|
|
|
|
THE ROVING
EYE
Bush does
Brussels
By Pepe Escobar
He came, he saw, he conquered ... nothing.
He had french fries and Napa Valley wine with
French President Jacques Chirac, listened without
blinking to German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder in
his earphones, was introduced to hundreds of
European Union (EU) leaders, officials and
diplomats, even attended two summits, by the EU
and by the North Atlantic Treaty Organization
(NATO).
President George W Bush uttered
the words "European Union" only for the first time
at his inaugural address last month: before that,
the EU was nothing but a nuisance. Now he's been
to Brussels on his "freedom agenda" conceptual
trip, and has had a crash course on what the EU is
all about. Brussels, diplomats tell Asia Times
Online, was not impressed.
The 25 EU
member countries firmly spoke with one voice. That
meant in practice that everywhere he went in
Brussels, Bush could not escape the core of "old
Europe" - France and Germany, not by accident the
core of the EU. It was Chirac who personally
explained to Bush the meaning of European
integration, what the European constitution is
about, and crucially what European defense and
foreign policy stand for - concepts that are
anathema to many in Washington.
Implicitly, Chirac made it clear to the
neo-conservatives: "old Europe", this mirage
concocted by Pentagon chief Donald Rumsfeld that
served to stigmatize opponents of the invasion of
Iraq, is in real life an increasingly integrated,
powerful bloc. For his part, it was Schroeder - in
a presentation prepared in tandem with Chirac -
who explained to Bush how the US must offer "a
gesture of goodwill", in the words of a diplomat,
like supporting their entry in the World Trade
Organization, to get results from a nuclear
negotiation with Iran.
EU leaders never
had any illusion in the first place. Secretary of
State Condoleezza Rice, in her turn-on-the-charm
European tour before Bush, had laid down the law:
we want democracy in the Middle East and trade,
not the International Criminal Court and the Kyoto
Protocol. Javier Solana, the EU's top diplomat,
had already admitted publicly that "they won't
change, and neither will we, so we might as well
forget it".
Bush's trip may have been to
Brussels, but it was all about Asia (China) and
the Middle East (Palestine, Iraq, Syria, Iran).
Bush insisted at all stops he now wants a
"partnership" with Europe: Chirac and Schroeder,
on the record, praised the new tune, but their
diplomats insist that only facts will test the
rhetoric. "It may be the same wine in a different
bottle," quipped a diplomat. Bush certainly did
not engage in his trademark born-again Christian
fundamentalist rap that makes cultured Europeans
cringe. But he insisted he wants to see "an arc of
reform from Morocco to Bahrain, passing through
Iraq and Afghanistan", which for many a European
still means regime change by force.
What the EU wants
On Iraq, the
EU - via France and Germany - made it clear that
it will contribute to the training of Iraqi
civilians and security forces, but only outside of
Iraqi territory. This is the EU's official offer
to Bush, and it's non-negotiable. Heavy-handed
pressure from Washington from now on is also out
of the question. Former "new Europe" states like
Poland and Hungary want to make sure they can
withdraw their troops from Bush's "coalition of
the willing" without getting slapped with myriad
sanctions by Washington.
On Iran, EU
diplomacy is convinced it has the best tactical
approach, but as Solana has stressed, Washington
must support Brussels and not engage in daily
regime change, we're-going-to-bomb-you neo-con
rhetoric. Paris, Berlin, London and Washington all
agree that Iran should not have a nuclear bomb.
But the negotiations are extremely complex: the
Europeans are offering a package of commercial and
technological advances, while Iranian negotiators
keep saying the Europeans don't mean it and are
always pushing the envelope. What EU diplomats
basically want, in the words of a Spanish
representative, is a commitment from the US to let
them do their job, "without being ridiculed and
undermined at every turn. Besides, we are all
united that if Washington wants to force regime
change on Tehran, they will have to go it alone."
Bush in Brussels vaguely "encouraged" the
EU's diplomatic approach, but he didn't endorse it
- ringing alarm bells in every diplomatic desk,
just as former UN weapons inspector Scott Ritter
revealed in the US that Bush had personally signed
an order for an air attack on Iran planned for
next June. But some more optimistic diplomats,
taking Rice and Bush at their word, agree that the
EU's step-by-step strategy may suit Washington for
the moment because "as they have admitted, they
are not contemplating a military strike against
Iran".
On Lebanon, Paris and Washington
agree that Syria must withdraw its troops - but
once again that does not mean the EU supports
regime change in Damascus by force. Paris,
especially, does not want any semblance of
confrontation with Syria; and crucially it's the
official EU position to totally delink the Lebanon
problem from the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Moreover, the EU definitely will not list
Hezbollah as a terrorist organization: this was
discussed in depth before Bush's visit at the
Clearing House, an EU unit that reviews terrorism
in Europe. The Europeans know too well the
important political role Hezbollah plays in
Lebanon.
On the Middle East, the EU wants
the quartet - the United Nations, the US, the EU
and Russia - to quickly restart the road map. As
the No 1 financial supporter of Palestine, the EU
wants, in the words of a diplomat, to "equally
share with the US their participation in the
Israeli-Palestinian future"; in the same breath,
the EU absolutely refuses the American project of
having NATO securing the peace in the
American-denominated "Greater Middle East".
On China, Bush once again warned against
the EU abandoning its embargo on arms sales. EU
diplomats are unanimous in stressing that the
Americans are leading a "disinformation campaign"
because "Israel sells more weapons to China than
anyone else". Both France and the UK also sell a
lot of weapons to China, so it was up to British
Premier Tony Blair to spell out the facts to Bush.
The EU, moreover, has a complex code that actually
prevents a significant raise in euro terms of
weapons sold.
Here's the message
cowboy
As a public relations exercise,
Bush in Brussels was carefully coordinated by
Washington to convey to the world the impression
that Bush II needs Europe to fulfill his
self-imposed mission. But the EU made it clear:
forget about a dependent relationship between a
hyperpower and its vassals. Jose Manuel Barroso,
the president of the European Commission - a
pro-American - put it nicely as "America needs
Europe and Europe needs America". But skepticism
remains the name of the game in Brussels: "Style
may have changed, but not substance," warns a
diplomat. "We know the neo-conservatives remain at
the core of the new Bush administration,
formulating policy. With these people, dialogue is
impossible. They are ideologues, and the EU has no
ideology."
So the EU has chosen to deliver
Bush a very clear message. If he wants a real
"partnership" with Europe, he will have to deal
directly with the heart of the EU, France and
Germany. On Lebanon, Chirac got direct support
from Bush for a UN investigation on the
assassination of former Lebanese prime minister
Rafik Hariri: this means there will be no American
moves in the UN Security Council, at least in the
short term, to impose sanctions on Syria. The EU
as a whole is against sanctions. On US moves to
attack Iran, Bush said this was a "ridiculous"
proposition, but he has also said that "all
options remain open". The EU stressed that in this
case the US will go it alone. Chirac, the old,
wily operator, seems to have figured it all out.
He seems to be almost convinced that Bush wants a
real partnership with Europe. "But only the future
will tell us if I'm wrong."
(Copyright
2005 Asia Times Online Ltd. All rights reserved.
Please contact us for information on sales, syndication and republishing.) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
All material on this
website is copyright and may not be republished in any form without written
permission.
© Copyright 1999 - 2005 Asia Times
Online Ltd.
|
|
Head
Office: Rm 202, Hau Fook Mansion, No. 8 Hau Fook St., Kowloon, Hong
Kong
Thailand Bureau:
11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110
|
Asian Sex Gazette Sex and Entertainment News
|
|
|
