08-06-2010

Mr Vice-Rector,
Dear Professors and students,
Ladies and gentlemen,

It is a great pleasure for me to be here today with you in Warsaw and to be able to address such a distinguished audience at the largest university in Poland. In an institution with such a long tradition, I feel I should first make a few remarks about the historical ties between our two countries, which go back a long way, even to the first days of the existence of Belgium as a country.

Many of you may not be aware of this, but the Polish Revolution of 1830-1831 indirectly contributed to the survival of the new Belgian state. Just one month after the Belgian revolution for independence broke out in 1830, a similar revolution took place in Warsaw. The Polish revolution was one of the reasons why foreign troops at that time could not send troops to suppress the Belgian revolution. And after the Polish revolution failed, Belgium welcomed many Polish soldiers and officers in the Belgian army, which they helped to establish.

In 1944, we once again welcomed Polish soldiers in Belgium, but this time in their capacity of liberators of Belgian cities and towns such as Ypres, Ghent, Aalter and Ruiselede. It is only last year that we celebrated here in Warsaw the 65th anniversary of this liberation and that we honoured the men and women of the Polish Maczek-division who sacrified their lives in Belgium.

Thanks to the continued struggle for freedom in Poland, communism finally came down in 1989 in Poland and encouraged many other similar peaceful transitions from Communist Party rule in Central and Eastern Europe in the second half of 1989.  It is also thanks to this struggle for freedom that Poland was able to join NATO and the EU and that I can be here with you today to talk about our EU Presidency. Poland joining the EU together with 9 and later even 11 other countries, was a truly historical event that made the ties between our countries even stronger.

Let us now come back to 2010 and the Belgian EU Presidency. In many ways, this Belgian Presidency will differ from the 11 previous ones. After all, our Presidency coincides with a crucial stage in the implementation of the Lisbon Treaty which partially changes our European institutional architecture and therefore also the way in which we work. One clear example of this is the increased influence of the European Parliament in the European decision making process. The Parliament is truly the rising star in the European sky. These past few months, we have noticed this in the negotiations on the European External Action Service but also in the SWIFT-case: the preparation of an agreement between the EU and the USA on the processing and transfer of financial data from the European Union to the United States so that they can be used in the American Terrorist Finance Tracking Program.

The Lisbon Treaty also created two new crucial leading positions: the posts of permanent president of the European Council (Mr. Herman Van Rompuy) and of the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, held by Catherine Ashton. If we want the EU to function well, it is absolutely essential that the main actors work together: Mr. Van Rompuy, Lady Ashton, the European Commission, the Parliament and the rotating Presidency. Belgium will do all it can to make this happen in the next 6 months.

Apart from making the new European institutional machinery work, Europe is of course faced with some other challenges. To name only a few:

• Do we want more or less European integration? Those who thought or wished that the Lisbon Treaty is the final phase in the integration process will have to think again. The European response to the financial crisis in Greece proved that urgencies like this one can quickly change positions that have been defended persistently for years. The European integration process has not ended yet.

• Another challenge is the lack of interest in European issues from citizens in several European countries. There is a very strange paradox in this: although the Lisbon Treaty made the EU more democratic and transparent than it has ever been, some of our citizens have never been as indifferent towards the EU.

• One last challenge that I would like to mention, and to which I will revert in the second part of my speech, is the declining role of the EU on the world stage. We have experienced this in a painful way at the climate summit in Copenhagen, but also on numerous other occasions.

Belgium will not be able to find a lasting solution for all of these issues, but I hope we can at least contribute to the search for an adequate reaction.

The Belgian EU Presidency is of course not something that can be seen as an isolated fact. First of all, because we work within the framework of the Trio Presidency which covers the period from 1 January 2010 to 30 June 2011, in other words, the presidencies of Spain, Belgium and Hungary. During this Trio Presidency these countries will have the opportunity to reinforce the continuity and effectiveness of the EU’s performance, which is something the EU citizens and Member States crave in these uncertain times of economic and financial crisis and lack of clarity about the workings of the institutions. Poland will also experience the special trio format during its trio Presidency with Denmark and Cyprus.

There are a few other elements to take into consideration when talking about the context of our Presidency: Some presidencies pretend they invent a whole new chapter in European history during their six months of fame. We are not like that. If we are honest with ourselves, which we Belgians generally are in our down-to-earth way of doing things, we have to admit that we are not going to start our Presidency from scratch. The bulk of the European legislative work of our Presidency will be based on the work programme for 2010 of the European Commission, which was published at the end of March, and on the so-called legacy programme: the issues we inherit from the presidencies before us, especially of course the Spanish Presidency.

Now a few words about the priorities of our presidency programme. Our priorities can be grouped into five thematic clusters.  Of course, this does not mean that other themes will be put on the backburner or that this is a final list. On the contrary, this programme is only a starting point. We often forget the impact of unexpected events.  Each Presidency draws up a detailed calendar with summits, councils and numerous meetings and conferences and hopes that this calendar will be adhered to as best as possible. But in reality, almost every EU Presidency finds itself having to deal with a number of unexpected events that turn your carefully planned agendas and programme upside down. There was the 9/11 catastrophe during Belgium’s previous EU Presidency in 2001, the Netherlands and Luxembourg had to cope with the consequences of the Asian tsunami and the French Presidency saw the eruption of the crisis in Georgia.  When such events arise, you have to be flexible enough to adapt to these new circumstances.

There is another reason why we should not exaggerate the importance of a Presidency programme: this document only reflects our views at a certain moment in time, namely at the beginning of our presidency. I prefer being judged, not on a text we prepare in June 2010, but on the actual results of our Presidency in January 2011.

1.  The first – and probably most important - theme of our Presidency is the current socio-economic situation in Europe and in particular our efforts to fight the economic crisis and to pursue the economic and financial transformation which should lead us towards economic recovery, sustainable growth ánd more jobs. Jobless growth is not an option. Everyone, even the top entrepreneurs I met at the World Economic Forum in Davos, agrees on this. To achieve this goal, we will have to continue our structural reforms, which includes amongst other things pursuing the implementation of the new financial supervision architecture, strengthening the stability of the Eurozone, restoring budgetary discipline, paying particular attention to education and research as driving forces for innovation and ensuring an appropriate follow-up of the recently published Monti report regarding the single market.

A vital element in this context is of course the EU 2020 Strategy, which succeeds the Lisbon Strategy. European heads of state and government will meet again next week to finalize this strategy after which we can start with the implementation which should bring us closer to the target of a competitive and green knowledge economy by the year 2020. Belgium really wants this EU 2020 strategy to produce better and concrete results. That is why we pleaded these past few months for a limited number of goals, an improved methodology compared to the Lisbon Strategy and a stronger social dimension.

But sometimes long term strategies alone do not suffice when you are faced with an urgent situation. This was the case with the financial crisis that hit Greece and could still threaten other countries of the Eurozone as well.  After a period of hesitation, a period which lasted perhaps too long, concrete steps were taken:

• In March the European Council asked President Herman Van Rompuy to set up a task force which should report back to the Council by the end of the year on ways to avoid future crisis situations like the one we have in Greece and should present measures aimed at a stronger budgetary discipline… In the meantime, this task force, which consists of the 27 ministers of Finance and the European Central Bank, met a first time on the 21st of May.

• Another recent and concrete step: On 9 May, after long and difficult negotiations, the ministers of Finance of the Eurozone decided to set up a stabilisation mechanism, worth 500 billion euros and which consists of loan guarantees of the member states and emergency funding by the European Commission. The International Monetary Fund provided an additional 250 million euros. These amounts came on top of a rescue package, worth 110 billion euros, which was already agreed upon earlier on 2 May by the Eurozone countries and the IMF.

These unprecedented steps towards more European economic governance would have been impossible to imagine 6 months ago, but even the staunchest critics of this concept of economic governance ultimately had to give in and accept the inevitable. Does this mean we are now safe again and completely out of the danger zone? It seems not: rumors of possible contamination to other eurozone countries continue to create uncertainty on the financial markets. Some decided therefore to take unilateral steps to curb financial speculation but I wonder whether such measures do not weaken the EU`s attempts to overcome these problems. Is it useful for one or two countries to act alone in such a globalised environment as financial markets?  I believe it isn’t.

The EU and the eurozone should not only be strengthened to withstand dangers from within, but also to ensure a strong and prominent European role in the global governance structures like for instance the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank and the G20. Reinforcing the EU`s position in such organizations and international fora is also one of the objectives of the Belgian EU Presidency.

2.   Our second priority is the climate and environmental policy and the aim of a low-carbon economy. Europe is and should remain the driving force that encourages the international community to strive for ambitious and concrete results at the COP 16 climate summit in Cancun later this year. But during my recent visits to China and India, I noticed the big gap between what the EU wants and what these countries are willing to give. The EU certainly has to remain an example for other countries and regions, but I believe that at the same time we should act in a pragmatic way. This means we should not always focus – like we did too often in the past – on our own European priorities but instead we should try to forge alliances with our most important non-European partners. Belgium, with its tradition of consensus building, will hopefully be able to contribute to these efforts.

Our fight for a cleaner environment and against climate change should however not be limited to external action. If we really want to achieve the goal of a green economy in the EU itself, we have to link our climate ambitions to other areas such as European transport and energy policies.
Biodiversity and more specifically, the preparation of the 10th conference on biological diversity in Nagoya will be another important issue during our Presidency.

3.  Our third priority: the area of security, justice, asylum and home affairs: We will start the implementation of the Stockholm Programme, the framework for EU police and customs cooperation, cooperation in terms of criminal and civil law and asylum, migration and visa policy for the period 2010–2014. During its Presidency, Belgium hopes to take forward issues like the common asylum procedure, the mutual recognition of judicial decisions and deal with themes like the fight against organised crime, illegal immigration and the trafficking in human beings. This is a domain in which European citizens expect concrete action from Europe because one of the key questions they ask their politicians is: can you guarantee my safety and that of my family? I admit: this is a very utilitarian approach towards Europe, but this is the approach of many in Europe nowadays. To paraphrase John F. Kennedy’s famous quotation: most of our fellow citizens do not ask what they can do for Europe, but what Europe can do for them.

4.  The fourth main priority of our presidency is to strengthen our efforts to achieve progress in various social domains. 2010 is the year of the fight against social exclusion and poverty. I already mentioned that we are in favour of a stronger social dimension in the EU 2020 strategy but we could do more in other sectors like pensions, public health, equality policy, etc. I believe that discussing such issues on a European level can really have an added value. We are all faced with the same challenges like for instance the aging of the population or the fight against poverty.  To quote the late Bronislaw Geremek: “We have devoted ourselves to building Europe, now it is time to devote ourselves to the Europeans.” However, I realize that not everyone in Europe shares this view. That is why we will have to try to find the balance between our own ambitions and the political reality of today’s Europe.

5. Our fifth and last theme is Europe’s external dimension. The EU has to remain the most important regional organisation in the world and one of the main actors for peace and security. But if we want to achieve this, we have to speak with one single voice. The Lisbon Treaty makes this possible by creating the position of High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. Catherine Ashton presides over the Foreign Affairs Council and represents the EU abroad. This is a daunting task, especially if you consider that the main instrument to enable her to really assume this task is not yet available. I am referring of course to the European External Action Service. Negotiations on the establishment of this European diplomatic service are still ongoing with the European Parliament but I hope they will be finalized as soon as possible. In the meantime, I have offered Lady Ashton the support of the Belgian diplomatic corps, both in Brussels to preside over the working groups as abroad in countries without a EU-delegation or where the EU-delegation does not yet have a Head of Delegation. In all of these cases, Belgian diplomats will act on her behalf and under her guidance. This can of course only be a temporary solution because we have to avoid at all cost to create confusion in the minds of our partners.  Therefore, as soon as the European External Action Service is up and running, Belgium will gladly step aside.

I, myself, I will preside over the General Affairs Council, which deals amongst other things with the theme of EU-enlargement. This is a sensitive issue in many EU member states, including Belgium, but during our Presidency we will play the neutral role of an ‘honest broker’. This means that we maintain the European perspective for the candidate countries with the ultimate goal of EU membership once the conditions have been met. Each individual country will only be able to make progress on the basis of its own merits. During our presidency we will closely follow the final stage in the negotiations with Croatia. Negotiations with Turkey remain a long-term effort, depending on domestic reform. We will encourage our partners in Ankara to continue these reforms and at the same time examine whether and how relations between Turkey and Cyprus can be improved. During our presidency, we might also witness the beginning of accession negotiations with Iceland. I also hope we will experience some progress with regard to the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia.

As the minister of Foreign Affairs and Foreign Trade of the rotating presidency, I will also preside over the council when it deals with international commerce. Our main objective is and should remain the conclusion of the Doha Round. But since very few still believe that we will soon reach an agreement in the WTO-negotiations, we should also maintain our focus on bilateral negotiations with countries like for instance Canada and India and regional entities like the Andean Community or the African, Caribbean and Pacific group of states (the so-called ACP-countries). Many of these countries are interested in trade agreements with the EU but we should of course make sure that our own interests are safeguarded. In the case of a country like India for instance we have to make clear that we expect better access for our firms to public tenders. But again, such bilateral negotiations are not an alternative for the multilateral WTO-process. I still prefer a substantial agreement in the framework of the Doha Round to a multitude of bilateral agreements.

Dear friends, pre-conceived presidency programs always face the risk of disruption by unpredictable events. The Union is on the way to improve its capability for swift diplomatic action, crisis management or disaster response. The External Action Service will address the challenge on the diplomatic front. But on disaster response, the Union still has a long way to go. Forest fires on our Mediterranean flank, industrial accidents, terrorism, earthquakes as in Haiti, eruption of volcanic ashes or floodings all over Europe, and now in particular in Poland : all these disasters have each time tested our response capability. I believe this is also a priority area for the Union, as for the time being our response is still not satisfactory. The Lisbon Treaty includes promising provisions, such as the Solidarity Clause, or new Commission competences in the field of Civil Protection. Before we prepare the debate on implementing these Treaty provisions, we will during our Presidency examine our weaknesses and means to overcome them, inter alia on the basis of our recent Lessons Learned exercise on our response to the Haitian earthquake. We Belgians have drawn our own conclusions from the deployment of our teams (B-FAST) in Haiti. I think it is key for the European Union and its citizens to come quickly to tangible results on this. That is why I am determined to push the process forward, together with the European Commission and Cathy Ashton. I hope I will also receive the full support of Poland on this particular point.

Mr Vice-Rector,
Dear Professors and students,
Ladies and gentlemen,

As I underlined earlier: the Lisbon Treaty, which came into effect on the 1st of December 2009, transforms the institutional architecture of the Union. New institutions have been put in place but, so far, they have not been able to reach their full potential and won’t be able to do so in the future either if the Union and its Member States do not change their strategy and attitude. And this is urgent since several recent evolutions seem to indicate that the influence of Europe is waning. Let me illustrate this with a few examples:

• The December 2009 Copenhagen Summit has left a bitter taste. The EU did not succeed in making its voice heard the way it used to.  A small group of countries got together to forge a deal without the EU.

• Within the IMF, we have been asked to forfeit a number of Executive Council seats in favour of emerging global actors like China and India.

• The G20, which plays a useful role in global governance, symbolizes the fact that the West has come to recognize that it can no longer rule the world without taking the emerging economies on board.

It is clear that we are living in a different context in which the West no longer exercises the same major influence. It is difficult to make any predictions about the future balance of power in the world. A lot will hinge on the strategy and hunger for power of the key players. Are we moving towards a G2, an alliance between the United States and China? And what about countries like India and a number of South-American or African States, who are all clambering for a more prominent place on the international stage, be it for themselves or for a larger group of developing countries? Should we expect profound shifts in the multilateral structure as a result of these developments? The initial steps have indeed already been taken with the talks on the reform of the IMF and the UN Security Council, but the outcome of these talks is still very much uncertain.

Herman Van Rompuy, the President of the European Council and the first politician I started working for about two months after the fall of the Berlin Wall, believes there will not be such a thing as a "G2" in the future and I agree. The existence of some indications about possible shifts in the global balance of power should not make us forget what Europe represents and what Europe has managed to achieve over the last decades.
Just to remind you:

• Nowhere on this planet can we find such an economically and politically integrated area, based on common values, rights and obligations, which manages to preserve such diversity of cultures, languages and traditions. Our countries are envied for their political stability and security, for their social system and environmental standards, for the quality of European life.

• The European Union has a population of half a billion men and women whom are amongst the most educated and trained in the world. Even with only 7 percent of world population we still generate almost 22 percent of the world’s wealth. The EU is the largest exporter of goods and services in the world while being the main export market for more than 100 countries at the same time. The 27 EU member States share a unified internal market and pursue a common commercial policy.

• Since the fall of communism, Europe has been the most stable region in the world but we have also contributed tremendously to international peace and security elsewhere in the world. Within the framework of the European Security and Defence Policy, the EU set up more than 20 missions across 4 continents and deployed well over 70,000 men and women.

• More than half of the financial resources for the developing countries come from the EU and its Member States. 

These achievements cannot be reversed. Regardless of any new global power blocks that may emerge, our partners in the West and beyond will continue to expect an active involvement from the EU on the international scene. The EU simply cannot afford to stay on the sidelines in times of international crises or when the important challenges of our times like for instance the issue of climate change, the fight against the worldwide economic crisis or important political dossiers such as Iran are being debated. If the Israelis and Palestinians eventually sign a firm peace agreement, eyes will turn towards the EU to ensure its implementation. If we want to bring the Doha Development Round to a successful conclusion, the Union, which is responsible for about 1/5 of the world’s imports and exports, will have to be part of it.

This is not wishful thinking from naïve Europeans. Our strongest and most important ally, the United States, values the European Union as a vital partner. In the national security strategy which President Obama presented less than 2 weeks ago, I read: “Europe is now more united, free, and at peace than ever before. The European Union has deepened its integration. Our relationship with our European allies remains the cornerstone for U.S. engage¬ment with the world, and a catalyst for international action. We will engage with our allies bilaterally, and pursue close consultation on a broad range of security and economic issues.”

But what role is there for Belgium in all of this? I feel that Belgium, as one of the founding fathers of the EU, as host country to the most important European institutions and as the cross-roads of so many ideologies, cultures and language communities will have to assume the role of ‘honest broker’ during its presidency of the EU. I have used this concept before because I attach great importance to it. This does not in any way mean that we should renounce our own principles, but that we should use our feeling for political compromise to act as mediator. Belgium will not push its own agenda, which is something some other Presidencies have from time to time been guilty of.  Don’t expect impressive statements and historical speeches from us either. We know we won`t get far with those. Reality and the new European institutional architecture force us to take small but important steps to achieve our goals.

If as a result of this approach the Belgian presidency will enjoy less visibility and will be more at the service of the EU, well, then I will be able to live with this. What matters to me, is not our visibility or my personal glory, but being able to make some progress - however modest it may be - on the path towards more European integration, which will enable the EU to tackle the numerous challenges it is faced with. If Belgium can make a small contribution in this regard, we shall end the year 2010 on 31 December, may be as an exhausted team, but certainly with a feeling of “a job done”, in the hope that all our European friends will be as satisfied as we undoubtedly will be.

Only spoken word prevails