U.S.-E.U. Summit: The Lies and Ommissions

The leaders of “the Western World,” as they consider themselves, concluded this past Monday’s U.S.-EU Summit with three small declarations (first from Obama, then Van Rompuy, followed by Barroso) without letting the journalists ask a single question. These summits “aren’t always the most dramatic meetings because we agree on so much that sometimes it’s hard to make news,” stated Obama. It is true that these types of conferences do not always interest people in the United States (not one line printed in major U.S. papers until this past Monday) and not many people in Europe either. (Thus far, not a line published in the print version of Libération. One must confess that only the Internet permits such forms of venting. …) Yet if no one speaks at these meetings, it is mostly because the Europeans and Americans succeed in masking their disputes.

In reality, Barack Obama is very concerned about the euro crisis and made it known again this past Monday by inviting his Treasury Secretary, Tim Geithner, to the talks with European leaders. In his speeches in the U.S., Obama has made a habit of citing the euro crisis, along with the Japanese tsunami, as explanation for the current difficulties of the U.S. economy. In the event that the American president would make a fuss out of this subject, his European guests also had a prepared counter-argument on the American debt and the recent failure of the Washington “super committee,” which was supposed to reduce the deficit. According to a diplomat who participated in recent talks at the White House, European leaders have not yet needed to nag about the overspending and political paralysis on this side of the Atlantic. However, in his public statement, José Manuel Barroso recalled that the current European problems originate from the “financial crisis of 2008” — which really just refers to the American economic crisis. In the end, American government officials once again showed a willingness to help Europe … but without spending taxpayers’ money, of course (at the last G20 in Cannes, Obama had already vetoed the idea of bailing out Europe with the help of the IMF).

The climate is another example of how the U.S.-EU “entente cordiale” [friendly understanding] (in the words of Van Rompuy this past Monday) hides some profound differences. Barack Obama has expressed his “concern” about the subject of European carbon emissions quotas, which, starting on January 1, 2012, will be applied to all airlines serving the European Union. This information was reported by American Ambassador to the European Union William Kennard and his European homologue in Washington, João Vale de Almeida, both of whom are charged with debriefing journalists. “Our view is that the best way to implement something like that is multilateral,” explained Kennard. “[B]ut the EU has decided not to act that way.” The argument is cocky, seeing as the United States has made such a big case out of multilateral negotiations on climate issues so far. The European ambassador was not wrong in retorting: “We are not opposed to a multilateral solution. …But we have been waiting too long. If there was a good one, we would buy it.”

For the record, the House of Representatives voted in a law last October to prohibit U.S. airlines from observing the EU legislation on carbon emissions quotas. On the eve of the summit, European diplomats still hoped that Obama would put a stop to the “unprecedented” initiative that emerged from the House of Representatives. Given the White House’s reluctance to reason with Congress, Barroso and Van Rompuy were reduced on Monday to pay a visit to Harry Reid, leader of the Democratic majority in the Senate, to dissuade him from voting in a similar law. The idea is to “bien lui savonner la tête” [reprimand him well], explained a European diplomat before the meeting.

All of this deserves “to make news,” like Obama said — who apparently has no interest in doing so and is doing everything possible to let these summits fade into obscurity. Some European diplomats already expect a postponement of the next U.S.-EU summit, theoretically an annual event, perhaps until the spring of 2013 due to the American presidential election (which will occur in Nov. 2012). According to the alternation rules of these summits, Obama or his successor will have to travel to Europe for the next meeting. Already it is suspected that the president will have other priorities.