Please note that this is BBC copyright and may

not be reproduced or copied for any other

purpose.
RADIO 4
CURRENT AFFAIRS
ANALYSIS
THE EUROPEAN JUGGERNAUT
TRANSCRIPT OF A RECORDED
DOCUMENTARY
Presenter: Bruce Clark
Producer: Ingrid Hassler
Editor: Nicola Meyrick
BBC
White City
201 Wood Lane
London
W12 7TS
020 8752 7279
Broadcast Date:
Repeat Date:
Tape Number:
Duration:

05.12.02

08.12.02
TLN248/02VT1049
27.37

Taking part in order of appearance:

Gisela Stuart,
Labour MP for Birmingham Edgbaston,
Presidium member and Parliamentary Representative,
The Convention on the Future of Europe
George Papandreou,
Foreign Minister of Greece
The Rt Hon. David Heathcoat- Amory,
Conservative MP for Wells, and full member of the
Convention on the Future of Europe
Dr Francois Heisbourg
Director of the Foundation for Strategic Research ,
Paris
Dr Christopher Coker
Reader in International Relations at the London
School of Economics
Dr Josef Janning,
Deputy Director of the Centre for Applied Policy
Research, Munich , adviser to the German
government and the European Commission
Dr Heather Grabbe
Research Director, Centre for European Reform ,

London
Bartholomew I, Patriarch of Constantinople, Istanbul

CLARK
In a few days time, the leaders of the
European Union will be inviting 10 more members to join the club.
Soon the Union will stretch from Galway to the Black Sea, and
comprise nearly 500 million people. For some people, the
enlargement of the European Union is the fulfillment of a deeplyheld personal dream. Like Gisela Stuart, Labour MP for Edgbaston.
STUART
My mother comes from Eastern Europe,
I spent the first 20 years of my life in Germany. Im now a British
MP - I have Neville Chamberlains old constituency. I would be
deeply offended if anybody would even dream to suggest that Im
not a good European.
CLARK
The emotional stakes are also
quite high for some politicians in Greece, which as the next holder
of the Unions revolving presidency, will soon be staging a
spectacular show under the Acropolis to mark the enlargement
treaty.
George Papandreou, the Greek foreign minister, spent his youth
fighting to establish democracy in the land of its birth - and he too
has family roots in the ex-communist bloc.
PAPANDREOU
Truly, when I did travel to Poland
and Lithuania where my great - grandfather was born, it was quite a
revelation and also an important moment, I think, for those who
hosted me having a feeling that we have so much in common.
Having travelled quite a bit and lived through some very difficult
moments, for example, the dictatorship in Greece and, therefore,
being exiled and knowing what that means. So, enlargement and
travelling around these countries has been at times emotional in
seeing how countries and people who have had similar
experiences such as exile and, or seen friends of theirs or family
in jail because of their political views, how this now has changed.
STUART
To me it is almost a question of setting
right a historic wrong. They have been excluded from their rightful
place in Europe for 50 years. I find it deeply depressing when I go
to some of these countries and meet a generation of 40, 50, 60 year
olds and I think you have been sold down the river for a whole
generation by communism. So, theres a real emotional link that
they have a right to be returned to their place within Europe.
CLARK
Gisela Stuart. So at long last, the
wounds of the cold war are being healed. But some people remain
unmoved by what they see as touchy-feely arguments - British
conservatives, for example. David Heathcoat- Amory, MP is a
colleague and sparring partner of Gisela Stuarts on the Convention
on the Future of Europe.
HEATHCOAT- AMORY
Im very worried about
enlargement - I think its one of those unexamined good ideas that
people are afraid to oppose but havent really thought through the

consequences of and I think that if we think the European Union is

undemocratic at the minute its going to get much worse when we
try and absorb a lot of other countries with different cultures for
which our judicial and legal systems are quite unprepared, its going
to be extremely expensive.
CLARK
Expensive indeed. How will the
European clubs 15 well-dressed members cope with 10 rather
bedraggled newcomers, whose combined economic output is less
than that of the Netherlands? And those cultural problems
look likely to deepen, with three more countries - including Turkey
- officially accepted as candidates. The real question is whether
the European Union can survive the strains of an open-ended enlargement
process. Its an important question - but one thats surprisingly
little discussed by the peoples of Europe. Dr Francois Heisbourg
is director of the Foundation for Strategic Research in Paris.
HEISBOURG
Theres been comparatively little
public debate. There are high levels of skepticism vis a vis
enlargement in French opinion polls, and enlargement in political
discourse has been treated in a largely defensive way that is with
pro-enlargement politicians speaking about the measures that
theyre taking in order to avoid the negative effects of enlargement
rather than putting forward the arguments in favour of enlargement,
the positive aspect s of enlargement.
CLARK
If the French are indifferent,
people in Britain appear to be largely ignorant. A recent poll here
found that three-quarters of people could not name a single one of
the 10 countries which are next in line to join the Union.
The right answers are: Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic,
Slovakia, Slovenia, the three Baltic states, Cyprus and Malta.
In western Europe as a whole, pollsters find that attitudes to
enlargement demonstrate at best a grudging acceptance.
None of this has prevented Europes political elites from ploughing
on. Dr Christopher Coker, Reader in International Relations at the
London School of Economics, thinks they are doing it for the wrong
reasons.
COKER
Well, theyre pressing ahead
furiously because I think theyre trying to evade confronting reality.
Thats essentially what it comes down to. They dont want a big
debate about the consequences of enlargement because
enlargement they see as a historical mandate that they have been
forced to accept because the consequences would be too dire. But,
on the other hand, theyre not really willing to revalue the vision of
Monnet, Schumann and others back in the 1950s - in other words,
history for the West has moved on as well as history in the East and
this is not something that many of todays politicians can really
accept with equanimity.
CLARK
Whatever motives may be lurking
in their subconscious minds, Europes masters are so busy with
enlargement that Guenter Verheugen, the EU Commissioner in
charge of it couldnt find time to appear on this programme.
But has this feverish activity been triggered by some higher moral
purpose, or are there some rather more pragmatic factors at work?
For Germany, the answer seems to be yes. Dr Josef Janning of the
Centre for Applied Policy Research in Munich is an adviser to the
German government as well as to the European Commission.

JANNING
German companies and German
financial institutions are by far the leading investors in most of these
countries. Germany is the biggest market for East Central
European products and German companies are most visible there
and if you travel throughout East Central Europe, you can hear
many voices in the streets - people saying, havent the Germans
bought enough, isnt the German influence already too strong? So,
in order to control for those sentiments critical of Germany because
of Germanys past or outright anti-German sentiments, we have no
better framework than the European Union to explain also to our
East Central European neighbours that this is not a form of neoimperialism by the Germans but its rather part of daily reality of the
European internal market and that everything is in order the way it
is.
CLARK
If thats Germanys biggest motive
for enlargement, its a cynical one, though it does have a ring of
truth. Moreover, German voters have been promised that in this
latest European project, they will not be the main pay-masters. They
are fed up with bank-rolling French farmers, Irish motorways and
Spanish fishing fleets. So if all goes to plan, the Germans will be
more popular and they wont have to pay for it.
But what about the Greeks, at the opposite end of the chain?
Having received billions of Euros in aid, what advantage can they
see from letting in much needier countries? The Greek Foreign
Minister, George Papandreou.
PAPANDREOU
Certainly enlargement will be very
important for Greece. We have always suffered from the division of
Europe. Therefore, enlargement is very much for us part of a wider
peace project. Something which you may well understand is very
important for south eastern Europe having been, having had gone
through terrible crises in the last 10 years with ethnic conflict and
this becomes a vision of cooperation and stability and peace. This
will be a major theme in our presidency also. We should, with
enlargement, we are creating a sustainable Europe, a sustainable
freedom, if you like, which we cherish so much, our democratic
values, our sense of protection and security - this is what we want
to see.
CLARK
In fact, Greeces neighbours
Bulgaria and Romania have been told they wont be joining before
2007, and the conflict-scarred states of the former Yugoslavia may
have to hold on for a good bit longer. But the Greek argument about
stabilising wild places also appeals to Gisela Stuart.
STUART
If we have instability and we see
whats happening, for example, in the Soviet Union, the breakdown
of law and order, rise of corruption, illegal trade, it is actually in all
our interests to create a European space of market economies
through movement of labour. If central and eastern Europe falls apart then
we will be damaged and we see it at the moment with the waves of
immigration, the waves of asylum seekers. If you have those thousands of
people there, how do you resolve that? Not by creating a fortress Europe
which is prosperous inside , by creating the prosperity so they dont
feel the need to leave. No-one leaves their home country
voluntarily.
CLARK
So both Gisela Stuart and George
Papandreou, who speak so idealistically about Europes rendezvous
with history, also have some rather hard-headed reasons for

supporting the enlargement process. But they cut no ice with British
Eurosceptics, who are deeply suspicious of the efforts of Euroenthusiasts to draw up a constitution for an enlarged Union. The
Tory MP David Heathcoat - Amory shuttles to Brussels on Eurostar
once a week to try to restrain the zeal of the constitution-writers.
HEATHCOAT- AMORY
I think a constitution will actually
be a big step further toward giving the European Union all the
attributes of statehood because it is states that have constitutions
and the European Union wants one and it will entrench a number of
undesirable features. It will give the European Union, for the first
time, a full single legal personality enabling it to operate on the
world stage, to sign treaties, sue and be sued and so on. It wont be
a state in exactly the same way that a nation state is but it will have
all the attributes. Its already got an anthem, its got getting an
army, its got a flag, its got a legislature, its got a budget, its getting
a foreign policy and defence policy. So, if you actually look at the
draft constitution already produced it is a highly undesirable
institution from a British point of view. Britain has done without a
written constitution for its entire history. Were now getting a written
constitution through the European Union. So, for the first time ever,
although we havent wanted it and we dont want it and we see no
need for it, Britain is going to have a written constitution.
CLARK
Its this prospect of a constitution
being foisted on Britain that has put the Conservatives off the idea
of enlargement. Margaret Thatcher used to see enlargement as a
crafty way of diluting the European soup. But that wont work any
more; for better or worse, the European treaties have become so
complex that they amount to a sort of constitution anyway. Gisela
Stuart believes a single document might help the citizens of an
enlarged Union to untangle the web of treaties and see where we
are.
STUART
To me the constitution is an object
of definition. It defines what the Union is and what it wants to
achieve and, therefore, I think people will have more of a sense of
certainty about this because many people think so far its been like
a Maoist continuous revolution. Im quite clear in my mind that this
is the most important thing Ive ever been asked to do because
were setting a framework for Europe, not just for the next few years
but for decades to come. I mean, just look, this is how far Europe
has come - the British House of Commons have sent a German to
represent them at the Convention.
CLARK
To British ears, Gisela Stuart may
sound like a raving Euro-phile. But she - like the British government
- sees the written constitution as a way of saying thus far and no
further...
STUART
This is neither a United States of Europe
- this is not my aim and Im absolutely clear about this, nor is it a
Federal Republic as the German s would subscribe to where you
make the member states nothing but a chamber of the regions - a
glorified one. To me its quite clear a new form of institution which
has elements which are inter- governmental, they remain with the
nation state and defence to me is one of those which I think are
and, in my view, will remain in the realm of the nation states - it will
be, in my mind, always a hybrid.
CLARK

So is it British government policy

to keep it that way?

STUART
So far the governments still
agreeing with me, I think.
CLARK
In that funny language known as
Euro-speak, the word inter-governmental is supposed to reassure
people. What it means is that in some areas of European policy, the
Unions member governments can freely choose to co-operate, or
not to co-operate. And whatever the practical arguments in favour of
pooling sovereignty, some sceptics see historical and cultural
reasons why Europes prickly nations need to be themselves for a
bit longer before merging with others. Christopher Coker of the LSE.
COKER
The best way of creating
internationalism was through the nation state. We now realize that
there is no concept of internationalism without going through the
phase of the nation state - we move on from nationalism to
something larger. The east European states, the majority of them,
have only experienced the nation state very briefly in their history not just in the last 12 years - but also briefly in the inter-war period
and that was not a very happy experience. So, in terms of things
such as democratic accountability, in terms of the relationship
between a political class and its people, in terms of parliamentary
sovereignty - all of these are new, relatively new, and yet there are
likely to be bypassed or transcended by larger international or
transnational structures which essentially what membership of the
European Union means. And I think its asking a lot of any society
including one that is not particularly developed culturally or politically
to make that transition. Its asking it a lot of the present west
European members particularly countries such as Britain. Its
asking even more of the east European ones.
CLARK
How will the existing members,
both individually and collectively, be affected by close embrace with
countries of a hugely different political and legal culture and a
hugely different attitude to defence?
COKER
I think that the central issue here
is probably less to do with the mechanism of decision making which
is, of course, the issue most discussed by politicians and academics
than the attempt to create a European identity. The real failing of
the European Union as it entered the 21st Century is that there is no
European identity, there are no European parties represented in the
European parliament, theres not a single European newspaper,
there is not a single European media service, its even doubtful
whether there is something called European public opinion even
though there are Euro-barometers that are supposed to measure it.
If that is the failing, then to add a further tranch of Europeans who
come from a geographically very different background, whose
historical experiences have been different again, who may even
draw different lessons from those experiences than the ones we did
from 1945, that is asking a lot of any organisation and particularly
one which is still as amorphous as the European Union.
CLARK
Christopher Coker is probably
right to say that a sense of being European is developing very
slowly. And wont it be harder still in a Union stretching from Lisbon
to Latvia? But whether we like it or not, the big, unwieldy vehicle
known as enlargement is already on the road - and this will have
consequences which will have to be managed somehow. Otherwise

were running the risk of losing all control.

Dr Heather Grabbe is research director at the Centre for European
Reform in London, a Europhile think-tank. She thinks weve
underestimated the implications of enlargement for the European
Union.
GRABBE
After enlargement it will become
qualitatively different because with 25 members and growing perhaps going up to 30 members over time - inevitably it cant be
just a few people around a table deciding things on behalf of the
rest of Europe. That will make the politics much more complicated.
It will be harder to get deals. On the other hand though, the EU will
become more ambitious because the demand will be there for it to
act more in foreign policy because its borders will touch countries
like Ukraine, like Belarus also, of course, North Africa, it will have to
deal with problems on its doorstep and it will have to have a serious
neighbourhood policy for , what you might call, its near abroad. It
will also become a much weightier player in terms of international
politics. Once youve got nearly half a billion people represented in
the European Union thats a significant voice in the world - in world
trade negotiations, in discussing things with Washington, in dealing
with problems like Iraq and Middle East policy, the European Union
will have to become a bigger foreign policy player.
It will also have to deal with more problems - things that its tried to
ignore in the past like policy on minorities - the EU doesnt really
have a democracy agenda. There arent clearly stated what these
European values really are - I think well have to develop those. So,
there will be more activity, more policies. The question is whether it
will be a more cohesive unit. That, I think, is still very much a
question to be answered.
CLARK
Developing European values?
For Christopher Coker, thats a very tall order for a Union thats
steadily moving eastwards.
COKER
One of the examples I found in
my own travels across the Balkans, in particular, was the
extraordinary distance both psychologically and emotionally from
the war in Kosovo. Now, Kosovo was, if nothing, a European war,
prosecuted by the European Union on behalf of something called a
European Civil Society for which the European Union now claims to
speak. What one found in Eastern Europe was an immense
distance between politicians who were prepared particularly in
government to go along with the Kosovo war because they knew
that would be expected of them and public opinion that was mostly
totally opposed to the Kosovo war by as much as 80% in a country
such as Romania. Im not sure that East Europeans expect to be
involved in war as the next part of the European project nor do I
think, given their historical experiences of the military which has
been a highly negative one, will they consider that this is a
legitimate aspiration for the European Union to pursue in the future.
CLARK
That doesnt augur well for
Europes hopes of a common foreign and defence policy. And if
Christopher Cokers right its hard to see how one would begin to
define the values that would underpin such a policy.
As the European Union becomes more diverse that dilemma is
likely to become more difficult to solve. Most of the 10 incoming
members, like most of the existing ones, have a western Christian
heritage, either Protestant or Roman Catholic. But with the advent

of Cyprus in this wave, and then Romania and Bulgaria in the next,
the number of Union members with an Orthodox Christian majority
will rise from one to four. And just behind those countries in the
queue there is Turkey, which is overwhelmingly Muslim and where a
party with Islamist roots has just won power.
Bartholomew I, the Patriarch of Constantinople, is the senior bishop
of the Orthodox Church, and he also speaks for the Christian
minority in Turkey. Does he believe Islamic nations can become
good Europeans?
PATRIARCH
This Christian past of Europe
must not exclude people belonging to other faiths and other
cultures. I see the entrance of these non-Christian people into the
European Union such as the Turkish nation which is in the greatest
majority Muslim, is only an enrichment.
CLARK
So can we say without hesitation
that there is a place in the European Union for Muslim societies like
Turkey or possibly Albania, Bosnia - can we say without hesitation
that a Muslim country can fully participate in the European Union?
PATRIARCH
Yes it can fully participate. I hope
that Turkey will be the first non-Christian country to be received into
the European family. The minorities who are all of them in favour of
such membership of Turkey into the EU will be able to improve their
own position because they will enjoy more freedom, more respect of
their minority rights, more religious freedom, everything will be
ameliorated, will become better.
CLARK
The Patriarchs support for
Turkish membership isnt all that surprising. A European Turkey
would have to accept religious diversity - and in other ways, respect
the European notion of human rights. To impress the Union, it has
already abolished the death penalty.
But nothing Turkey does is likely to assuage Valery Giscard
dEstaing, the former French president whos overseeing the
project to write a European constitution. He recently said Turkey
was not a European nation and could never join the Union.
He was saying, in effect, that the EUs leaders should withdraw the
promise of membership which they gave Turkey in Helsinki three
years ago. In Paris Francois Heisbourg views the Giscard bombshell with
unexpected equanimity.
HEISBOURG
He was wrong in terms of his
recommendations which was to, which were not to let in Turkey.
That being said, it is refreshing to have a senior European politician
actually opening the debate publicly on the entry of Turkey. The
Turkish issue has been dealt with by stealth, heads of state and
government have been taking positions on the entry of Turkey
without necessarily meaning what they were saying.
I mean, I certainly had the - not entirely unexpected but still rather
unpleasant experience of meeting one of the participants in the
European Council in Helsinki a few days afterwards and who, you
know, told me as he told a number of other people quite blithely, oh
yes, thats what we said but, you know, Turkey will never be part of
the European Union, nest pas?
CLARK
However shameful the Unions
hypocrisy may be, its certainly true that an entirely new strategic
challenge will face the EU if it expands as far east as Turkey.

HEISBOURG
In that case we will have a
security border with Syria, with Iraq, with Iran, with Azerbeijan, with
Armenia and with Georgia. That, I think, will lead the European
Union to a much higher degree of obligation in terms of having a
collective defence capability above and beyond the current plans
within the European security and defense policy.
CLARK
Its rather terrifying, isnt it? And
as the full consequences of enlargement become clear, in all their
mind-boggling complexity, wont we see some political ferment in
the heart of Europe? Josef Janning in Germany.
JANNING
It is to be expected that Eurosceptic politicians will have a greater acceptance in the population
in the time to come - thats one of the risks the process faces. For
many people in the street, enlargement bears the risk of losing
ones job. People, especially here in Germany, see every day from,
at their own work place or they hear it from neighbours where even
smaller companies have moved production to Hungary or to Poland
or the Czech Republic. So, people find it somewhat difficult to
understand that making use inside this internal market of the factor
costs of production in the East of cheap labour, of cheap land, of
lower construction costs or lower energy costs is, in the longer term,
adding to the prosperity of the European Union.
CLARK
Could one reason for the
scepticism in Germany be the following: people think it was
expensive and burdensome enough to unite Germany, how much
more expensive will it be to unite Europe?
JANNING
That is a point very well taken.
Yeah, thats what they think. Indeed in many debates you hear this
comparison being made. For German policy makers it is not very
easy to tell them that this is entirely wrong. Extending solidarity is
always a risky thing so you want to think twice about that. But they
are in this process now and they are realising that its so far on the
way that they cannot stop it.
CLARK
So its academic to discuss
whether the enlargement project is good or bad; it has developed a
momentum of its own. All the same, mightnt it be a good idea to
slow it down? Heather Grabbe of the Centre for European Reform.
GRABBE
If theres a long delay, the costs
could be huge, however. Theres an awful lot invested in this whole
process, both politically and economically. For Central and Eastern
Europe, there would probably be a drop off in foreign direct
investment just when they really need that investment to upgrade
their economies and to encourage growth. They would also see a
lot of disillusionment among the public - that the EU hadnt lived up
to its promises - theyd made all of these painful reforms for nothing.
So, we could see quite a lot of political backlash. For the EU, the
real issue is credibility. The EUs own credibility would be shot to
pieces if it couldnt live up to its promises to let in countries which
are as well prepared as Hungary and Estonia then what hope is
there for Croatia, for Ukraine, for Turkey, for countries which aspire,
at least, to have a closer relationship with the European Union and
for the candidates to come in at some later date. The EU will not be
a credible actor on the world stage in terms of its external policy if it
cant actually make enlargement happen after 15 years of

preparation and a huge amount of work on the applicants side.

CLARK
Heather Grabbe is right to say
that well-prepared countries should get their just deserts. Whats
more, the danger she cites - of deep disappointment in eastern
Europe if the West fails to share its prosperity - is a very real one.
But fear and confusion about where the European Union is going
already abound among its current members. And Christopher Coker
believes the Union will come to resemble a Theatre of the Absurd.
COKER
I suspect it will look very much like
Pirandellos play Six Characters in Search of an Author. Where
theyre all part of the script but they have different lines, different
dreams and their own particular subtexts. We will all be dreaming
of different visions of the European Union and that will make it very
difficult for the European Union to press ahead as one into the 21st
Century. Were sleeping in the same bed but were definitely
dreaming different dreams and some of us are going to wake up
with nightmares.
CLARK
But the future doesnt have to be
so apocalyptic. Some of the absurdities of the Union in its current
form will have to be swept away. But even if the EU didnt exist,
Europe would need some system for managing our differences and
coping with common challenges that transcend frontiers, from
pollution to money-laundering. An enlarged and reformed Union
may yet provide that system - but we wont get there through
conspiracies of silence, or by utopian rhetoric.
We must find the courage to construct an expanded Union in which
many languages and beliefs, but common standards of legal
certainty and mutual respect, can co-exist. Be it ever so large,
Europe is too small a place for each of us to sleep in a separate
bed.