The implications of a Czech European Union presidency
This January, the Czech Republic assumes the presidency of the European Union, a political system it has consistently criticized, marking the first time a former Soviet state will chair the 27-member coalition. The six-month rotating presidency, currently chaired by France, has been a largely ceremonial post in the past. However, it gained increasing clout after the Russian invasion of Georgia this summer and the current global financial crisis. Many E.U. observers voice concern that the Czech Republic’s controversial positions on these issues, coupled with its small and weakened governing body, will make it unfit to lead the European Union during this particularly tumultuous time. These concerns seem too overblown, however. Even if the Czech Republic were ill-equipped to play a leading role at this critical juncture, allowing the Czechs to assume the presidency sets a vital and positive precedent for former Soviet and less traditionally influential members of the European Union to assume an equal status in “new” Europe.
Possible Complications
The European Union’s governance model of consensus will test the Czechs. As a former Soviet satellite, the Czech Republic has strong sentiments regarding the Russian strong-arm invasion of Georgia, and will have to suppress its own political beliefs to develop a more conciliatory policy. As professor Jacques Rupnik, a historian at Harvard’s Center for European Studies and director of research at CERI, told the HPR, French President Nicholas Sarkozy used his E.U. presidency to implement a cease-fire, place E.U. peacekeepers in the region, and “managed to find a common position which all the members of the E.U. accept,” a result Rupnik sees as less likely under a Czech presidency.
The Czech Republic may not be able to cultivate the same level of leadership that France established. “There is great doubt and confusion about its state of preparedness and its capacity to chair the European Union,” Rupnik told the HPR. He foresees a series of obstacles, including the U.S.-Czech Republic agreement that calls for a missile defense system in the Czech Republic, which Russia insists is meant to target its own territory. Rupnik said that the European Union is “strongly divided on this issue” and that the Czech Republic will have to “reconcile the bilateral deal with the United States that greatly affects Russia, and its new role as speaking for the European Union as such.” This could split the European Union along the same lines as did the war in Iraq five years ago, when the Eastern and central European countries largely supported the invasion, and Western European nations were largely opposed. It will be the charge of the Czech Republic presidency to seek consensus to formulate a new position.
Internal Difficulties
The Czech Republic has the additional liability of having a president, Vacav Klaus, who has been extremely critical of European policy. “The Czech president is not only a euro skeptic, he is a euro-phobe,” said Rupnik. Klaus has compared E.U. economics to Soviet communism and sees state intervention as a menace to free-market capitalist economies. He recently traveled to Ireland, where he praised its vote against the Lisbon Treaty, a set of institutional reforms designed to streamline the bureaucracy, give the E.U. parliament more authority, and create a two-year E.U. presidency. Ireland was the only E.U. country that failed to ratify the treaty. There will a great difficulty in having a new member preside over the European Union who so blatantly protests the project.
The financial crisis will also complicate the Czech presidency, as the Czech Republic, in accordance with the views discussed above, chooses not to use the Euro. Sarkozy has thus suggested that, after the French presidency ends, he could continue as coordinator of the Eurogroup because there will be no strong central authority in the E.U. presidency to speak on behalf of the Euro.
Revisionist Views
While these circumstances will be difficult to grapple with, there are important advantages to a Czech presidency. As professor Ali Tekin of Bilkent University in Ankara, Turkey, told the HPR, having newcomers take on leadership roles is symbolically important. “The Czech Republic and the other Eastern European countries have concerns that the others don’t. Georgia and Ukraine and a whole bunch of other issues will come to the floor, and perhaps this is timely because the E.U. needs to rethink its policies and relations vis-à-vis Russia.” A Czech presidency, then, would boost the confidence of the newcomers; Tekin argued that the Czech Republic was a particularly qualified choice because its economic performance surpassed that of other candidate countries in the region, it was “relatively experienced” in international affairs, and was “not one of those countries that was inward looking.” The Czech Republic may be the fresh new face that is necessary to help broker consensus, since it will not be mired in furthering its own agenda.
Others argue that the Czech presidency will have few significant consequences. “The theory of the EU presidency is that, because you are chair, you are not meant to push your own national interests,” Reginald Dale, of the Center for Strategic and International Studies and Director of the Transatlantic Media Network, told the HPR. “Being in the chair doesn’t give [a country] much more influence over E.U. policy than not being in the chair.” He agreed, however, that assuming the presidency will require a great deal of diplomacy. “I think that the Czechs will try to have a successful presidency, which means having an agreement among the 27,” he said. “They want to show they can measure up to any E.U. country.” Furthermore, by virtue of its more modest size and smaller base of interests than those of more major European political players, the Czech Republic may not even desire to push through its own policy agenda. Instead, by this logic, the Czech Republic is uniquely well suited to chair the European Union.
Though opinions differ about the positives and negatives of the Czech presidency at this juncture, the fact remains that its presidency is on the horizon. “They are going to be in the presidency and I don’t see them backing away from it,” Professor Richard Morningstar, former U.S. Ambassador to the European Union and current professor at Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government, told the HPR. It seems evident that the nature of the E.U. presidency requires consensus, and the checks on power inherent in the body will force the Czechs to cooperate with other member states. As a member of the European Union, it is in the Czech Republic’s long-term interest to work in a conciliatory manner with its regional allies, a fundamental reality that rings true despite ongoing debate about its ability and desire to do so.