European Union foreign ministers have sought to sell their Syria compromise as a success. In reality, Monday's agreement is an abdication of leadership, once again proving that Europe cannot be taken seriously as an actor on the global stage.Continue reading.
To fully understand the European Union's role in the Syrian crisis, a small thought experiment could prove helpful. If you were a party in the civil war in Syria, which of the following actors would you most like to have as an ally? The Russians, who deliver military supplies and demand political influence and a warm-water port in return? The rulers in Saudi Arabia and Qatar, who guarantee an endless supply of weapons in exchange for ideological compliance? Or perhaps the Americans, who remain hesitant to become involved but are nonetheless the world's most influential political and economic power?
One thing is clear: The EU would certainly not be at the top of the list. Europe, to be sure, regularly demands written assurances that it's allies are not cooperating with Islamists and terrorists. But as quid pro quo, they don't offer much more than encouraging words. And there is a reason for that. The Europeans can't even agree on a common position.
The agreement that EU foreign ministers finally managed to reach late on Monday night is a compromise in name only. The bloc's 27 member-states were only able to agree on a continuation of the financial and economic sanctions that are currently in place. Such sanctions are the lowest common denominator of the EU's approach to Syria, though. When it comes to the much more important issue of arms shipment, Europe is hopelessly divided.
Sunday, June 2, 2013
EU Foreign Policy Fails Again on Syria
From Ralf Neukirch, at Der Spiegel, "Empty Compromise":
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
0 comments:
Post a Comment