European Parliament has endorsed Goldstone report. The EU Observer reports that the EP
has endorsed the Goldstone report, the UN’s official investigation into the bombardment of the Gaza Strip in January 2009, a report that accuses Israel of war crimes and calls for the prosecution of Israeli officials in The Hague.
In a 335-to-287 vote splitting the house between left and right, MEPs backed a joint resolution from the centre left, far left, Greens and Liberals calling on the EU’s foreign policy chief, Catherine Ashton, and the bloc’s member states to “publicly demand the implementation of [the report's] recommendations and accountability for all violations of international law, including alleged war crimes.”
With this position, the EP is in stark contrast to the US Congress
which last November passed a resolution calling the report “irredeemably biased and unworthy of further consideration or legitimacy.”
More details about the resolution in the EP Press release: here (pdf).
Ahston’s programmatic speech. Catherine Ashton has presented her foreign policy views in a speech at the European Parliament (available as pdf here). Key points from the speech:
On the current turf wars between EU institutions:
Europe is going through a phase of building something new. Where people have to adjust their mental maps and institutions have to find their new place. Doing so is messy and complicated. But also exciting. For it is impossible to over-state just how important this moment is.
On the new diplomatic service:
This is a once-in-a-generation opportunity to build something that finally brings together all the instruments of our engagement in support of a single political strategy. (…)
If we get it right, as we must, then we will be able to shape a European foreign policy for the 21st century with an external service designed to achieve that. One where we mobilise all our levers of influence – political, economic, development and crisis management tools – in a co-ordinated way. A service that is representative of the EU in geographic and gender terms. It is the only acceptable way to go.
Why the EU needs a strong foreign policy:
At the heart of everything we do lies a simple truth: to protect our interests and promote our values we must be engaged abroad. No one can hope to be an island of stability and prosperity in a sea of insecurity and injustice. Ours is a world in flux. (…)
If we pull together we can safeguard our interests. If not, others will make decisions for us. It really is that simple.
Today’s world — two key characteristics:
Deep interdependence – in political, economic and security terms. Technologies, ideas, diseases, money: everything moves. We are connected in ways we have never been before.
The fact that power is shifting. Both within political systems – roughly from governments to markets, media and NGOs. And between political systems – roughly from the old “West” to both East and South.
Core objectives of EU foreign policy:
First, to ensure greater stability and security in our neighbourhood, by promoting political and economic reforms. This is important in itself for reasons which are self-evident. But our wider international credibility also depends on getting the neighbourhood right.
Second, to address the global security challenges of our time. For this, we need comprehensive strategies, strong international organisations and the rule of law. Both within countries and between them.
Third, to build a network of strategic relations with key countries and organisations – because the problems we face cannot be solved by any single actor.
Comments on Ashton’s speech:
Tony Barber, FT
Lady Ashton, the European Union’s foreign policy chief, hit back at her critics on Wednesday by blaming rivalry among the EU’s institutions for slow progress in establishing the bloc’s new diplomatic service. In a feisty appearance at the European parliament, Lady Ashton portrayed herself as an energetic leader thinking hard about Europe’s place in the world and travelling frequently from one region to another to uphold European interests.Ian Traynor, Guardian
In a combative performance outlining early views on how to make EU foreign policy more effective, the Labour peer signalled the start of “assertive leadership” and blamed the turf wars raging in Brussels over the shape and powers of a new European diplomatic service for her plight.Ahto Lobjakas, RFE/RL
In her maiden speech to the European Parliament in Strasbourg, Ashton — who has come under fire for failing so far to give the bloc’s foreign policy a clear shape or purpose — said the EU must become a major player on the international scene, to protect its interests and values, and to respond to the “enormous” global demand for its presence. But the EU’s top diplomat had little of substance to say about how the bloc would go about it. She mentioned the United States and Russia only to refer to visits and meetings to the two countries.Honor Mahony, EU Observer
Her delivery of the speech and her subsequent responses to MEPs’ questions were notably more assured than when she last appeared before the house. She also threw a few punches of her own after having being publicly criticised by both EU foreign ministers and defence ministers in the past few weeks.Gavin Hewitt, BBC blog
In the Parliament today there was some criticism. One MEP, referring to the turf battles, told her: “You mustn’t be intimated by internal rules. Be a protagonist.” Another called for strong leadership. It was all pretty mild.What Catherine Ashton has going for her is that both MEPs and most of Europe’s leaders have a vested interest in making her job work. The consequence of failure is not just humiliation for Catherine Ashton but recognition that the long years of arguing have failed to deliver a stronger voice for Europe on the world stage. Few want to see that.
Smaller EU states want bigger role in EU foreign policy. The EU Observer reports:
Poland, Hungary, Slovakia and the Czech Republic have warned that member states could opt out of EU foreign policy unless they get a fair share of power in its new diplomatic corps. “The eventual lack of [member states'] involvement in shaping and implementing policies could lead to the loss of their interest in EU foreign policy and could even result in a widening gap between EU and national policies,” the group of four countries said in a policy paper circulated in Brussels late last month.
The so-called Visegrad states (…) also urged the established EU powers to make way for newer EU members in the European External Action Service (EEAS). (…) “Since geographical balance is a basic ingredient of the EEAS, it should be incorporated in the staff regulation as a binding principle …[and] requires regular monitoring through …e.g. yearly reports,” it added.
Romania, Bulgaria, Slovenia, the Baltic countries, Greece, Cyprus, Austria and Portugal have broadly allied themselves with the position over the past two weeks.
The Visegrad group is keen to grab more influence in Brussels. If the EU goes ahead with suggestions to hold informal summits 10 times a year, the Visegrad countries aim to have a prime minister-level meeting before each one. Visegrad EU ambassadors already meet on a monthly basis.
Read today on Global Europe: Think strategic. It’s too early for a high level meeting between the EU and the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO). By Alexander Cooley, Associate Professor of Political Science at Barnard, Columbia University in New York and Open Society Global Fellow researching the rise of the SCO in Central Asia.
To receive the Global Europe Morning Brief every weekday by email, send an email to globeurope@gmail.com