Jeleva in front of the European Parliament. Bye bye Rumiana?

(BRUSSELS2) In the end, we have "pity for her", this is the phrase that came up most often in the mouths of MEPs on leaving the room. Which at the political level means "stop fire". (photo credit: European Parliament/Pietro Naj-Oleari)

Halali

The hearing of Rumiana Jeleva, Commissioner-designate for humanitarian aid and crisis response (who is also part of Ashton's "team") has, in fact, turned into a hallali. The Bulgarian locked herself in an indefensible position: 1) treat deputies who asked her for explanations on her declaration of interests, often kindly; 2) believing that his word, good faith and honesty will suffice and postponing the details; 3) give the press the answers it refused to the deputies. Result: a very general feeling among the deputies of a complete failure. The French deputy Corinne Lepage (Modem), entrusts her « obvious embarrassment on the question of declarations of interest attached to a rather light competence....". She's not the only one. Few defend her, even in the EPP, her political group in the European Parliament...

Witnessing the problem, the meeting between coordinators lasted a long time, longer than usual. With no notice given. MEPs want, above all, a "clarification", as quickly as possible, before deciding and are turning to the President of the Commission. " José-Manuel Barroso must give us information very quickly, within 24 hours. We can't let the situation deteriorate." confides Goerens, the Luxembourg liberal coordinator, at the end of the hearing, to some journalists. But evil seems
be done. And, already, alternative hypotheses are being considered. The question is on everyone's lips: who could replace Jeleva in the event of defection, if the European Parliament decides to push its advantage? Among others, the name of Nikolai Mladenov, Minister of Defense and former MEP, is mentioned. Unless President Barroso provides irrefutable proof.

Throwback to a hectic session, or how to miss your audition...

A good start...

Yet the hearing had started well, with an initial political statement, well prepared, well balanced, and applauded by MEPs.

Humanitarian aid: making a distinction with the military

In a declaration read with conviction, Jeleva asserts herself as a defender of international humanitarian law and of "humanitarian actors", so that they are "in a position to work “, she says, while some governments “ deny humanitarian needs ". She continues to want to make a " clear distinction between humanitarian and military activities. Because more and more often there are military actors who do certain actions on the ground to win the heart of the population (...) You have to differentiate between activities that maintain certain illusions. Because the risk is that humanitarian workers are the target of attacks. We must protect humanitarian actors on the ground ».

An ambition on civil security

Jeleva affirmed its ambition on the issue of crisis response, civil security. " I am going to leave of the 2006 Barnier document, a document which provides for a certain number of actions and considering that the European Union has a value to provide, by wanting to "modernize the civil protection mechanism, claiming to want a HQ and an operational center capable of coordinating aid in times of crisis for EU citizens, a global approach from prevention to reconstruction ". Lastly, she states that she wants to present a proposal on a European civilian intervention corps.

But comes a question taken from above, from too high

The question was expected, even highly anticipated. Several rumors were circulating in the ranks of parliamentarians. The most sensitive point concerned her declaration of interests, which did not mention her status as owner of a "Global Consult" company but only as "manager", whereas the commercial register would show (according to several deputies) indicated that she was "manager and owner" until 2009 (with supporting documents that apparently prove it). Also Filip Kaczmarek, a member of the EPP decides to empty the abscess, repeating the question: “Are there interests that have not been declared? Would you have anything to add? »

None of your business !

The commissioner replies, quite haughty, very detached: “ In general, I do not react to rumors peddled by the press, relating to my private life. We are here to talk about serious things: humanitarian aid and crisis response. (...) I don't want to hide anything. All the rumors about me and my husband are completely unfounded. ". That's all ! This is little. This is the first mistake. The future commissioner does not seem not understanding that conflict of interest issues are not private issues but public issues. And that in front of the European Parliament, it is useless to finish with the style "wooden language", usually useful to circumvent the difficulties. MEPs take turns repeating the question.

I have all the necessary documentation

Some Bulgarian MPs, Socialists and Liberals, are determined to settle their account with the Commissioner-designate (who belongs to the opposite party, GERB, Christian Democrat). Liberal MEP Parvanova - challenged directly by the commissioner (2nd error) - therefore insists: " we have legislation in Bulgaria. And the deputies cannot take this position”. Jeleva disdains what seems to him to be a partisan attack “ I am not a lawyer. I have a file with all the necessary documentation. And this documentation complies with Bulgarian legislation. I will ask your collaborators to distribute them to you. » She says. " I hope that the Commission will continue to deal with the issues that concern us. This company has been out of business for a long time. And it was declared. I can prove it, supporting documents. I don't think it's necessary to repeat, repeat. I'm asking you to stick to the documents. »

Bulgarian justice to the rescue

And she adds: If I had broken the law, the Bulgarian authorities would have taken up the matter. The financial institutions, the courts in my country are functioning. They are there to rule on the veracity of the documents. » 3rd mistake! Bulgaria is currently under close scrutiny for its poor justice system. Claiming an absence of judgment is not very credible... There are now no longer just a few deputies to have doubts. The Commissioner's statement did not convince anyone. His desire to bury the problem, to postpone it arouses suspicion and arouses curiosity...

... and it goes wrong

The debate continues

While the EPP coordinator tries to defend "his" commissioner, documents are distributed in the rows of MEPs. A point of order is approved. Eva Joly asks the bailiffs to recover these documents and sends back to the coordinators' meeting to arbitrate on this point. But the damage is done... The superintendent pays "cash" for her lack of foresight. She becomes more and more destabilized over the hearing.

Errors, approximations follow one another

To a question about humanitarian aid in the Gulf of Aden, she shows herself "ready to go there..." without realizing that it is about Somalia, of which we are talking, a failed state, where the lesser Westerner is immediately considered as prey to delight or... to kill. To another question on the Congo, and the role played by the military in the humanitarian disaster, she admits not knowing the situation (even though the Congo is one of the most important places of intervention for European humanitarian aid). Etc... Obviously, Jeleva is no longer in the room, and convinced herself that she will not be confirmed.

Stop fire

Faced with the situation, and the atmosphere more than heavy, some deputies have also shortened, or even waived their speaking time, to listen to the torture.We pity her“says a deputy. It is exhausted that Jeleva finishes the hearing. Only one or two colleagues, sympathetic, come to comfort her, a bit like one comforts someone after a death. The exit of the room is carried out in a rather mournful silence. Everyone is aware that no more must be done. We feel Jeleva moreover on the verge of a nervous breakdown, ready to break down.

Last mistake: tell the press what we didn't want to tell the deputies...

Jeleva still has to submit to the exercise of questions and answers in front of the press: limited to two questions. She doesn't want to go. But force it.

To an Austrian colleague who questions him about his past interests, Jeleva blurts out: “ Yes “she has good” sold (his shares) in his company in 2009 ". For how much ? " She doesn't know anymore ". Which proves that she owned the company. A point that she did not really specify to the deputies who will be happy to learn from the press of the answers that they could not obtain... Last mistake!

2nd question (mine): “vdo you trust? (in your nomination)... hesitation. It is reality. The commissioner doesn't believe it anymore...

Jeleva leaves. She takes refuge in a VIP office for a long conversation with the Bulgarian ambassador in Brussels.