& çâÌæÚUæð´ ·¤è ¥ôÚU Îð¹Ùæ ÁæÚUè ÚU¹ð´ ¥ÍæüÌ ¥ÂÙð ÜÿØ ÂÚU ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´Ð ãæÚU Ù ×æÙð´, €UØô´ç·¤ ·¤æ× ·¤ÚUÙð âð ¥æÂ·¤ô ©gðàØ ·¤è Âýæç# ãôÌè ãñ ¥õÚU ÁèßÙ ·¤æ ¹æÜèÂÙ ÎêÚU ãôÌæ ãñÐ ÖÜð ãè ÁèßÙ ×ð´ ç·¤ÌÙè Öè ·¤çÆÙæ§ü €UØô´ Ù ¥æ°, çÁ™ææâæ ¥õÚU ©ˆâæã ÕÙæ° ÚU¹ð´Ð ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´, ÜÿØ ã×ðàææ ¥æÂ·Ô¤ Âæâ ãôÌð ãñ´ çÁ‹ãð´ ÂæÙð ·Ô¤ çÜ° ÂýØæâ ¥æÂ ·¤Öè Öè àæéM¤ ·¤ÚU â·¤Ìð ãñ´Ð

MUHAMMAD ZAMIR

I can only hope that our leaders in the SAARC region will carefully follow what is happening in Europe and try to stimulate discussion and eventual understanding between themselves on their unresolved issues. South Asian policy czars and important decision makers have to break out of their prejudice-ridden insular mind-set and seek a responsible and mature path to peace and harmony. Such a step can only better the lot of a fifth of humanity.

MUHAMMAD ZAMIR
Dialogue within Europe: A lesson for South Asia
BANGLADESH is far removed from the interactive politics of Europe. As such, many of us tend to give little notice to the evolving situation in that continent. We generally forget that in the long run, the way the EU emerges in the international stage will determine future relations with Asia in general and smaller countries like us in particular. The decisions within the EU will have practical ramifications for us. It is as such important that we continue to carefully monitor views within Europe and also comments made by analysts from outside about Europe. South Asia has much to learn from the way the EU is trying to streamline itself.
Recent Ministerial meetings in various capitals of Europe have called for a new European political culture as the EU moves from a "comfortable club " to an "enormous community of nations" with enlargement next May to 25 member states. The Intergovernmental Conference (IGC) which concluded recently gave particular attention to the creation of this new culture and deliberations focussed on agreeing on a coherent foreign and security policy to make the union a global player to rival the United States.
The challenge for a post-IGC Europe has assumed strategic importance as most EU countries agree on the need to deliver competitiveness and sustainable development on the one hand and juxtapose it with good governance. This has been reflected in the efforts that have gone into the Convention to produce a balanced draft Constitutional Treaty comprehensible to ordinary people. Smaller states like Finland and Ireland have also underlined the need to maintain credibility in the eyes of the public by ensuring one voting commissioner per member state. This has been proposed because of the felt need to have an "objective" majority voting system that would banish the old-style "horse-trading" in EU decisionmaking. This has reflected the concern among the smaller states who have started wondering whether the EU will emerge from the IGC stronger or weaker, more
united or more divided: in other words, would the result be a Union working for common policies, or would national interests prevail?
EU states agree that enlargement has been a political and economic necessity. The also know that it has made the 'deepening' of Europe all the more important. However, the bone of contention appears to be with regard to the 'peace of deepening' of relations. Some feel that this needs to slow down for a time while a balance is struck between intergovernmentalism and integration.
The original fifteen members of the EU know that they are moving from a comfortable club to an enormous community of nations. They are also aware that it will take not only a special effort to make it work, but also that more radical steps will be required towards Qualified Majority Voting (QMV), particularly on tax and social security, driven by public opinion which is demanding more EU common policies.
Two fundamental post-IGC challenges appear to be looming ahead for the EU. The first is how to make the EU a strong global actor and a credible partner for the USA. The other is how to make the EU the most competitive economy up to and beyond 2010.
Analysts are pointing out the need for great care in working out suitable strategies to overcome the existing weaknesses associated with these challenges. They have stated that there has to be a positive transatlantic agenda and more dialogue and folllow-up. They feel that this is essential if the EU is to be considered as an equal partner with an effective common foreign and security policy. They also believe that this will overcome US
suspicions with regard to European Union responsibility and its weakness in crisis management.
Sprucing up the competitive nature of the EU economy has also been debated at length these last weeks by the EU membership. They have realised that a slowdown in growth has weakened the chances of meeting the existing Lisbon goals. Matters have also not been helped by the fact that at the same time, the global economic environment has become more demanding, particularly with the spectacular rise of China as a global economy. They recognise that part of the problem was that Asia was not even mentioned as a factor when the Lisbon Agenda was set. What has changed (in the economic agenda since Lisbon) is the fact that EU governments are now dealing with a "moving target" compared to the situation three years ago.
The existing EU membership and the expected addition have led many today to emphasise the need to regroup and redefine the Lisbon strategy. One proposal being considered and examined is the hugely-successful Finnish model. EU economists are stressing on the need to pour more investment into research and development. They are also underlining the desirability of business growth, closer cooperation between industry, government and social partners and developing education with the hope of bringing more women into the labour market. This, they believe will make the EU the most competitive economy in the world.
Analysts are also suggesting that future EU economic policy has to be based on consensus rather than confrontation. They think that there needs to be not
only a "European social model" centred on lower taxes, balanced privatisation, and higher employment rates, but also that the EU working life should be adjusted to accommodate family needs. Interestingly, they are thinking that it is time for the EU to reverse itself, spread the burden of social costs, encourage fathers to take paternity leave, and take fuller advantage of the "intellectual potential" of women.
European sociologists involved in the planning of a future Europe have also drawn the attention of EU leaders to the current "lack of dynamism" caused by the ageing population and a limited supply of workers in Europe. In this context, they have suggested an improved strategy whereby the original Lisbon agenda would be revitalised by committing Europe to better control of fiscal and monetary policy. They believe that this will stimulate growth and renew the original European commitment to the Stability and Growth Pact. This, the believe is vital. This concern in their hearts have become critical given the fact that the EU finance ministers backed away from threatening legal action against France and Germany for breaching Pact rules on excessive deficits. According to them, such a step will only contribute to the increase in the constant uncertainty of commitment of major EU governments (to the Pact) for business and consumers. Civil society throughout Europe are now in agreement that big countries must set an example and they must come to better terms with the Commission on how to meet the goals.
Four other challenges also remain unresolved with regard to the completing of the Single
Market, two of them economic in nature -- the serious obstacle in the energy sector and attracting of immigrant labour, particularly from the Balkans. These areas will have to be addressed as solutions do not appear to have been found to these equations.
The two others are political in scope and content -- the issue of EU defence (including the related mechanism for this purpose) and the question of streamlining relations with Russia.
The EU is proud as a civil power, but if it wants to be a "factor for peace," it will need to possess not only a credible institutional military instrument but also the means and autonomy to carry out operations, if necessary. This is something which can be achieved through a compromise between the EU and NATO, but that seems unlikely in the immediate future given the differences of opinion on this subject between the UK on the one side and Germany and France on the other.
Russia, on the other hand is an example of the need for the EU to work out a common policy and not deal in bilateral negotiations. Any observer will point out that there are too many bilateral deals with Russia. Some will also indicate that Russians like such bilateral moves as opposed to comprehensive negotiations with EU in entirety. This protects their national interests. It will be interesting to see how this is corrected in the future.
The post-IGC EU will be all about maintaining a coherent, single Europe, and avoiding the development of inner cores. After the forthcoming enlargement round, the next step might be to give Turkey a real chance at EU membership, a commitment renewed in recent days as tragic events in Turkey have brought the nation closer to the EU. After that, membership priority will probably go to the remaining nonEU Balkan states.
It would not be out of place to also comment here on the great anxiety within the European mechanism that so many years later, no coherent parliamentary system appears to have evolved in the EU, despite the presence of European parties. This is probably partly because too many European party leaders remain too heavily involved in their domestic affairs and were not much interested in formulating common policies.
The EU is today passing through a critical phase. With patience, their leadership will find common denominators on which they will build a suitable institutional arrangement.
I can only hope that our leaders in the SAARC region will carefully follow what is happening in Europe and try to stimulate discussion and eventual understanding between themselves on their unresolved issues. South Asian policy czars and important decision makers have to break out of their prejudice-ridden insular mind-set and seek a responsible and mature path to peace and harmony. Such a step can only better the lot of a fifth of humanity. The recently concluded SAARC Summit has ended on a note of optimism and that should not be lost.
Muhammad Zamir is a former Secretary and Ambassador.