EUROPE'S AGENDA AT THE SUMMIT

European union on the web: http://europe.eu.int

"The European Union ... shows an inability to operationalise the ideas that it has long known to be right. The EU’s member states are strait-jacketed by their obligation to achieve regional consensus. In addition, efforts to change the economic system are subservient to the whims of an unaccountable Commissioner of Trade. And thus the message the EU sends to the world is one of platitudes, generalisations, ideas, and great visions." Peter van der Gaag, ANPED

“Our evaluation of the role of the EU in Johannesburg is mixed. Having been an important progressive force in several areas, we would have expected more pressure from the EU and are disappointed on issues of globalisation, trade and corporate accountability. With politicians returning home, we should remind ourselves that the EU’s own policies are far from being sustainable: transport, agriculture, trade and energy policies in the EU are in urgent need of reform!” Martin Rocholl, Friends of the Earth Europe ++ [ Earth Summit Wrap Up: Governments Miss Historic Opportunity; Friends of the Earth press release; September 4 ]

The European Commission has always stressed the need for an effective EU contribution to the World Summit. Its forthcoming EU Sustainable Development Strategy and the 6th Environment Action Programme are planned to be important European contributions. Concerning developing countries and development aid, Europe will to focus on the development opportunities that present themselves as a result of economic growth, the development of new technologies and the mobilisation of capital.

As early as February 2001, the Communication "10 Years after Rio: Preparation for the World Summit for Sustainable Development" was adopted outlining the strategic goals of the EU:

1. Greater global equity and an effective partnership for sustainable development;
2. Stronger integration and coherence of environment and development on an international level;
3. A clear agreement on environment and development goals to revive and enhance the Rio 1992 process;
4. Effective measures on a national level with strict international supervision.

In contrast to the U.S. President, all European Heads of State will attend the Johannesburg Summit. Britain’s Tony Blair, France’s Jacques Chirac, and Germany’s Gerhard Schroeder were only the first to announce their travel plans. Although this reflects the importance of the Summit to the European governments, it does not necessarily guarantee European support for a successful outcome.

At PrepComm III, the European Union tried to adjust the negotiated Document to the WTO Doha-Agreement as they did in the Financing for Development Conference in Monterrey, Mexico earlier. In accordance with Japan, the EU believes all reference to trade and globalisation should be in line with the language agreed upon during the WTO Ministerial in Qatar. Free Trade is the European approach towards sustainable development, while at the same time, the EU tries to protect its economy and avoids taking steps to open its markets for the developing countries (which is what the G77, the developing countries, are calling for). In addition, the EU calls for strengthening the United Nations governance mechanisms, implying good governance principles. NGO criticise that the European Union, during the PrepComm III, had only shown poor leadership under its Spanish Presidency and abandoned its environmental advantage in favor of trade liberalisation.

At PrepComm IV, the European Union was described as portraying itself as the good guy in the face of US stubbornness but effectively delivering much rhetoric without real commitments. The European Union, on the other hand, was in favour of an international document in Johannesburg, for which it mainly put forward its agenda on the environment: Almost alone, the EU tried to proceed with the environmentally relevant Chapters in the Draft Plan of Implementation, mostly opposed by the G77/China. Efforts to bridge gaps and build a coalition between the EU und G77/China were not successful, since the EU did not make any offers in the areas of trade, finance, and subsidies.

Earlier, the European Parliament adopted two opinions on the EU position for Johannesburg in mid-May, one titled "Ten Years after Rio" [ pdf; 12 pages ] and the other on sustainable development [ pdf; 11 pages ]. The Parliament has complained that in the current negoitiations, partnership agreements are promoted as replacements for, rather than as complements to, clear and positive global governmental commitments. The report on sustainable development calls on the World Summit to take a coordinated approach to issues such as the relationship between poverty, trade and the environment. The Parliament is also calling on the EU Member States to agree to an immediate moratorium on debt servicing for all countries belonging to the group of the Highly Indebted Poor Countries (HIPCs) and/or the Least Developed Countries (LDCs) and to waive all remaining bilateral debts for those countries.

The EU environment ministers met in Soenderborg/Denmark on July 23, to discuss their World Summit strategy. While criticizing the US-positions, they called for real commitments of the OECD-countries. EU Development Commissioner Poul Nielson and EU Environment Commissioner Margot Wallström stressed the importance of a success in Johannesburg both for North-South as well as for world trade relations. Both pointed out that a failure of the Johannesburg Summit would deepen the gap between rich and the poor countries. In their view, this could also disrupt the Doha and Monterrey processes by deteriorating the negotiation climate.