Cathy Ashton's worst enemy...

(BRUSSELS2)"My God. Keep me from my friends. As for my enemies, I take care of them", this old maxim holds true today for Cathy Ashton and the European External Action Service (EEAS).

Noisy talk...

That the High Representative for Foreign Policy and her service is in conflict with the Member States (on appointments) or the European Parliament (on the decision-making part), it is quite logical. The European Parliament has always had a very limited role in foreign policy. Today, with the decision on the Service (although he is only consulted on the decision, he has co-decision on the budgetary and staff aspects), he has, in a way, the "foot in the door"(1) and intends to impose itself at the end of a standoff whose principle it has practiced for years... As for the Member States, they also defend their interests and want to maximize their respective influence within the future service: the big ones to preserve their diplomatic service advantage, the small ones to compensate for their absence on the international scene, and thus find in the EEAS a "proxy actor".

... and deaf rivalry

In this battle, there is a player that we hear little about: the European Commission. Who has a lot to gain in the Foreign Service but also a lot to lose with the High Representative: in the control and implementation of several budget lines, in the presence abroad. The Commission's delegations are changing heads and the Commission will no longer be able to appoint whomever it wishes or, at least, no longer on its own; the Vale de Almeida episode is the last of an era that may seem over (2).

So far, the Commission has certainly defended its rights rather well. But the real battle is now at the political level. Gradually, the Diplomatic Service and its head acquired, in fact, their autonomy (let's not yet speak of independence ). In a way, the blows of each other push in this direction. And even if Baroness Ashton did not have a substantial political fabric, when she took office six months ago, she acquired it little by little: in Gaza yesterday, in China today, in Kenya-Tanzania tomorrow.

In fact, it may represent a certain weakening of President Barroso, who will lose his monopoly of external representation which he cherishes above all. This sentiment is not expressed publicly. And when we ask one or the other what it is, the answer is undoubtedly: "there is a good understanding between the president and the vice-president". The reality looks a little different...

Little feeling of contempt

Having had the opportunity to exchange on several occasions with members of Barroso's cabinet on the subject, I felt a lack of defense from the Vice-President, or rather the opposite. Example: on the absence of Cathy Ashton from the informal Council of Defense Ministers, and the possibility that she would have of being replaced by the President of the Commission, for example, I drew this line to myself: “ Although a Commissioner may sometimes be called upon to replace the President, it is still not up to the President to replace a Vice-President ". The answer may seem anecdotal. However, it clearly reflects the contempt that exists within the Barroso team (or at least one part of it) for Cathy Ashton, who remains in their eyes simply a commissioner among the others.

And this feeling is reflected in the sharing of daily tasks. It is up to the High Representative to receive the Ministers for Foreign Affairs, to the President of the Commission to maintain relations with the Prime Ministers or Presidents. A kind of natural distribution that did not occur with the first High Representative. Javier Solana got into the habit of receiving whoever he wanted... and, above all, of phoning whoever he wanted.

On the foreign service, difficult discussions

Another testimony. During the discussions of the high-level group, which preceded the agreement on the European External Action Service, " it's with Catherine Day (the Secretary General of the Commission) that the discussions were the most difficult explained to me a diplomat from a Member State who followed the discussions closely. The discussions cover several subjects: the scope of the Service, planning and budgetary autonomy, premises... The Commission was thus reluctant until the end to give the EEAS budgetary autonomy as well as certain decision-making powers - over the heads of delegation in particular. " The Treaty does not allow the delegation to another structure of its competences, notably budgetary. explains an expert on the subject.

The Telegraph's "last missile"

The article of Daily Telegraph, which headlines today on the fatigue of the High Representative and her possible departure must be interpreted in this context... as well as in that of the elections in Great Britain. Indeed, fatigue threatens Cathy Ashton. Difficult to do otherwise because the job of High Representative is not that of any rest, and is almost impossible to ensure with an agenda, even fixed on 16 hours of work per day. From there to betting on his resignation, it looks more like undermining.

It seems that it was more the nationality (British) and the political color (Labour) of the High Representative, which motivated certain sources to be a little more talkative than usual. But it looks like quite usual "Brussels bashing" in European institutions where political or even politician positions are much more common than the appearance suggests. On the side of Cathy Ashton, we thus vigorously deny any idea of ​​leaving: "the High Representative is currently working - she is in China - and has no intention, at all, of leaving her post".

On the British side in London, the change of the British Commissioner to the Commission does not seem to be on the agenda. To have witnessed it during my recent stay in London, this subject which makes people "talk in the cottages" in Brussels is a non-subject across the Channel. Even on the Tory side, it is estimated that this is the least of the worries (3).

Change of High Representative, a c...

Heaven knows I wasn't a Cathy Ashton aficionado - with a beginning marked by a series of blunders and political errors (4) - and if I didn't share all of her options... But she's here now , the work has started. It's not always the "joyful ride" one might have dreamed of. But it is a fact: the diplomatic service is gradually taking shape. And if he is not at the end of his troubles, a first step was accomplished with the agreement of the Ministers of Foreign Affairs of the 27 on the subject on April 26. Changing the High Representative in a few months would be a mistake, another delay. We are not going to change the composition of the Commission with each change of government in Europe (5). Europe really doesn't need that now!

(Nicolas Gros-Verheyde)

(1) The EP dictates its three wishes to Cathy Ashton

(2) The folder "Almeida Valley" made waves at the Council

(3)  For the Tories, the future of defense is with... France

(4) Among others: Catherine Ashton was she right not to be in haiti
The very British vision of Catherine Ashton on defense...

(5) Is it necessary to specify that the change of the High Representative requires a new agreement at 27. I do not see the 27 relaunching the transfer window of the heads of Europe. The "Miliband" hypothesis relayed by my colleague from Telegraph seems "unrealistic" to me if a Tory-Liberal government comes to power in the UK; logic would prefer a "liberal" commissioner. But here it is the desired political balance at European level (the Socialists having demanded this position) which is called into question. It's the whole political balance with 2 Christian Democrats and 1 Socialist in the top three that would have to be renegotiated. See above ...