A mysterious get-together

Date: 12/02/1998

One month before its launch, no one seems quite sure just what the European Conference is all about. By Mark Turner reports on growing fears that leaders of 26 countries may find themselves sitting around a table in London with embarrassingly little to do

JUST one month before the launch of the European Conference at Lancaster House in London, few people from either the EU or its applicant countries know exactly what it is meant to achieve.

As a result, there is a growing sense of disquiet that leaders and foreign ministers from 26 European countries could find themselves with embarrassingly little to do when they meet on 12 March.

"We have heard an awful lot about royal protocol for the lunch with Queen Elizabeth," said a diplomat from a leading eastern European candidate, "but we still know very little about what the EU really wants to do with this conference. We fear it could turn out to be a waste of time."

British officials are scarcely more informed. "The Luxembourg Council clearly set out the themes which the conference should address, but experts are still working on the details," said a spokeswoman.

Such comments do little to allay deep-rooted doubts about the conference's validity. It does not help that so far the EU has not consulted the eastern European participants on the conference's content, let alone invited them to propose issues which they feel should be discussed.

In essence, the conference will be an informal and regular meeting between the EU and other countries with a 'European vocation', where policy-makers can discuss issues of pan-regional interest.

Last December, Union leaders invited the ten eastern European applicants, Cyprus and Turkey - provided it showed a willingness to solve various political problems - to attend.

But ever since France first floated the idea in late 1996, eastern Europeans have viewed the conference with deep mistrust. Last April, when foreign ministers discussed the proposal at an informal meeting in Noordwijk, it was widely interpreted as a sop to eastern European applicants which were not included in the first wave of negotiations and as an empty political gesture towards Turkey.

Little, it appears, has changed. Ankara remains adamant that it is a meaningless gathering which holds little attraction.

"Turkey is not going to attend the conference," asserted Uluç Özülker, the country's ambassador to the Union. "Why? Because this is a cosmetic approach. If the EU properly implemented our Association Agreement and customs union, we would already have gone far beyond this."

After weeks of patient disbelief, EU officials finally seem to accept that this is more than rhetoric.

The big question now is whether, without Turkey, the conference will be anything more than an empty but pomp-filled precursor to the launch of accession negotiations later in the month.

The answer, according to many of the applicant countries, is 'yes' - but only if it seriously tackles topics of interest to all those on Europe's eastern fringes.

"This is a useful and necessary conference," said a Latvian diplomat. "But very much depends upon the actual content. At the moment, the information is not sufficient."

Although the Union has agreed that the conference will deal with justice, foreign policy, environmental and regional economic questions, many believe it still risks becoming just another 'structured dialogue' under a different name - a process that had become notorious for being neither very well structured nor much of a dialogue.

While the UK says it is keen to exorcise the ghosts of the past and create a genuinely useful mechanism, many fear the conference is already so riddled with compromises and provisos that such efforts are doomed.

Germany, for a start, insists that the body should have nothing to do with enlargement. "This should be an informal dialogue, with no secretariat and no working groups," said a spokesman for Germany's mission to the Union.

European diplomats also argue that the conference should not have any decision-making powers, nor formal links to EU policy-making.

Madrid, for example, sees the inaugural conference as "a protocol event" rather than a serious assembly, according to a spokeswoman at Spain's EU mission.

But if the conference is little more than a talking shop between East and West, it is not clear how it adds to the work already carried out by the Council of Europe (a point that the Strasbourg-based institution has been at pains to point out), or even the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE).

If it is something more - a body which is not about enlargement, but somehow brings together countries which wish to join the EU in the future - it is hard to see why participation should stop at Poland's eastern border.

Ukraine and Moldova have both asked to be observers, but have been rejected. "It is only fair that we have a right to dialogue," said a Moldovan diplomat, who added: "The process of enlargement is an historic attempt, and there is not much experience in how to organise it. Everything has to be done right from the first attempt."

Poland's current political problems over tightening its borders with Ukraine in advance of membership more than demonstrate the value of a wider dialogue, say commentators.

Similarly, Albania and the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM) would also like to attend. "Why should we not be there? We put that question to the British as early as last November," said a FYROM diplomat. "We have no demands for full status. For us it is just a sign of political will to include us in the family. We feel that if the presidency pushed, we could be allowed in."

And why, critics ask, should a conference which claims it is not about enlargement only involve countries which wish to join the EU immediately.

Although neither Norway, Switzerland or Malta intend to join the Union in the next five years, many believe that all could be members within a decade or two, and possibly even before the less advanced eastern applicants.

"When Denmark invited Norway to the conference, my prime minister actually said 'yes'," said a Norwegian official. "But later on, it became clear that this was only for countries who want to become EU members. There is no political will in Norway to consider that. But we would like to participate if we were allowed to."

The Swiss government is less enthusiastic, but it is not opposed in principle to the idea of participating. "This is an interesting place for countries to meet, and we have taken notice that the precondition of having an Association Agreement has been dropped," said a Swiss diplomat. "But it is too early to say what Switzerland's answer would be if it were invited."

Finally, the European Parliament is pushing to become a full member and is becoming increasingly peeved that, while President José María Gil-Robles will observe the opening ceremony, there is no guarantee that MEPs will be invited to future meetings.

In the circumstances, argue analysts, EU foreign ministers might do well to consider the long-term implications of their decision when they discuss the conference's content at the end of this month.

They have a golden opportunity to create a forum that unites the continent in constructive dialogue, but they also run the risk of creating further divisions, unnecessarily duplicating work, and undermining Union credibility.

As one Romanian diplomat put it. "This could be a real step forward, which would give our dialogue real substance, but we are somewhat concerned at what could happen if it fails. A serious reflection process should be set in motion very quickly."

Major feature previewing the European Conference, Lancaster House, London, 12.3.98 of the EU Member States and applicant countries.