|
The European Union (EU) has recently stepped up consultation within itself in an attempt to find out an identical stand on the Iraq issue. But judging from the situation revealed by recent dailies, the Iraq issue is doubtlessly "another scalding sweet potato" in the common diplomatic construction of the EU. Whether or not the EU can overcome difference and adopt an identical attitude in the face of the United States will be a severe test to the common security and diplomatic policy of the EU.
George Papandreou, the present EU rotating presidency and foreign minister of Greece, indicated to the press a few days ago that the Iraq issue will undoubtedly consume the main energy of Greece in the first half of the year when it serves as president. The Greek Prime Minister Kostantinos Simitis recently also declared that the EU would send out a delegation headed by the foreign minister of Greece in February to various Mid-east countries for mediation, striving to a stop a war together with these countries.
In the past few days, leaders of many EU countries have made statements one after another, although their views are not the same, most of them expressed such a stand: the inspection work in Iraq should be completed in accordance with the UN stipulated procedures, the United States should not unilaterally make war, instead, it should try its best to peacefully settle the Iraq question by political means.
The EU keeps itself at a distance from the United States and oppose the use of force to solve the Iraq issue, an important reason is, besides the commonly known economic benefit, that leaders of the EU take an attitude of reservation toward US so-called evidence. Although the United States has repeatedly claimed that it has grasped evidence proving Iraq's development of arms of mass destruction, which is, however, hardly convincing. Senior Representative Javier Solana in charge of the EU diplomatic and security policies has explicitly indicated that "it is very difficult to launch war without evidence". Solana, former secretary-general of NATO, is considered as a politician without any "anti-US suspicion", his remarks reflect, to some extent, the deepening doubts of EU countries about the United States.
Another reason is the mounting anti-war sentiment of the general public of EU countries. A recent poll conducted in France, Britain and some other nations shows that most of the people of EU countries all oppose the United States trying to solve the Iraq issue by force. Many people even indicate that even if there is a UN Security Council resolution allowing the United States to use force, America must not resort to force. It is said that the anti-war forces of EU countries are prepared to stage anti-war demonstrations of a larger scale in mid-February all over the continent of Europe. In the face of the mighty anti-war opinion, EU leaders are more inclined to solving the Iraq question peacefully.
Although the general attitudes of EU countries are relatively close to each other, it is quite difficult to form a strong, unified stance and "speak externally with one voice". Greece has indicated the need to try as far as possible to unify the stands within the EU, but it is not easy to achieve this objective. First, it is hardly possible for Britain to give up its choice of following closely behind the United States. Close are the stands of Germany and France though, they have their respective considerations. Germany's attitude is relatively clear, it firmly opposes war and has explicitly indicated that it will not participate in US military actions against Iraq. France's attitude is manifestly ambiguous. Although France also stands for solving the issue not by force, President Jacques Chirac called on the French armed forces to "make every preparation" against all possible contingencies" in a speech he gave a few days ago. His idea not expressed in words is that once the war against Iraq begins, France cannot sit idly without doing anything, meaning that it is very likely to join the allied forces in war. Chirac's "half sentence" evoked wide repercussion at home, his subordinates cannot but turn out to ease things off, saying that the President's remark doesn't mean change in France's stance.
France and Germany happen to be the Security Council presidents respectively in January and February, the public opinion here notes that if the Iraq issue is again brought up to the Security Council for discussion and the Security Council member countries are required to clearly state their attitudes toward military actions through voting, whether France and Germany can be identical in their stance is open to question. A senior EU official has pointed out that as long as the votes of France and Germany are divergent, then it would be hard for the EU to prate about common security and diplomatic policies in a number of years to come. Four member states (France, Britain, Germany and Spain) of the EU participate in the Security Council of this term, Prime Minister Simitis of Greece expressed the hope that the said four countries could coordinate their stands at the Security Council session, "defend their same stands" and increase the weight of the remarks. of the EU.
Although Chirac said to Simitis that efforts would be directed as far as possible toward this direction, his remark, however, carried the flavor of indefiniteness.
Since the EU proposed the establishment of common security and diplomatic policies, it has often lacked a common stance, leaving something regrettable behind for its devoid of mighty identical actions and adversely affecting the EU playing its role in the international arena. This time, in the face of the Iraq issue, can the EU hand in a satisfactory answer sheet?
(People?s Daily January 25, 2003)
|
