Wg^Z[^c\ Wg^Z[^c\ cdiZ \ cdiZ THE SWEDISH EU PRESIDENCY ★ After the less-than-stellar performance of the Czech chairmanship of the EU, the Swedes will want to show that small countries can run effective presidencies. Internal political stability and a skilled diplomatic corps should help. ★ Stockholm’s presidency priorities include an effective EU response to the economic crisis, climate change, enlargement and progress in justice and home affairs. ★ However, Europeans will judge the success of the Swedish presidency largely by factors over which Sweden has little influence, such as the fate of the Lisbon treaty, improvements in the European economy and the success of the Copenhagen summit on climate change. Many European officials heaved a sigh of relief when Sweden took over the EU’s rotating six-month presidency from the Czech Republic on July 1st. The Czechs can point to genuine achievements in some tricky areas. For example, they helped to broker a gas deal between Ukraine and Russia in January, and they got EU leaders to agree to guarantees that will allow a repeat referendum on the Lisbon treaty in Ireland. By and large, however, the Czech presidency has proved a disappointment, with Czech leaders openly deriding US economic policy and speaking out against the Lisbon treaty – and the government collapsing in acrimony half-way through the presidency. Domestic political instability should not pose a risk to the Swedish presidency. The centre-right coalition of Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt has made a dramatic recovery in the opinion polls, and the next general election is not due until September 2010. And while the Czech presidency was held back by a rigid and sometimes ineffective bureaucracy, the Swedes highlight flexibility (all day-to-day EU business will be decided in Brussels, without the time-consuming need to refer back to Stockholm) and professionalism. While Reinfeldt’s international profile is quite low, the country’s foreign minister (and former prime minister), Carl Bildt, is one of Europe’s best known foreign policy figures. However, Sweden is taking over the rotating EU presidency at tricky time. First, Europe is in its deepest recession since the 1930s. The tools to alleviate the downturn are in the hands of national governments and independent central banks, with little but a co-ordinating role left for the EU to play. Second, a further Irish rejection of the Lisbon treaty in a referendum in October would trigger a sense of crisis in the EU that could overwhelm the Swedish presidency. Third, the EU’s institutions are in a state of flux. Following elections in June, the new European Parliament will not be working effectively until the autumn. More importantly, the new European Commission will not be appointed before the Irish have voted on Lisbon, and the new commissioners will then need to be confirmed by the European Parliament. The new Commission may not therefore take office until December 1st, or possibly later. The outgoing Commission under President José Manuel Barroso already looks somewhat tired and timid, with many commissioners more focused on looking for new jobs than pushing through courageous EU initiatives. Since only the Commission has the right to draft EU legislation, this institutional transition means that the Swedish presidency will have to focus on objectives that do not require new EU laws. The Swedes can be expected to make some progress on most of the issues that they have put on their EU agenda. But the success of their presidency will be judged mainly by developments over which they have little or no influence: the Irish referendum on the Lisbon treaty; improvements in the European economy and a successful deal on a post-Kyoto climate change regime at the Copenhagen summit in December.
Centre for European Reform 14 Great College Street London SW1P 3RX UK
T: 00 44 20 7233 1199 F: 00 44 20 7233 1117 info@cer.org.uk / www.cer.org.uk