To receive the Brussels Briefing in your inbox every morning, register for a free FT account here and then sign up here.
In Clermont-Ferrand on Tuesday, a reporter asked Manuel Valls how he felt about former economy minister Emmanuel Macron filling a 2,000-seat venue in the same town three days earlier (500 other fans were refused entry because it was just too packed). Predictably, Mr Valls, who not so long ago was Mr Macron’s boss, did not take it well.
Read moreLadies and gentlemen, dear friends,
It is good fortune that the Maltese Presidency comes at this extraordinary time, a time full of new challenges and dramatic upheavals. In these six months, in Rome we will celebrate the sixtieth anniversary of the Treaty, and the Brexit procedure will formally be launched. The spring will also be a demanding test for the whole of the EU with regard to migration, especially on the Central Mediterranean Route. Such a sequence of events requires leadership which is competent, experienced and sensitive.
We were indeed lucky that this difficult role fell upon Malta. Few have a better understanding of Italians, who will host the Rome celebrations, and few have a better understanding of the British, who we will begin to divorce. And, as we know, divorces - without mutual understanding of the partners involved - can turn their lives into a nightmare. Finally, few have a better understanding of the essence of the migration tragedy in the Mediterranean.
But Malta is not only a guarantee of a competent and understanding leadership. For Europe, Malta is also a symbol of our cultural identity. If you want to see a history of European culture through a lens - take a close look at this remarkable island.
According to some, it is here in Malta, that Calypso, the nymph from Homer's Odyssey, hosted Odysseus. Although, given the seven years he was held captive by her, the word 'hosted' is perhaps a slight understatement. For art lovers, Malta is the island of Caravaggio, while for the lovers of archaeology, it is the site of the oldest free-standing structures on Earth. It is no coincidence that la Valetta will be a European capital of culture in 2018.
It is precisely culture that anchors us, Europeans, in time and space, giving us a sense of identity. Culture is that territory we want to and should defend. We all have our roots in the Mediterranean, in Greece and in Rome, in Christianity, which was born at this crossroads of cultures. If today we are looking for anchors that will stabilise our continent, Malta is that kind of symbolic anchor. Zygmunt Bauman, the brilliant Polish philosopher and social thinker who died only two days ago, wrote that Europe has a particularly important role to play in revitalising our understanding of culture, precisely because Europe, with its great diversity of peoples, languages and histories, is the space where the Other is always one's neighbour and where every one of us is constantly called upon to learn from everyone else.
Apart from competence, patience and empathy will no doubt be the main strengths of the Maltese Presidency. My confidence in this comes from the knowledge of certain events dating back to the beginning of our era.
According to the Bible, the apostle Paul was en route to Rome where he was to be tried as a political rebel. However, the ship carrying him and hundreds of others was caught in a fierce storm. Two weeks later the ship crashed on the Maltese coast, and all the people on board swam safely to land. The welcome given to the survivors is described in the Acts of the Apostles, Chapter Twenty Eight, by Saint Luke: 'And later we learned that the island was called Malta. And the people who lived there showed us great kindness, and they made a fire and called us all to warm ourselves.'
Two thousand years have passed, and you continue to welcome guests and survivors, calling them to warm themselves by a common fire, of which today's ceremony is another beautiful example.
Thank you.
Place: Europa building, Brussels
Chair(s): Federica Mogherini, High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy
All times are approximate and subject to change
+/- 08.00
Arrivals (live streaming)
VIP entrance, Europa building
+/- 08.30 (ttbc)
Doorstep by High Representative Federica Mogherini
VIP entrance, Europa building
+/- 09.30
Beginning of the meeting (Roundtable)
Adoption of the agenda
Approval of legislative A items (public session)
Approval of non-legislative A items
Outlook for the first part of 2017
Syria
+/- 13.30
Working lunch: Middle East Peace Process
+/- 15.30
Press conference by Federica Mogherini (live streaming)
Main press room, Justus Lipsius building
Although a gross generalisation, it is nevertheless fair to say that the British were never believers in the European dream, with its vision of shared values and a common political culture. The UK sees its withdrawal in terms of trade: from London’s standpoint, Brexit is all about defending its commercial interests.
That’s understandable. So it’s particularly unfortunate that the ministerial team handling Brexit under Prime Minister Theresa May has failed to grasp the basics of international trade. Their misapprehensions were highlighted by the resignation of the UK’s ambassador to the European Union, Sir Ivan Rogers.
The Brexiteer ministers’ crucial mistake is to think that governments beyond Europe will be willing to award the UK lucrative trade deals – and that they are even able to do so. The powers of any government concerning international trade are limited to lifting barriers – something that, needless to say, has been the EU’s great achievement. The creation of cross-border business, meanwhile, is down to companies.
In today’s climate of creeping protectionism, it’s clear that Britain couldn’t have chosen a worse moment to leave the sheltering arms of the EU. Until the 2008 onset of worldwide economic crisis, international trade had for decades been expanding by seven per cent a year. Now it has slowed to less than 1.5%. There are fears that protectionist politics in Europe and the United States could whittle that down to almost zero. The Brexiteers’ brave talk of ambitious new trade deals beyond Europe is looking very hollow.
“Sir Ivan’s point was simple. Realigning Britain’s trading relationship with continental Europe and the rest of the world will be very complex and is fraught with danger.”
While it lasted, booming world trade fuelled spectacular global growth, suiting developed and developing countries alike. Two-thirds of world trade is handled by multinational corporations, many of them based in America or Europe, while the shifting of production towards low-wage countries did much to create the Asian ‘tigers’ and support China’s development as the world’s largest national economy.
But now trade is under pressure. The World Trade Organization’s Doha Development Round, which promised a new era of multilateral trade liberalisation, lies in tatters. It seems unlikely that either the EU-US Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) or the US-Asia Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) will ever see the light of day.
The new protectionism is largely spurred by rich countries, which are responding to the shrinking number of industrial jobs at home. Forecasts from the WTO say that “in an open trade environment” developing countries are set in the years ahead to outpace richer competitors from members of the OECD, both in terms of exports and overall growth, by a factor of two to three.
Exchanging the benefits of intra-EU trade for the uncertainties of the global marketplace looks a poor deal for Britain. But until a general election in the UK can reassess the will of the people, it’s plain that the May government will press ahead with its undertaking that ‘Brexit means Brexit’.
“Brexiteer ministers have little understanding of, or sympathy with, the treaty commitments the UK has made and that the EU-27 will be insisting on.”
The question is whether it will be a hard or soft Brexit – one of an abrupt severance or one that keeps economic disruption to a minimum. This is where the debate over trade becomes crucially important.
Sir Ivan Rogers’ widely publicised resignation comment about the “muddled thinking” of British government ministers reflects expert opinion on both sides of the English Channel. Free trade is the wellspring of economic growth, and depends on common technical standards and norms rather than on bargains struck by politicians. Untangling Britain from rules that safeguard the single market, while protecting the UK’s exporters, would indeed take a decade – just as Sir Ivan warned last November.
His warning drew the ire of 10 Downing Street, and brought accusations in the anti-EU right-wing press that he is a ‘Bremoaner’ who wants to overturn last June’s referendum’s result.
But his point was simple. Realigning Britain’s trading relationship with continental Europe and the rest of the world will be very complex and is fraught with danger. Unless British companies observe European rules and standards, their EU business risks drying up overnight.
In London other senior civil servants have joined Sir Ivan in warning of the difficulty of achieving a hard Brexit that avoids the collapse of negotiations with Brussels. The UK has virtually no seasoned trade negotiators after four decades in which the European Commission has handled trade issues on behalf of member states. Worse, the Brexiteer ministers have little understanding of, or sympathy with, the treaty commitments the UK has made and that the EU-27 will be insisting on.
Related content
IMAGE CREDIT: © European Union, 2017
The post Sir Ivan’s departure highlights Brexiteers’ ‘muddled thinking’ on trade appeared first on Europe’s World.