Does the EU need a foreign minister?

Résumé du document

If one can recollect one of the main innovations of the aborted Constitutional treaty, it is undoubtedly, the appointment of an EU Foreign Minister. It is to be noted that if the accurate denomination and definition of a ?Union Minister for Foreign Affairs' was buried with the constitutional treaty which followed the French and Dutch with no answers to referenda, then its position and functions were salvaged in the Lisbon treaty. Further, the salvaged position and functions were still not ratified by the 27 Member States. Instead of being christened as ?Foreign Minister', he/she would have formally and officially been referred to as ?High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy.' As the duties and functions of the High representative for the CFSP (Common Foreign and Security Policy) and the Commissioner for external relations have been merged, the High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy (he/she) will operate in their positions as well and the offices of the representative of the CFSP and the Commissioner will cease to operate. The situation in today's European Union remains unchanged as against what it was seven years ago when the Convention for the future of Europe was initiated. The bottlenecks in the foreign policies of the EU are broadly linked to the issues of ?legitimacy", ?coherence', and ?effectiveness' (Everts and Keohane, 2003). Considering this as the starting point in the diagnosis, the issue lies in proving that the appointment of an EU foreign minister will help improve these three most vital burning issues (atleast to some extent). If this point is ratified, then one can wholeheartedly believe that there is a need for a Foreign Union Minister to administer the EU member states and its functioning.

Extraits

[...] There is no denying that having a single foreign minister in place of this multiple head system could help solving issues of coherence. However, one should not put the cart before the horse. To improve issues of coherence and efficiency (differently, in the short term, from legitimacy which stands on a more symbolic ground), the first step would be to adopt a single decision-making procedure for all EU foreign policy actions (which is very unlikely to occur at the moment). [...]

[...] It is far from being fully satisfying if one wishes to see a genuine EU Foreign Minister lead a European foreign policy. Indeed, such an “in-between” solution will probably be associated with new problems of coherence, potentially damaging for the foreign policy's effectiveness. One might wonder how the high representative will be able to conciliate its Commission's seat with its Council's allegiance. Another controversial issue is the relationship that the new High representative will have with the new permanent president of the Council, and the allocation of powers between the two of them. [...]

[...] Does the EU need a foreign minister? One of the main innovations of the aborted Constitutional treaty was the creation of a EU Foreign Minister. If the accurate denomination of a “Union Minister for Foreign Affairs” was buried with the constitutional treaty following the French and Dutch No-answers to referenda, its position and functions were salvaged in the Lisbon treaty, still not ratified by all 27 Member States. Instead of being named “Foreign Minister”, the latter will bear the official name of “High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy”. [...]

[...] This would largely stem from the above-described image of secrecy traditionally associated with a foreign minister. The Constitutional treaty referendum campaign in France indeed testified of such oppositions. Having a foreign minister at the EU-level was seen as largely illegitimate. A EU foreign minister could then, in its internal dimension, backfire on legitimacy gain. Better first to make sure that the European citizens agree with the fact that countries let the EU decide on their behalf, and then create the post of minister. [...]

[...] But it can only come as an expression of a more integrated and coordinated EU policy if one wants him or her to be able to improve the EU external action's efficiency or coherence. The EU needs more trust on behalf of the various national governments in the form of delegations of power; it also needs a single decision making process. Effectiveness gains could be made through reforms of the voting procedures (extension of Qualified Majority Voting in the Council). More than a foreign minister, the EU needs Member States' political will to pursue a truly European Foreign policy. Bibliography - Le traité de Lisbonne, Rapport d'information de M. [...]