Can Euro-Vision Be More Than a Song Contest?
The dust has settled in Brussels from the European Parliament elections and already the Brussels political elite have turned their attention to the appointment of the new European Commission president. A favorite parlor game in Brussels every five years is guessing who will be the new president and the roster of members the European Commission. Appointing a new commission has traditionally been an exercise in political consensus par excellence, reflecting the communitarian process that has defined political decision-making the European Union since its inception.
With no other candidate on the official radar, current Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso has been seen as the establishment favorite for a second term. If re-appointed, Barroso will become only the second person to serve two terms as president, sharing that honor with that titan of European integration, Jacques Delors. In what can best be described as a pre-emptive victory lap, Barroso gave a series of interviews last month stating his plans to form the next European Commission as soon as possible to avoid uncertainty that he cited would damage Europe given the economic crisis. This line of argumentation has already gained explicit support from current European Union president, Sweden, and the tempered support of Euro heavyweights, Germany and France.
But the raucous composition of the new European Parliament is proving a major stumbling block to Barroso's fast-track re-appointment. In what can only be described as a masterful assertion of political skill, leaders of the three opposition parties - the Socialists, the Greens and the Liberals - were able to cobble together a majority that halted the re-appointment that many had expected after its unanimous endorsement by the heads of the EU's 27 member-states. In a dramatic U-turn, Sweden - which assumed the six-month rotating presidency on July 1 - has said that it will respect the will of the parliament. Stockholm has agreed to postpone his nomination until the fall.
Barroso's political survival is among his few political accomplishments. To his credit, Barroso has shaken off any vestige of association with George W. Bush and the invasion of Iraq. (Remember the Azores Summit, anyone?) Even in the run-up to this year's Commission appointment, he was able to forge a coalition that cut across the political spectrum. But this is a testament to political resilience, not political leadership. No one will claim that it's been a good five years for the EU. Its citizens are demoralized and disinterested. Turnout in European Parliamentary elections have been consistently declining since the creation of the European Parliament in 1979. At 42%, turnout in the 2009 parliamentary election was its lowest ever. The EU has been adrift since the 2004 enlargement that at once made a dramatic push toward the idea of a Europe whole and free, but left Europe searching for a new project.
Barroso's performance as a visionary leader has been lackluster. He presided over the two crushing electoral defeats - referenda in France and the Netherlands about the 2004 EU constitution and a 2008 referendum in Ireland about the Lisbon Treaty. During last summer's Russian invasion of Georgia-which should have been Europe's hour to act on the world stage- Barroso seemed comfortable to melt into the background and let French President Nicholas Sarkozy take the lead in brokering a peace. Europe has also failed to respond to the economic crisis quickly; member-states instead recoiled into positions that more narrowly focused on national interests. Several prominent members of the European Parliament, most notably former Belgian Prime Minister Guy Verhofstadt, a newly minted Liberal, have been highly critical of Barroso's flatfooted performance on this front. Barroso has also been unable to rally member-states behind Europe's other projects - be it a coordinated energy policy towards Russia, increased defense and security integration, or comprehensive immigration reform.
Today's Europe needs the "vision" thing now more than ever. The Commission president is the face of the EU. As such, he or she must be an effective communicator of a European vision. The Lisbon Treaty foresees the creation of a European Council president and a European foreign minister, a position that could lend greater clarity of vision to the EU at home and abroad. But until the Lisbon Treaty comes into force, decision-makers in European capitals cannot sit back and assume that the accord will fill the leadership deficit that has plagued the EU for the past decade. As the re-packaged Lisbon Treaty makes its second (third, really) pass through the minefield of member-state confirmation, the pact will need a spirited champion who can parachute into the field and make the case for Europe to its people. Without a skillful and charismatic Commission president to shepherd the treaty's passage, the EU may remain stuck in the institutional malaise that has consumed it for the past four years.
The European Parliament has a unique political opportunity to hold Barroso to task for his record. The European Parliament must wait until after the new Irish referendum, now scheduled for October 2, before re-visiting the question of appointing a new Commission president. Rather than focus on back-room negotiations on committee chairmanships, the ad-hoc coalition of Socialists, Liberals and Greens should make Barroso's re-appointment contingent on the Lisbon Treaty's unanimous ratification by all EU member-states.
Such a bold political move on the part of the European Parliament would have a three-fold effect. First, it would hold Barroso accountable for his first term. Barroso's performance in last several weeks has shown great zest. He has been working hard to create structure that would effectively oversee and coordinate financial regulation throughout the EU, but that hardly compensates for the missed opportunities of the past. Second, it would assert the European Parliament's authority. Swedish Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt said that he accepted Parliament's decision about Barroso to show the body "respect". But respect for the European Parliament-the only pan-European institution with directly elected representatives - must be more than a fleeting occurrence. Third, it would spur the interest of Europe's disengaged citizens. European citizens know that if theirs is to become a truly political union, high-profile leaders must pay a price for their shortcomings. It's time to turn Euro-vision into reality.
