Baroness Ashton, who today takes up office as the Union’s
High Representative for Foreign and Security Policy under the Lisbon Treaty,
could do no better than study the life of another of her noble predecessors on
the European stage – that of the Prince de Talleyrand-Perigord, Foreign
Minister of the French Empire and architect not just of much of the present
French state, but of much of present inter-European relations as well.
An aristocrat who served Louis XVI, the Directory, Napoleon,
the Allies, the restored Bourbons and finally King Louis – Phillipe, no-one
could claim to be a better survivor.But
the twists, turns and accommodations that his tortuous life entailed, have left
him a detested figure in much of France.Which is rather sad when you consider that but for his efforts to have
it restored, the Tricolour might have flown for the last time at Waterloo.
Talleyrand’s negotiating skills were supreme: France even
came out of the defeat of Napoleon, thanks to his negotiation, with more
territory than she had had at the beginning.
But his crowning triumph, achieved when he was already into
his ninth decade and on his final mission as Ambassador to Britain in the
1830s, was finally to align British and French foreign policy and to set it on
the course that would result in the ‘entente cordiale’ and an unbreakable
alliance that later survived two world wars.
That he should have done so in the aftermath of twenty years
of bloody war with Britain’s traditional enemy, when Germany was the rising
nation in Europe and when even the household language of the British court was
German, should be enough to make any aspiring diplomat go weak at the knees
with admiration.
Asked what had driven him throughout his long and turbulent
life, he said that he had always acted in the best interests of Europe,
believing that what was good for Europe would also be good for France and that
what was good for France was also good for Europe.
Nevertheless, if Talleyrand is generally despised by today’s
French politicians, his famous dictum seems still to be imbibed with their
mothers’ milk.Indeed, it is no
exaggeration to say that the whole European construction, certainly in France’s
eyes, turns on this very premise.
This is not necessarily something to be regretted, still
less opposed. From a British perspective what is good for Europe can also be
good for Britain. We too, in our own way, have wanted to civilise the world. So
the French motivation is not necessarily something to fear,just to be aware of.
With that in mind – and if it is not too much of a bother –
let us return to the much tilled ground of the Lisbon appointments. You remember that the initial reaction from
the commentariat was astonishment when we learned that two relatively unknown
figures – Mr van Rompuy and Baroness Ashton, had been appointed.
This astonishment was certainly real enough: we had been led
towards thinking that while one group of politicians did indeed want a low key
President of the European Council, others wanted a strong campaigning figure
such as Tony Blair, who, at various times, was espoused by a raft of senior
European leaders, including President Sarkozy of France.
Indeed, even as late as 19th June, and after he had dropped
his support for Blair, Sarkozy was still saying: “…if we have Lisbon I’d like
the first President of the Council to be someone strong and ambitious for
Europe because Europe deserves and needs such a person.”
Once the Lisbon appointments had been made, however, the
commentariat rapidly switched tack, arguing that no-one had wanted strong
figures in these roles, that France and Germany did not want their national
prestige usurped by some traffic-stopping figure; that what was required was a
back room person, an organiser. And on the foreign policy side, someone who
would not make waves.
I am still wondering whether this is correct.Has the leopard really changed his spots?
You remember Sarkozy’s French Presidency? (More Sarkozy’s
than French you might think). The lavish expenditures, the rushing around all
over the world waving the European flag.The frenetic pace continuing right to the very last day and last hour of
the Presidency, trying to show what might be done, what ought to be done, with
French leadership.
Put this together withMr Barroso’s second Commission, now assembled.Its composition is very much in the French
interest.The wings of free market liberalism - something for which Barroso’s first Commission was roundly criticised for
embracing too closely - are now almost certain to be clipped.Agriculture, too, so important to France, is
in safe and friendly hands.In Pierre de
Boissieu, France has also secured the Secretary-Generalship of the Council.
Consider also that Sarkozy, has been careful to stress that
Mr van Rompuy’s appointment as Council President is for two and a half
years.Of course the appointment can be
renewed for a further term when in comes to an end in May 2012. That is, if the
member states so wish.
But whose term of office expires in April 2012?None other than Mr Sarkozy’s!Should he not stand again for the French
Presidency, the Presidency of Europe - the ‘strong and ambitious’ figure that
Europe ‘deserves and needs,’ could be his. Why not?
Fifteen years ago a newspaper cartoon from the dying days of
the government of Edouard Balladur pictured the French cabinet as if in a game
of Cluedo.Every minister was depicted
as attacking another.Each was being
shot, stabbed, clubbed, poisoned or strangled by a colleague. Meanwhile, through a window, we see Sarkozy,
retreating from this mayhem with a gleeful smile.
Sarkozy’s volte-face, first supporting Tony Blair, then
abandoning him, now becomes explicable. Britain is palmed off with the foreign minister
post – which is not important because, should Sarkozy indeed become President
of the Council, he will want to play the chief diplomatic role himself.Skilful, very skilful. Worthy of Talleyrand
himself.
Talleyrand also said, memorably, that zeal was the enemy of
diplomacy. That the best things came to he who waited. I am wondering whether
Sarkozy has learned this injunction too; whether Mr van Rompuy is no more than
his stalking horse.Having got his Commission
ducks in order and disarmed his possible opponents, will Sarkozy now descend in
two and a half years time to claim what he regards as his (and France’s)
inheritance?