. The former Minister for Europe, Douglas Alexander, confirmed that the term 'EU Ambassador' is a misnomer.[130] In a letter following up his predecessor's oral evidence, the new Minister for Europe, Geoff Hoon, told us that:

Douglas Alexander's statement to the Committee that these individuals are not Ambassadors, but representatives of the European Commission, was correct. The term 'Ambassador' has never been correct terminology, although mention of 'EU Ambassadors' is common outside the Union when talking about a group of Ambassadors belonging to individual Member States. While incorrect references sometimes occur, the important issue is that neither Commission representatives nor Commission offices can represent Member States.

On the question of EU representatives' residences overseas, the UK, with other EU Member States through the Council of Ministers, exercises significant influence on the establishment of the EC budget at the beginning of each financial period. It is from this budget that offices and residences of the Commission overseas are funded. Parliament is also given the chance to scrutinise the Government's position on the draft EC budget before its adoption in Brussels.

97. The FCO did not have immediate access to information on the cost of the European Commission's representative offices or residences overseas. It took six weeks for the information to be obtained by the FCO and passed to us.[131] As Mrs Beckett acknowledged, "that does suggest that we are not involved in very detailed scrutiny."[132]

98. In a paper submitted for consideration at the June Council, Commission President Barroso proposed a series of measures intended to make progress on CFSP and other issues in the absence of the provisions in the Treaty. The Barroso paper is entitled Europe in the World: Some Practical Proposals for Greater Coherence, Effectiveness and Visibility.[133] It sets out three main factors on which, argues Mr Barroso, the success of EU 'external action' depends:

first and foremost, political agreement among Member States on the goals to be achieved through the EU. This requires a strong partnership between the EU institutions and a clear focus on a limited number of strategic priorities where Europe can make the difference, rather than dispersing efforts across the board. This is the condition sine qua non;
second, whether the available policy instruments are suited to the task at hand, are backed with the necessary resources, and present clear advantages;
third, the role and responsibility of the EU institutions and the legal environment.[134]

99. Although the Foreign Secretary appeared quite relaxed about the general tenor of Mr Barroso's paper, she was very clear that she would not countenance any attempt to give the Commission a greater role in foreign policy:

Who can quarrel with greater co-operation or perhaps greater exchange of personnel. For example, in my former department we exchanged personnel with the comparable French ministry. All of those things, better strategic planning, can be very useful. However, and there is a substantial however to this, better co-ordination within the Commission and between the High Representative and the Commission, fine, we would not quarrel with that, but I understand there is also a suggestion of perhaps full Commission participation alongside the Presidency and EU delegations. Well, no, maybe not, perhaps not even legally allowable. I stress to the Committee that the headline phrases that you have quoted are fine but if they contain within them detail which we question then we will question it.[135]

100. Mrs Beckett continued:

I have already, in the short time that I have been in this post, heard on a number of occasions representatives, not just of the UK but also of other Member States, talking very firmly about foreign policies being a matter for Member States, and I think you will find that Member States across the board are generally quite jealous of their rights.[136]

The Foreign Secretary conceded, however, that the appointment of a Commission special representative to Macedonia, who also reports directly to the Council, had been a bad precedent.[137]

101. We conclude that, whatever the merits of the proposal to establish a Foreign Minister and an external action service for the EU, it is important that the European Commission should not develop a diplomatic service or 'embassies' by stealth. We recommend that the Government take steps to prevent the official use of the term 'ambassador' to refer to the Commission's representatives and that it ensure that, at a time when the funding of British diplomatic, consular and trade posts around the world is under great pressure, expenditure by the Commission on its overseas delegations and properties is subject to rigorous scrutiny.

Is there a distinctive role for the EU in foreign policy?

Keeping the neighbourhood tidy

102. The EU has become increasingly active as a player on the world stage. EU foreign ministers and, recently, High Representative Solana, have been actively engaged in seeking to persuade Iran to abide by its previous undertakings not to develop nuclear weapons. The EU is also a member of the Quartet, which oversees attempts to revive the Middle East Peace Process. Nearer home, the EU is heavily involved in attempts to reconstruct the Western Balkans. It has also been developing an out-of-area defence capability.

103. Charles Grant reminded us of the actual and potential scope of the EU's current security role outside its borders:

Europe could be a serious security power. It can create peace, and is creating peace in parts of the world. I find that the British public have no idea that the EU is involved in missions in places like Aceh, where they are a key element in monitoring the peace settlements; on the Gaza-Egypt border where they are policing the border; or in Transdnistria—where they may be on their way soon. Obviously, there is an EU force keeping the peace in Bosnia. … The EU is developing so-called battle groups, which will be up and running soon. They will be forces that are supposed to be capable of going in to a crisis zone in a fairly difficult situation, not just peace-keepers.[138]

This work is valuable and it is by no means certain that if the EU were not doing it, it would be done as well, or at all.

104. Douglas Alexander was upbeat when speaking to us about the EU's role in foreign policy:

In terms of the effectiveness of the European Union projecting itself and its values internationally, I would probably cite the most salient example, which is that of Iran. If you look at the E3 process over recent months, initiated with the full support of other European countries, it seems to me a very good example of where there has been, notwithstanding the present arrangements within the European Union, a very effective European dimension to one of the biggest single strategic challenges that we face.[139]

AN EU WORKING IN BRITAIN'S INTERESTS

105. The FCO's strategy White Paper, Active Diplomacy for a Changing World confirms that the EU's role in foreign and security policy is likely to grow.[140] The White Paper continues:

As a global player, it will be in our interest to work with our EU partners, in particular France and Germany, to develop a stronger and more effective EU role in Europe and beyond.[141]

In similar vein, the White Paper goes on to state:

It will be in our interest that the EU becomes a more capable global actor. To achieve this, EU Member States will need to translate common external policies into effective action through practical and political commitment. Combining our economic, diplomatic and military weight better and making EU development assistance more effective will be critical to increasing the EU's international impact and its contribution to our international security objectives in particular.[142]

106. We conclude that foreign policy is and should remain primarily a matter for each nation state to decide for itself. We further conclude, however, that there can be real value in co-ordinating foreign policies at EU level and in undertaking joint missions on matters where the EU25 can agree and where they have a shared interest.

126 Foreign and Commonwealth Office, Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe, Cm 6429, October 2004, p 158 Back

127 Q 243 Back

128 Ibid Back

129 "New EU Ambassador John Bruton meets President Bush", www.eurunion.org/News/press/2004/200400171.htm Back

130 Q 158 Back

131 Ev 58 Back

132 Q 244 Back

133 COM(2006) 278 final, available at http://ec.europa.eu Back

134 Ibid, p5 Back

135 Q 248 Back

136 Q 251 Back

137 Ibid Back