Redefining Europe S Role in the World

Redefining Europe’s role in the world

Development co-operation and external policy in a future Europe

By Mirjam van Reisen

Presentation prepared for the Round Table on

The Future of EU Development Co-operation

Organised by Eurostep/CLONG - Brussels

November 13 2002

“.. The main objective of community development policy must be to reduce and, eventually, to eradicate poverty. This objective entails support for sustainable economic and social and environmental development, promotion of the gradual integration of the developing countries into the world economy and a determination to combat inequality.”

Statement by the Council and the Commission

on the European Development Policy, November 2000

“The European Union believes that better growth and development prospects may offer a more solid base for peace and security…”

European Council, Presidency Conclusions,

14 December 2001.

Europe between world-partner and world-power

Within the increasingly unipolar world Europe, particularly with the upcoming enlargement, has a formidable chance to firmly establish itself as a global player.

After 2004 Europe will have the third largest population after China and India and will compete with the United States in being the strongest economic power.

Not only in a quantitative measure, but more importantly in a qualitative appraisal, the EU is well-placed to present itself with a message that promotes the social values that were central to its creation, based on the understanding of the overarching importance of peace, global stability and security based on a vision of equality and prosperity for all.

The European Union is the largest contributor to Official Development Assistance (ODA), and its cordial relations with developing countries is a central element of its own prosperity, as was well recognised by the founding fathers who drafted the Treaty of Rome.

In the new Millennium the European Union has continued to engage internationally with fresh commitments to development co-operation.

The policy for development co-operation jointly adopted by the Commission and the Council in November 2000 and approved by the European Parliament, clearly set the eradication of poverty as the primary objective of the EU’s development policy;
At the Laeken Summit in 2001 he Council agreed to a time-table for Europe to reach the target of 0.7% of ODA per GNP.

The subordination of development

Nevertheless in the mean time the restructuring of the interface between the EU’s external relations and development policy has nearly abolished development co-operation as an independent policy area. A serious re-definition of development co-operation has taken place as marked by institutional changes. The organisational reforms have engendered the following results:

Subordination of development cooperation to external relations in the European Commission:

Cutting down of the administration for development co-operation (Directorate General for Development Co-operation) with the view of its abolition, and a serious reduction in the involvement of the DG in policy-making and implementation;
Removing implementation of development co-operation to a new agency EuropeAid under the leadership of the Commissioner for External Relations;
Reducing the scope of the portfolio of the Commissioner for Development to a General Director (or CEO) for implementation of development co-operation, under the chairmanship of the Commissioner for External Relations;
Expanding the portfolio for the Commissioner for External Relations to policy-making and implementation of Development co-operation;
Re-arrangement of the delegations in developing countries to be directly accountable to the Commissioner for External Relations, as opposed to the Commissioner for Development Co-operation.

Abolition of the Council for Development Co-operation in the Council, decided in the Seville Summit, merged with General Affairs. As a consequence the national Ministers of Foreign Affairs will be in charge of the development agenda.

The subordination of development co-operation to external relations is the result of the political aim to create a stronger European foreign policy utilising all available resources. The danger is that development co-operation will no longer continue to exist as a policy area that has its own objectives.

Subordinating Coherence to Consistency

The Maastricht Treaty defined coherence as the need for Community policies to take development objectives into account if they had an impact on developing countries.

The Amsterdam Treaty introduced the concept of consistency and defined this as the need for all community policies to be consistent with the objectives of the CFSP.

Even though the two concepts can function well next to each other without competition a confusion of the two concepts is seriously problematic. It should be recognised that whereas the CFSP is a reflection of the EUs domestic interests externally, development co-operation should depart from the objective to eradicate poverty in developing countries and reflect the interests of people living in poverty.

Although the concept of coherence is still within the Treaty, the definition of consistency as coherence with CFSP objectives will dismantle the principle of coherence and make it devoid of any political or legal value. It leaves no room for an understanding of the policies based on own interests of the EU may, at times, have devastating effects on the people living in poverty in developing countries.

The European Convention and Development Co-operation

The Convention sets as a central issue the need to define strategies in order to “defend” specific “objectives and interests”, rather than “promoting” the European social model.[1] The Convention uses the term ‘solidarity’ but in the limited context of solidarity between the Member States. A conception of solidarity beyond the EU and towards the international community as a whole is totally absent.

The Convention has so far confirmed the demotion of development co-operation as merely a subordinate to external relations. In the Preliminary Draft Final Report of Working Group VII – “External Action” ‘coherence’ is introduced as the concept for ensuring that the EU will “maximise its influence on the global stage” by using “all its instruments, political and economic alike, in a co-ordinated and mutually reinforcing manner.” Mentioning the “variety of instruments and tools” at the disposal of the EU in this regards humanitarian assistance and development co-operation are mentioned, alongside diplomatic action, actions by the Presidency and the High Representative (HR), bilateral and multilateral agreements, and actions in multilateral fora.[2] A qualitative differentiation between the ‘tools’ of development co-operation and humanitarian assistance on the one hand, and the instruments of foreign policy on the other hand is acutely absent.

In the institutional area the Convention’s draft proposals accentuate the subordination of development co-operation to an overarching structure of foreign policy. For the Council there is a proposal that the General Affairs Council will be split off again from the General Affairs Council, with foreign ministers representing Member States in both, and no role left for Development Ministers within the Council.[3]

Closer co-operation is proposed between the HR and the commissioner for External Relations– further confusing the principle of coherence, “to ensure coherence between foreign policy decisions and the deployment of instruments in the field of external relations.”[4]

Counting the losses

The interface between development co-operation and foreign policy is indeed important as inconsistencies in external relations can also harm the development efforts. However, the current proposals, within the trends that have taken place in the last 2 years, are dangerously close to aiming at an abolition of European development co-operation altogether. The following is a list of losses Europe is facing:

No longer an equal political representation of Development Policy in the Commission – or only at a ‘junior’ level;
No longer an equal political representation of Development Policy in the Council – and no role left for Development Ministers from Member States;
Abolition of the posts of Ministers for Development Co-operation in Member States, and abolition of related administrations – and funds;
No creation of capacity, resources and administrations for Development Co-operation in accession countries;
Abolition of a Committee for Development and Co-operation in the European Parliament;
The effective abolition of Development Policy as a form of international co-operation that is based on its own objectives, and implemented with its own instruments, supported by its own political, institutional, budgetary and administrative resources.
The transformation of humanitarian assistance into a tool for crisis management and security measures, including the possibility to deploy personnel on the ground – associated to or similar with the military;
Dismantling of the ‘coherence’ principle that the aim of poverty eradication in developing countries is taken into account in other Community policies, particularly trade, agriculture and fisheries.

The intrinsic link between the European Union and the South

The creation of the European Community was a break from colonialism to multilateralism; a strategy away from the old form of colonialism to new forms of association by multilateralising the Member States’ relations with the South. This was not based on charity, but justified on the recognition that the Third World would be indispensable for European recovery after the second World War, given the need for natural resources and energy in particular. The Marshall Plan clearly recognised this tripartite economic system between the US – Europe and the South.

The importance of the South has not diminished today, and Europe’s alliance with the South will remain a critical factor in its potential to play a role at the global level, both in economic and political terms, and militarily.

The enlargement process creates a great challenge to expand this potential of associating with the South even further. In the past the enlargement processes have always led to further expansion of Europe’s relations with the South. As the UK became the bridge to the Commonwealth, and Spain to Latin America, we can be sure that the new accession countries will offer new prospects for opening further relations with the South.

The past enlargements have also shown the contribution that accession countries make to deepening the multilateral and international relations of the EU, also in sharing the new prosperity achieved with those less well off.

If Europe is to be a global player, based on social values, equality and the promotion of human rights, it will need to make strategic alliances with the South, whether this is in the WTO, in the UN or in the International Financial Institutions.

Recommendations: Development Co-operation in the Convention and Towards the IGC 2004

A.A new framework for foreign policy and external relations

The ‘external policies’ are, at present, composed of the Community policies with an external dimension, in particular trade, accession and development. These policies define the long-term relations between the EU and Third countries, through a number of negotiated bilateral and multilateral agreements. The European Commission is in charge of the implementation, supported by the EU delegations in various countries.

The EU’s foreign policy is closely linked to the EU’s security policy, and is, in its current form, a reactive political response to developments in the international arena. The EU foreign policy is located in the Council and has an intergovernmental character. At the moment there is no direct link with EU delegations in Third countries.

It is clear that the strict separation between external policy and foreign policy is problematic and that a merger of the two policy areas in one form or the other can be an advantage. Many questions emerge in this new potential framework of a combination of foreign policy and external relations; such as what are the objectives, in which way is this combination useful, where should it be located and where will development co-operation fit.

A clear definition of the future external and foreign policy

The future foreign policy and external relations need to be based on a clear definition that sets the general direction of the entirety of the EU policy with an external impact. Also within a constitution this definition should not be lacking. This could include the merging of the posts of the current Commissioner for External Relations and the High Representative of the CFSP. It is important that a merger post in some sort of form can give direction to the EU delegations in Third countries. It is also important that, within this area, intergovernmental consultation and decision-making remains possible. Where possible voting by qualified majority could be introduced.

A foreign service as link between the Council and the Commission

A new ‘foreign service’ should be localised within a separate and small institution that would serve as a link between the Commission and the Council, and assures consistency between the decisions and actions undertaken by either. This new foreign policy service should be tasked to manage the delegations. This new service should also have access to financial resources from the budget. A representation of the Commission (the President and the Commissioners for External Relations) and the Council (The troika) would jointly manage it and would be headed by the merger of the Commissioner for External relations and the High Representative. The aim of this service would be to promote the role of Europe in the world and to protect the European security interests, based on international law and respect for human rights.

Long-term policy (trade, development and humanitarian assistance) need to be clearly distinguished.

A clear definition is necessary of all the external policy areas, which aim at structural changes in the long term. These areas are based on long-lasting negotiations and require a certain permanence. Decisions in these areas can be informed by foreign policy, but cannot solely be taken on the grounds of foreign interests as they emerge at a particular stage. As continuity needs to be one of the basic principles of these policy areas they give stability to the Union’s external relations.

Development co-operation, humanitarian assistance and trade need to remain separately defined Community competences within the Treaties and within the Constitution. They should remain located within the Commission, which can ensure the necessary expertise and continuity in these areas. Experts in these areas can be linked to the delegations, while they remain answerable to the competent Commissioners. In other words, the successful integration of policy areas should depart from the vision that for each policy area distinct objectives and competences are clearly defined.

B.Strengthening of development co-operation and humanitarian assistance

Foreign policy will only benefit from a well-constructed development and humanitarian policy, provided that these have an independent definition in the Treaties and constitution. Moreover humanitarian assistance and development co-operation can only be successful if based on humanitarian grounds, and the objective to eradicate poverty, rather than on the basis of political decisions. This should be clearly set out in the legal definition of the future role of Europe.

Moreover Development Co-operation does have a clear political dimension, in stimulating processes that will eventually help to eradicate poverty. Central principles in this effort can and should be strengthened in the Treaties and in the Constitution.

Poverty eradication is the principal aim of European Development Co-operation.

Coherence remains strictly defined as ensuring that development objectives are respected in European Union/Community policies which impact on developing countries.

A clear demarcation between coherence and consistency is respected in the constitution and the Treaties.

The principle of complementarity is strengthened with the clear expectation that Member States, including accession countries, promote and implement development co-operation and humanitarian assistance as part of a EU approach in these fields – to ensure engagement at the national level, and in full respect of diverse priorities that may exist at national level.

Increase the transparency in decision-making and accountability by increasing the role of the European Parliament, particularly in operational legislation regarding development co-operation and humanitarian assistance.

Budgetisation of the European Development Fund and ensuring democratic control by the European Parliament.

Ensuring political representation for development co-operation and humanitarian assistance within the College of Commissioners and the Council at equal level with trade.

Ensuring decentralisation by linking specialised staff in the delegations directly answerable to the Commissioner for Development Co-operation.

Conclusions

The European Union has an important role to play in the world, and development co-operation, as well as humanitarian assistance, are crucial aspects of this. This greater global role needs to be matched with greater responsibilities towards the South, and the European Union should build on its reputation as a credible and reliable partner of countries in the South. Europe’s strength is in being a world partner, not just a world power.

In view of these observations it is recommended that:

The preamble of the EU Treaty / Constitution should explicitly recognise the EU’s global responsibility. Poverty eradication should be one of the principle objectives of the EU as a whole, and social sustainable development should be promoted internally as well as externally.

Community competences, such as trade, development co-operation and humanitarian assistance, which are based on long-term policy objectives providing stability and continuity, remain seated in the commission. The political responsibility in these areas needs to be guaranteed within the College of Commissioners to strengthen Europe’s role in the world.

The legal basis for development co-operation needs to be refined by putting poverty eradication as the central objective, in the Constitution as well as in the Treaties. Development co-operation should remain firmly based on the principle of coherence, which needs to be clearly distinguished from the principle of consistency. A clarification of the principles would be desirable. The complementary competence in development co-operation should be further defined with the expectation that Member States will contribute in a consistent manner to the European development policy – and in the recognition of the beneficial aspect of the diverse contributions from national Member States aid programmes.

If necessary a new foreign service could be established linking the different competences of external relations and CFSP, and making a connection between the Commission and the Council. The merger post of Commissioner could head the service for External Relations and the High Representative. This service would work on the basis of clearly defined objectives in the area of foreign policy and defence, and on the basis of an intergovernmental agreement and qualified majority where possible.