Enlargement and beyond – challenges and opportunities ****************************************************************************************** * Enlargement and beyond – challenges and opportunities ****************************************************************************************** Günter Verheugen - Member of the European Commission Public Speech at Charles University, delivered in framework of Workshop on European Neighb organised by CEFRES, DGAP and the European Commission Prague, 10 June 2004 Mr Rector, Thank you for your kind welcome and introduction. The opportunity to address a Czech audie prestigious lecture hall at Prague’s Charles University is a special pleasure and honour f Ladies and gentlemen, The last time I spoke in this building, almost exactly two years ago, the most difficult f negotiations on Czech accession to the European Union was still ahead of us. We finished t on schedule in December 2002. This was crucial, because the window of opportunity started afterwards: the international situation became much less favourable during 2003. Then, the accession were won, here as well as everywhere else. Ten new member states joined the EU a And now, during these very days, they all participate fully in the elections for the Europ This is a success. But let me stop being self-indulgent. There is a lot of work still ahead. Let me start by European elections, beginning with the bright side. Coming so soon after your country's accession to the European Union, this first vote for t Parliament is a great opportunity. Over the past years, I had the privilege to see at first hand how the candidate countries opened up their economies and societies. I am still amazed at how far they have come. Almost 15 years ago, the Czech people made a choice to join the European Union. With the o the region, you have put an end to the Cold War and transformed central and eastern Europe growing, dynamic, democratically advanced region that has culturally enriched us all. The be seen for what it was: a bleak period of limited freedom and restricted choice. Now we share responsibility for our own destiny. We can face the challenges together and m choices for us all. When the Czech Republic prepared for accession to the European Union i it had to adjust to rules on which it had no voice. By taking part in the European electio each and every one of you will, for the first time, have the chance to contribute towards European institutions and their policies. You should not let this opportunity pass. Withou participation of the citizens, our European Union of democratic States cannot work. But our experience with direct European elections over the past few decades has been mixed rates have gradually declined. The election campaigns have often been lacklustre affairs. are often seen more as interim verdicts on national governments than as indications for fu policies. For many if not most voters, Brussels is too remote to be exciting. This may seem strange. The European Parliament has very real powers. It decides on legisla us all; The European Parliament has a decisive voice on the EU budget. And it has direct i institution that I represent: the European Commission. Indeed, when the Heads of States an meet next week, they will take the results of the current elections into account when they Commission president to succeed Romano Prodi from next November. There are many explanations for this discrepancy between the objective importance of Europ and voter interest. It has been a fertile subject for political scientist for decades, and continue to be so. Let me briefly discuss just one factor: the role of national politician national governments and in national parliaments. It is often said that national politicia responsibility towards their electorates for their actions in Europe. Whenever things go w happy to claim the credit, and for the rest, Brussels is a convenient scapegoat. They omit in Brussels the Commission makes the proposals; the decisions are taken by the Council (i. governments) and the European Parliament. The end result - all this so-called excessive bu Brussels - is there because our national politicians wanted it to be there. So, what is the remedy? Should we move to more direct democracy, more referenda? An intere would European integration even have started if it had been submitted to referenda in the of our major achievements, such as the creation of the Euro or the recent enlargement, hav We have seen much political leadership towards European integration during the past 50 yea less effort at explaining things to voters. However, the successful outcome of the accessi of 10 countries last year, including the one in your country demonstrated that referenda o can be won. I conclude from this, that regardless of the question whether to have the constitutional o go for a referendum or not, there is a clear need to campaign for Europe – to inform, to d convince people why our future depends on the success of the European integration also in By doing so we will be able to fill this gap between leadership and perception, which seem need. Interestingly, this responsibility will soon be put to the test. Hopefully, next week the of heads of state and government will reach agreement on the European Constitution. This C will make the Union more transparent, more efficient and more democratic. But it will need by all 25 member states before it enters into force. Quite a few member states, both old a already decided they will submit the Constitution to a referendum. [And some of the opinio look very promising. So, our government leaders will have a wonderful chance to take the C their voters, explain why we need it, and defend why they approved it. So, whether or not will be ratified, we will see much more debate on European issues soon.] The European political agenda is very full. Let me give you a brief and partial list. - We need to decide on the EU’s medium-term budget, the so-called “Financial Perspectives” the budget for tomorrow's Union of probably at least 27 Member States. Budgets are not onl fundamentally about policy. We have to make sure that solidarity, the core of the European is best achieved through common action, remains a priority for the Member States. The new will need adequate funds for the foreseeable future so they can catch up with the older me - We need to give a much firmer boost to European growth and sustainable development – wha the Lisbon agenda. If we want to achieve our goal of making the Union the world's "most co dynamic knowledge-driven economy by 2010", then more efforts are needed – and globalisatio few options. Competitiveness and a growth-oriented industrial policy, along with better co economic policies in the Union, must be the focus of tomorrow's Commission. People through will see and feel the difference once policies are more in line with the needs of our econ be pessimistic. Since enlargement, our economy matches the output of the US. The growth in states is impressive. - This December, the European Council will decide on whether to open negotiations on Turke the Union. They will base themselves on a report and recommendation from the Commission. T key remaining task for the current Commission. - We will base ourselves or an objective analysis. The reforms undertaken in Turkey over t have been impressive. This will be fully reflected in our assessment. - While we already are a dominant player in the world economy, we need to match this in th foreign policy by becoming much more focused and cohesive. The Constitution, with the crea EU foreign minister, will help in this respect. But the most important issue is not organi substantive. If we don’t speak with one voice, we will not be heard. If we are not heard, our values and our interests? The well-being, stability and peace of Europe's nations – particularly in these times of n depend on our European Union. It is an anchor for our Member States and our neighbours and It is almost a platitude to say that the enlargement of the European Union on 1 May marks a new era in European history. It is not just the end of the artificial division of Europe fresh start. We cannot just sit back, dwell on the Herculanean achievement we have just ac henceforth concentrate on the internal affairs of the enlarged Union. Having built a bigger European house, we must now continue our efforts to ensure that we l neighbourhood. The European Union may now have expanded to an almost continental scale, bu in isolation. We have multiple interests in common with the world around us. And in partic the countries around us to be stable, well-governed and prosperous. Our interests in close with neighbours, and in their well-being, are manifold. Of course, their prosperity can on to us. But there is more. Only through stronger political cooperation can we hope to conta regional conflicts. How else to deal properly with legal and illegal migration, the threat crime, terrorism or the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, or with certain envi problems? How else to address such issues as energy security or maritime safety? Taking on our responsibilities for this region, expanding stability and prosperity in the neighbourhood, is certainly one of the most pressing and important challenges the European after enlargement. The European Union has now come to a point where it must define the fut wants to play in a pan-European context. It also has to make sure that enlargement benefit and that the emergence of new dividing lines on our continent is prevented. We cannot acce disappearance of the iron curtain leads to the creation of a “Brussels-lace curtain”. As a response to these challenges we have conceived the European Neighbourhood Policy, whi our Eastern as well as Mediterranean neighbours. Let me stress that the European Neighbourhood Policy is distinct from the issue of possibl enlargement of the European Union. The policy concerns countries for which accession is no the agenda. But it does not close the door to the European aspirations of any country. Thus, the countries of the Western Balkans are not included in the Neighbourhood Policy, a prospect of becoming members of the EU provided that they fulfil the criteria for membersh Copenhagen European Council in 1993. As concerns Russia, the EU and Russia have decided to develop their strategic partnership the creation of four common spaces, as defined at the 2003 St. Petersburg summit. The European Neighbourhood Policy offers our neighbours the chance to participate in a wid EU policies and activities, through greater political, security, economic and cultural co- It proposes to partner countries the deepening of relations over a broad spectrum: politic and reform, economic co-operation and integration, including trade, legislative approximat infrastructure networks including energy, transport, information society and environment. cooperate more with partners on research and innovation, in the area of Justice and Home a enhanced people-to-people contacts in education and culture, as well as the maintenance an of cross-border contacts and regional co-operation. Far beyond the direct benefits of cooperation, there will be indirect economic benefits as economic and political conditions will encourage cross-border trade and create a favourabl for investment. This, in turn, will create favourable conditions for economic growth for a concerned. Ultimately, the idea is to move to a substantial deepening of political cooperation based as well as a significant degree of economic integration. This will not be achieved easily or overnight. The level of integration achieved within th Union is highly demanding on its members – as the new member states know only too well. Ex integration to partner countries in our neighbourhood can only be done gradually and caref to be to their benefit as well as to ours. For instance, we need to protect the integrity market. At the same time, this will imply challenging reforms for our partners, but they w also bring considerable benefits for them. So much for the broad objectives of the neighbourhood policy. But how can we achieve these Over the past year, we have carefully reflected on this, and made a start. I am particular the new Member States, even before accession, have from the very beginning actively partic discussions that led to the creation of the new Neighbourhood concept. Many of the ideas t from Poland, Lithuania and others are now reflected in the policy papers on the European N Policy. The main vehicle for the Neighbourhood policy will be Action Plans, concluded between the its partners. These Action Plans will be very broad in scope, but also very precise in the upon. We intend to avoid declaratory policy, and be as concrete and specific as possible. precise timeframes and be able to monitor whether we reach our goals. After the policy was first endorsed by the European Council last year, we have entered int dialogue with those partner countries with which Partnership and Cooperation or Associatio are in force: Ukraine and Moldova to the East, and Morocco, Tunisia, Jordan, Israel and th Authority in the Mediterranean. Together, we have begun to define a set of priorities whos bring our partners and us, in the European Union, closer together. Two overriding principles underlie our relations with the partner countries as we develop them - the principle of differentiation and the principle of joint ownership. The Action Plans are tailor-made, because neither the political, social and economic situa interests of the partner countries are identical. Indeed, our partners differ hugely in ma Action Plans therefore have to take account of each partner country’s geographic location, economic development, political situation, current relations with the European Union and o the reform programmes the partner countries have already implemented. This differentiated neighbours to enhance cooperation with the Union in accordance with their respective needs How far and how fast we can go together will depend on how much we share: political values systems etc. For instance, with the government of Belarus it is difficult at the moment to but once a more democratic system is in place in that country, we will obviously be very k much deeper relations with it. In the mean time, we are limited to working with the people society in Belarus to foster the necessary democratic change. The Action Plans need to be jointly owned, because the European Union does not wish to imp or values on neighbours. This is not our way of doing things. We sincerely believe that th Plans and indeed the Neighbourhood Policy itself depend for their success on jointly agree and the clear recognition of mutual interests. This is why joint ownership is a central el neighbourhood policy. Moreover, experience has shown that ownership is a sine qua non cond effective implementation of political and economic reform. The high priority the European Union accords to shaping relations with our neighbours obvi be underpinned by adequate financial and technical support. While the European Union is al substantial financial support to the countries covered by the Neighbourhood Policy, the Co recently proposed that existing funds (such as the Tacis or Meda programmes) or their succ increased significantly during our next budgetary planning period, which runs from 2007 on An even more visible token of the European Union’s commitment to the Neighbourhood Policy of a specific European Neighbourhood Instrument, which will complement assistance provided existing financial instruments or their successors. Its central aim will be to foster cont people on the ground, by supporting direct cross-border cooperation, as well as regional c projects involving Member States and partner countries. For the first time ever, co-operation between beneficiaries on both sides of the European external borders will be under one financial “roof”, under a single management system and of procedures. It will thus not only bring a radical facilitation for people working on su projects, but give the term “joint project” true value in the strictest sense. And as to the immediate future: I am confident that the European Council next week will en Commission’s proposals on the Neighbourhood Policy including the inclusion of Armenia, Aze Georgia in the Policy. This will give the European Union another important instrument to p on the wider reform agenda in each of these countries. Ladies and Gentlemen, The enlargement of the Union on May 1 presents a significant opportunity for the Union’s m neighbours. We must learn the lessons of the 20th century and never again build barriers b And no one is better placed to judge the effects of a divided continent than you. We cannot see borders as the outer walls of a fortress, over which we look at our neighbou suspicion. It is also not the time for the Union’s members to become inward looking, only internecine quarrels over tax harmonisation or agricultural reform or other problems. Inde keep our common house in order. We have to deliver our objectives that we are following wi Strategy and those linked with our strategy to create a genuine space of peace, prosperity our citizens. One way ahead to master these goals is to encourage cooperation across borders. We must fo values with our neighbours. We must strive to create a virtuous circle in which political, economic cooperation enhance stability, which in turn facilitates cooperation. In this way sure that the 21st century is one in which the European space becomes a source of peace an