Euro-Med more than an empty gesture

Date: 26/10/1995

WITH a month to go before a major reunion designed to unite the Mediterranean, the European Union is trying to cement its policy on North Africa and the Middle East.

Ministers from Algeria, Morocco, Tunisia, Egypt, Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, the Palestinian autonomous territories, Syria, Turkey, Cyprus and Malta will meet EU governments in Barcelona on 27-28 November.

The Union will have to keep the meeting from resulting in mere words and empty gestures and make it a substantive turning point after decades of talk about a common market in production, trade, free circulation of goods and services.

The governments of all 27 nations which will definitely attend the conference have already agreed to a joint statement that “the peace and stability of the Mediterranean region is a common goal”, committing them to “preserve and reinforce it with all the means at their disposal”.

The EU has tried on several occasions since 1972 to get a Mediterranean policy off the ground. This time it may have a chance, notably because the dozen North African and Middle Eastern nations will be full partners in the effort.

The dozen insisted on participation after it became clear to them in April that the Union was single-handedly forging a Mediterranean policy, inviting them to sign a declaration at a conference in November that would have been drafted by the EU alone. Since then, officials of the Mediterranean states have met frequently with their EU counterparts to prepare the conference and to outline a post-conference strategy for Euro-Mediterranean relations in the coming years.

The strategy is far from complete, however, and there remain uncertainties as to who will be at the Barcelona conference.

Mauritania may join the group and some Arab states are pushing for the inclusion of Libya - an invitation most EU states want to withhold. Opinions are divided as to whether to allow the US and Russia in as observers, or even the Gulf Cooperation Council and the Arab League.

Other problems raised by the guest list, and therefore EU policy, include how to group Turkey, Cyprus and Malta in this initiative - all of which have ambitions to join the Union - and how to exclude Albania and the former Yugoslavia.

After the multiplication of regional initiatives for North Africa and the Arab world, the programme for Barcelona has been controversial and is now defined more in terms of what it is not, rather than what it is.

Organisers have pledged it will not duplicate efforts of the Middle East peace process, perhaps to soothe Lebanon and Syria's fears that the invitation to Israel had that intention.

The conference could, however, risk duplicating the economic programme of the peace process or the business initiatives established at a US-led conference in Casablanca last year and in Amman this month. More simply, most Mediterranean states want to know how a wider, regional approach would bring more material benefit than the bilateral economic accords which each is pursuing with the European Union.

At Barcelona, therefore, discussion of bilateral trade issues, tariffs or financial aid will be avoided, even though the bilateral accords are the backbone of the EU's Mediterranean policy.

Instead, the conference will concentrate on establishing a framework for regional political initiatives and issues best handled regionally, such as the environment.

The EU promises Barcelona will be a watershed. But that will be determined not so much by what happens at the conference itself as by what steps are taken afterwards to establish a real Mediterranean policy.

Since 1990, when Eastern Europe started claiming much of the EU's attention, southern EU states have insisted on rebalancing efforts and funds in favour of the bloc's southern flank. The need for balance was heightened by the Gulf War, which made clear the region's precarious instability.

Failures in the Middle East peace process, increasing religious fundamentalism, nationalism and xenophobia in Europe highlighted the 'cultural Chernobyl' which risked blowing up in Europe's backyard. The explosion could be even more dangerous, some EU states argued, given the spiralling birth rates and the increasing poverty of North Africa.

There are also advantages to stepping up ties with the southern banks of the Mediterranean.

One quarter of the world's petroleum passes through the region, making it an area of strategic interest to Europe, Russia and the US. The benefits of access to a consumer market which will grow to 400 million inhabitants by the year 2025 (compared to 370 million currently in the EU) are also obvious.

Fear of immigration is an additional key motive for helping to boost North Africa's economy. As one Chirac aide said: “If we don't help North Africa, North Africa will come to us.”

For business, cooperation with the Mediterranean states is crucial. European industry, using North African labour, can stay competitive with Asian and Latin American industry.

The European garment industry, for example, has said that unless it can use factories in Turkey, Tunisia and Morocco, “Europe will become no more than a distributor for Chinese products”.

Trade is so far very unbalanced. While the EU consumes half of the Mediterranean's products and supplies half of its imports, the Mediterranean only supplies some 3&percent; of the EU's imports. The EU's trade surplus over the region is twice that over Eastern Europe.

European investment in the region is poor, accounting for less than 3&percent; and way behind EU investment in Asia and Latin America.

Two Magreb economists recently complained that Europeans do less for their neighbours than other rich populations do, saying EU investment in the Mediterranean pales next to American investment in Mexico and Japanese investment in South East Asia.

North Africa may not be as attractive as Asia for investment, but economics alone cannot explain feeble European interest.

Persistent political instability may influence business and may have created a vicious circle linking prosperity and security. Lack of investment keeps the economy weak and poverty makes the region unstable.

Preparations for the Barcelona conference have revealed that EU and Mediterranean officials view this circle differently.

When asked what the main goal for EU policy is, member state diplomats say “security”, adding that political stability will naturally bring economic reform and growth.

North African and Middle Eastern diplomats, on the other hand, say they want European policy to promote favourable economic conditions. Prosperity, they say, offers alternatives to radical movements, creating the stability that allows political reform.

EU policy in the region aims to achieve both and the Barcelona talks will fall under three 'partnership' headings: political and security; economic and financial; and social and human affairs.

The challenge will be to move from ten or 12 bilateral trade accords to the largest trade zone in the world, thereby helping to glue back together the classical Mediterranean region.

When Portugal and Spain joined the EU in 1986, author Jean-François Drevet pointed out that it was the first time in history that the straits of Gibraltar and of Sicily became borders.

Mediterranean nations hope the EU will bring back the ancient trading zone and more clearly define its plans for a free-trade area by 2010.

The Mediterranean states will have to pitch in too. Commerce between them accounts for no more than 4&percent; of their foreign trade. They must also speed up economic reforms at home.

Heavy bureaucracy in state and private sectors makes Egypt's economy difficult to work with, and Algeria has witnessed near total collapse. Turkey, Tunisia, Morocco and Jordan are also making progress.

Free trade with the EU could have real disadvantages for some Mediterranean states.

Morocco and Tunisia have voiced fears that opening their markets to EU goods could kill their own industries. EU farmers oppose allowing North African produce freely into Europe, but the European Commission says Moroccan farmers could stand to lose a lot more.

The EU would offer a transitional period to reduce the impact on southern neighbours, but its partners have reason to fear that the period will be sufficient and well managed. Free trade will be hard to stop once it starts.

European politicians and business may also ask themselves if now is the right moment to jump into the unknown, given political instability in the Mediterranean.

The Mediterranean states must also work to fight internal threats, often linked to religious extremism, and to resolve the many political and even territorial disputes between them.

At Barcelona, the EU must be able to demand such reforms. The declaration to be read at the conclusion of the Barcelona conference has already been prepared and is nearly as vague as most UN resolutions. There are hopes that meetings planned for the coming month will bring more solid proposals.

Diplomats, including Americans, say the EU has already achieved a significant accomplishment in getting Syria and Lebanon to sit at the same table with Israel outside of the United Nations for two days.

Whatever the outcome of Barcelona, the EU has promised to follow it up with a work programme to begin “as soon as possible” after the conference.

The EU has announced good intention, but its members will have to show real political will. If they do not, the Euro-Mediterranean initiative may become yet another compilation of previous efforts and die just as the Euro-Arab dialogue did. The work programme tries a new tack, calling for a fashionable idea, a “dialogue between religions”.

The initiative must live up to great expectations. As Robert Bistolfi, founder of the Eumed group, a 'think tank' on European-Mediterranean relations, has commented: “If all the people of the region do not perceive it as a bringer of peace and shared progress, if it proves incapable of easing the social fractures in the Mediterranean, the misunderstandings could become conflicts.”