Elmarad az EU-USA csúcs

Az Egyesült Államok Külügyminisztériumának szóvivője többek között a Lisszaboni Szerződés ellentmondásosságára hivatkozott, mikor bejelentette, hogy Barack Obama elnök nem jön el a májusra tervezett EU-USA csúcsra Madridba.

Philip J. Crowley szerint a szerződés ellentmondásos abból a szempontból, hogy nem egyértelmű, hogy kivel és mikor kellene találkoznia az Egyesült Államok elnökének az unió részéről. A szóvivő szerint a jelenlegi új struktúrában a Tanács félévente rotálódó elnöksége mellett az Európai Tanácsnak is van már egy állandó elnöke, mely igaz a Bizottságra is, és számukra is kérdéses, hogy a majdani csúcstalálkozókat az EU részéről ki és hol fogja megtartani.

A hír nyomán számtalan cikk jelent meg a nemzetközi sajtóban arról, hogy ez a lépés egyértelmű jele annak, hogy Európa leértékelődött az Egyesült Államok számára. Az El Mundo című spanyol napilap kedden arról írt amerikai forrásokra hivatkozva, hogy a legutóbbi, tavaly novemberben tartott csúcstalálkozó „elvette Obama kedvét attól, hogy részt vegyen egy újabb ilyen találkozón májusban”. Az El País szerint Obama „hátat fordít Európának”. A napilap azt írta, hogy Obama a novemberi lisszaboni NATO-csúcstalálkozóval egyidejűleg szeretne sort keríteni az EU-USA-találkozóra. (Euvonal)

--------------------------------------------------------------------

Why Obama won't bother to attend the EU summit?

Months after the European Union ratifies a treaty aimed at increasing its clout in the world, President Barack Obama's decides not to travel to a summit with EU leaders in Spain because he has more important things to do. Predictably, the decision is interpreted in Europe as a snub for the Spanish government of Jose Luis Zapatero and also for the EU, still recovering from the failure of its efforts to lead by example at the Copenhagen climate talks.

Indeed, the decision reinforced a developing narrative within Europe that was one of the themes of last week's meeting in Davos. With the rise of China, and to a lesser extent economies such as India and Brazil, Europe is less of a player than it was on the world stage. Add this to Europe's current economic travails—sovereign debt problems within the euro zone, feeble economic growth and badly-wounded banking systems—and the outlook is a testing one for Euro-optimists.

Unsurprisingly, Washington did its best to protest that Europe was still at the top of its agenda. Philip Gordon, the senior State Department official responsible for European affairs, said in an interview that the decision of the president not to come is "not a slight; nor is it a cancellation."

...

He said the decision was no reflection on the U.S.'s bilateral relationship with Spain, which had improved significantly since Mr. Zapatero, directly after he was elected in 2004, withdrew all Spanish troops from Iraq and earned the enmity of President George W. Bush. "I think we have really turned the corner on a problematic relationship during the Bush administration," Mr. Gordon said.

Neither was it a commentary on the importance of the U.S. relationship to Europe. He echoed comments from his boss Hillary Clinton, who addressed head-on in a speech last week "concern that the Obama administration is so focused on foreign policy challenges elsewhere in the world that Europe has receded in our list of priorities." "European security remains an anchor of U.S. foreign and security policy," she said.

Mr. Gordon denied suggestions in Europe that the administration had been disappointed by the support given to Mr. Obama's plan to pour 30,000 more troops in Afghanistan – to which European governments have added a further 9,000. "I think we were quite pleased with the response to the president's speech on Afghanistan," he said. Despite these protestations, many Europeans think the EU and its member governments would be unwise to ignore the message from Mr. Obama's non-cancellation.

Charles Grant, director of the Centre for European Reform, a London-based think tank, said this president does not have the attachment to the old continent of many of his predecessors. "Obama is very unemotional about the E.U.," he said.

The key to getting him to attend E.U. summits is to provide practical solutions to problems. "He's not going to take the E.U. seriously unless the E.U. delivers," he said.

Mr. Grant's point is reinforced by what, according to many European press reports, was European squabbling ahead of the Madrid meeting over transcendental questions such as who was going to sit next to Mr. and Mrs. Obama at the summit dinner, who would shake Mr. Obama's hand first (Mr. Zapatero) and who would sit to his right (Herman Van Rompuy, new president of the European Council).

The Wall Street Journal