Meanwhile, this decision was perceived in Greater Europe itself as a symbol of the 'deep crisis' of the European community against the backdrop of the clear dominance of national interests. The EU is approaching the next summit, scheduled for June 15, not in its best shape.
The main topic of the informal meeting of the foreign ministers of the 25 EU member states in the Austrian town of Klosterneuburg was the prospects of the European constitution, which hung in the air like a reminder of unfulfilled hopes. In fact, the 25 politicians had no other choice but to take a pause for reflection on the future of the fundamental law. If we do not take into account European neophytes, there is no agreement among the Euro-grandees regarding the further fate of the document. Apparently, the only one who is genuinely concerned today about the constitution issue is the head of the European Commission, José Manuel Barroso, who is vainly urging not to fall into 'European pessimism' and not to allow 'paralysis' of European integration.
The situation in European capitals speaks for itself. Paris, gripped by the permanent crisis of the Fifth Republic, is unable to think about anything other than the upcoming presidential elections. Moreover, the political struggle there is largely built on the topic of fighting migrants, which is clearly politically incorrect from Brussels' point of view. On the British Isles, they generally do not feel too constrained by European obligations. In general, there is confusion and vacillation everywhere, and clearly no unity of interests. The only thing all Europeans agree on is the need to tighten laws regarding emigrants. Only Romano Prodi, who came to power in Italy, is obliged by his position as former head of the European Commission to continue insisting on resuming debates on the constitution. But only small countries with a large European administrative resource - Belgium and Luxembourg - have joined his calls.
At the same time, Brussels is concerned about the reluctance of the 25 countries to unite in the face of the 'common threat of Russian energy dictates.' In addition, each of the countries shows concern for protecting its commercial, industrial and other interests - most often to the detriment of the EU.
Meanwhile, unemployment is growing, having already engulfed 20 million residents of the Old World, and experts are talking about the triumph of protectionism, isolationism and Euroscepticism. And Paris - as the main industrial isolationist, which published a list of 12 'strategic sectors' of the economy - was even accused of 'economic patriotism.' It seems nothing worse could be imagined. However, Paris clearly does not consider this a catastrophe, continuing to build barricades around strategic facilities, fencing itself off from the 'fraternal' investments of greedy neighbors. But voices are also heard in support of French individualism. Some experts say that the French, who gave the world 'liberty, equality and fraternity,' voted not against a united Europe, but against globalization and the Anglo-Saxon model of European development!
Paradoxically, but a fact: the project of the European constitution not only did not unite the EU countries, but, on the contrary, quarreled old friends. For example, the oldest partners France and Germany, which celebrated the 40th anniversary of their friendship this year, found themselves on opposite sides of the barricades. According to Ernst Stetter, director of the German Friedrich Ebert Foundation, 'the Franco-German engine has stalled; Germany is in search of new coalitions.' Moreover, Bulgaria and Romania, which had already believed in their imminent entry into the EU, were under threat. Their accession to the union has been called into question because of the same constitution. At the same time, negotiations with Turkey, which began in October of last year, will also be blocked.
In 2007, the reins of EU leadership will pass to Germany, which, with its characteristic constructiveness, will work on developing 'really feasible proposals' regarding the future of the European constitution project. At least, that was what German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier promised in Klosterneuburg. It was decided that the 'deadline' for clarifying the issue of the legal foundations of the EU's activities would be 2009, when the current founding treaty concluded in Nice expires, elections to the European Parliament will be held, and a new European Commission will be formed. So far, the only constructive proposal from the European Commission on this matter has been to remove the word 'constitution' from the document's title. According to José Manuel Barroso, this word scares Europeans.
In general, as ambitious as the European constitution project was, its failure was just as loud, highlighting serious problems in the EU mechanism itself: as the union's apparatus grew and turned into a giant machine, United Europe lost its flexibility and turned into a lifeless bureaucratic colossus in need of radical renewal.