Short text explanation expected between Rasmussen (NATO) and Ashton (EU) on Tuesday
(BRUSSELS2) The chief diplomat, Cathy Ashton, meets, on Tuesday (March 1), successively the Secretary General of NATO, Anders Fogh Rasmussen. The object is to be able to make concrete progress on NATO-EU cooperation, which is still blocked by the Turkish-Cypriot dispute (*). But with AF Rasmussen, smiles should only be out outside. Because as soon as the doors are closed, there could be a little "text explanation" between the two leaders.
An unfair play attitude from Rasmussen
In question, the attitude of the Secretary General of NATO, little fair play, during the informal meeting of the EU in Budapest-Gödöllo. "Men always want to speak first, that's how it is“, as comments, ironically, Cathy Ashton.
Minimum participation but maximum noise
In fact, according to the information that has reached us, despite the appearance that he gave, the Secretary General of NATO only attended a very small part of the EU meeting. He did not even attend the session of "pooling and sharing", which he nevertheless echoed in front of the press, pushing the irony so far as to make a complete account of the work of the Ministers of Defense ... of the EU! According to a witness at the meeting, in fact, he has"just attended the part concerning NATO-EU partnerships and cooperation"where he again pleaded for Turkey's association with European defense policy. And, during the session, he multiplied approximations, shortcuts and even lies.
Shortcuts, approximations and lies...
To support his usual position (1), intended to put pressure on Cyprus and already mentioned several times, such as in Palma de Mallorca, the NATO Secretary General used two other arguments.
Firstly, Turkey has the right to be associated with the European Defense Agency since it is inherited from the WEU, with which Turkey was associated. It may seem logical. But the dynamics of the two organizations and the objectives of the two agencies are different.
Second argument: NATO involves non-member countries in operations (cf. Afghanistan), not the EU We are no longer here in the quick shortcut, we seem to have fallen into the approximation close to lying. Admittedly, the mechanisms of association are different. But they do exist. At European level, for each mission, a contributing committee is thus set up which brings together the participating third countries. Its operation is quite discreet, and probably less noisy than the ISAF mega-meetings organized at great expense before certain summits or ministerial meetings. But it is effective. The committee of contributors is, in fact, consulted before each meeting of ambassadors where the subject is raised strategically (modification of the base of the operation, etc.). The head of the mission regularly participates in this committee. In addition, officers from each country are integrated into the operation headquarters, which allows them to obtain all the information they want, and even to influence the course of the operation directly.
One can also wonder if the mechanism consisting in systematically inviting the Secretary General of NATO to an EU meeting (and vice versa) is really effective. We rather have the impression that it is a waste of time, a sower of confusion and above all counter-productive, consisting in a tension in the positions of Cyprus (supported by Greece and the other Member States).
(*) The meeting which was planned with the Turkish Prime Minister, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, during a lunch organized by the President of the Commission, José-Manuel Barroso, was canceled due to the burial of Erbakan, former Prime Minister and inspiration of current Turkish Islamism.
(Nicolas Gros-Verheyde)
(1) Read also:
