Confrontation Between Two Powers — What Herb Thinks

I first became aware of the battle raging in the EU last May while reading a bulletin written by Charles Grant. Grant is the director of a think-tank, the Centr for European Reform.

In his bulletin Grant said:

“There is a danger that technological disputes between ‘inter-governmentalists’, who favour a stronger Council, and fans of the ‘supranational’ approach, who want a bigger role for the Commission and Parliament, will dominate the Convention” (http://www.cer.org.uk/pdf/policybrief_eucouncil.pdf)

The other day Valery Giscard d’Estaing, chairman of the Convention, warned about the same danger. In fact, he went so far to say he felt smell of war.

Now the danger both Grant and Giscard feared may be beginning. It looks like the EU Convention will be dominated by a power struggle between the Commission and the Council.

A paper, signed by one third of the Convention’s members, is demanding an immediate debate be opened where those in favor of the Commission’s and Parliament’s proposals for EU government can challenge the proposals recently put forward by the heads of state in the Council.

The heads of some of the larger states want an elected EU president within the Council. The smaller states want the Parliament to elect an EU president over the Commission.

This immediate debate is not what Giscard wanted to happen. Evidently, his agenda was to tackle this sticky problem over who will control the EU at a later stage in the Convention.

So, why did one third of the Convention members want to force the debate up front? I believe it’s because they don’t trust Giscard or the Council. In fact, there are strong suspicions floating that the real debate is occuring behind closed doors somewhere above the Convention. In other words, this is the Commission’s attempt to bring what’s really going on in the EU out in the open.

What’s really going on in the EU? Since Charles Grant was so right-on-target last May regarding the two factions and their dangers to the Convention, let’s see what he has to say about what’s really going on in the EU.

In a December 2000/ January 2001 CER bulletin Grant said something surprising. He actually indicated that he thought the battle for control of the EU was already over. It had been won by certain, unnamed governments within the Council. Grant said:

“In fact the federalists and the Eurosceptics are locked into an unholy alliance, one that is dedicated to the denial of the truth – namely that federalism is dead, that the Commission has been sidelined, and that governments committed to a pragmatic European Union have taken it over” (http://www.cer.org.uk/).

Did you notice what Grant said? He said certain governments had taken over the EU. The reason this was so startling to me is because my book, Recommendation 666, records the events that occurred under the French presidency in the last part of 2000 — the take-over Grant is talking about.

So, is this why the pro-Commission people are attempting to force the debate out in the open at the beginning of the EU Convention? Do they suspect what Grant suspects — that certain governments within the Council have already taken over the EU?

This brings us to an interesting possibility. If once again Grant is proven right, the outcome of this confrontation between two powers may have already been decided.

— Herb Peters
7/11/02