Expectations for Czech EU presidency

shadow_hk

Watchdog
Joined
November 2, 2008
Messages
106
Location
Czech Republic
So what are your expectations for upcoming Czech EU presidency?

You can find more information in English for example here:

http://www.euractiv.com/en/opinion/czech-eu-presidency/article-177910?Ref=RSS

or here:

http://www.eu2009.cz/en/index.html (it is an official web page - but only a limited amount of information is available until 1st of January)

(and Americans could be interested for example in that we plan to invite U.S. President-elect Barack Obama to a summit meeting with the 27 EU states in Prague)

http://www.ceskenoviny.cz/tema/index_view.php?id=342613&id_seznam=2015

Also the 60th NATO summit will be held during our presidency.

Our EU presidency begins on the 1st of January and I must say my feelings are not far from the pride :)

I hope we will handle it well because at least all European eyes will be on us.

And yes, as the presiding country we will have to support Lisabon Treaty so I expect our ratification of this treaty during our presidency but it is not certain. It will depend a lot on developments in the situation, on Ireland and potential addendums to this threaty (personally I support Lisabon Treaty as a necessary thing though one can have legitimate reservations to its current content, that's for sure).

Finally, some final words regarding foreign policy by our deputy Prime Minister for European Affairs, Alexander Vondra, former ambassador in Washington. The words I have yet to read. :).

http://www.alexandrvondra.cz/?item=eu-foreign-policy-and-the-quest-for-leadership&category=projevy

But I like him and his views, which usually correspond to my views. Him, Karel Schwarzenberg (a minister for foreign affairs) and the Prime Minister Mirek Topolánek are "The best three" we can now probably offer. And Euro-skeptical Václav Klaus whom I liked once very much? Well, he is a sui generis case :)



 
Joined
Nov 2, 2008
Messages
106
Location
Czech Republic
I hate to rain on your parade, but most of us have no idea who's holding the EU presidency at any given time, unless it happens to be our own country, and sometimes not even then. Without any elections or similar buzz, there's really nothing to keep it in the headlines. (I can't for the life of me remember who it is now, although if you told me, I'd probably slap my forehead and go "Of course!".)

Be that as it may, we're in for some interesting times -- the economic crisis, re-establishing cordial relations with the US and civil relations with Russia, the ecological treaties, and what have you. I'm glad to hear you're putting your best talent on it (although less glad to hear that one of them shares your views.) ;)
 
Joined
Oct 19, 2006
Messages
8,540
Well, maybe it is on the edge of interest in Finland, but certainly not here ;)

edit: and right because we are in a such global mess (and during problematic ratification of Lisabon), I believe the EU presidency and the actions and policies under its auspices are more important than ever.
 
Joined
Nov 2, 2008
Messages
106
Location
Czech Republic
The EU has a president? Cool. ;)
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
7,834
Just continue in your American ignorance and everything will be fine :))).

You know how we are, I see. :)

Forgive me teasing. I agree that with the current state of the world, relationships and alliances are more vital than ever, and the EU leadership position is very important. And I'm glad to see the Czech Republic or any former Soviet Bloc state for that matter, participating in the world as a free nation; and also you should be glad it's Obama who will be coming to your summit, as a president McCain would spend the whole event referring to your country as Czechoslovakia. ;)
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
7,834
During his presidency of the EU, Sarkozy held a pretty good leadership. Negociating with russia in EU name about Georgia and for a couple other important matters like this. But with the upcoming Czech presidency, it's doubtful the president of your republic that basically no-one know (sorry!) will be able to have the same sort of leadership.
 
Joined
Nov 4, 2007
Messages
1,271
Location
Quebec city
You know how we are, I see. :)

Certainly not all of you :).

Still I like you, I mean Americans as a nation, very much. :). I mean it.

as a president McCain would spend the whole event referring to your country as Czechoslovakia. ;)
I guess his advisor staff would prepare him :).
During his presidency of the EU, Sarkozy held a pretty good leadership. Negociating with russia in EU name about Georgia and for a couple other important matters like this. But with the upcoming Czech presidency, it's doubtful the president of your republic that basically no-one know (sorry!) will be able to have the same sort of leadership.

I call the Sarkozy's negotiation and agreement he achieved in Russia in EU name about Georgia as a second Munich Agreement, or as we call here "A Munich betrayal".. or "about us without us". So, I can't agree with you with this one. Our leading trio I was talking about shares my view but don't worry, they are realists too..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Munich_Agreement

The French always opt for a solution that is most convenient for them. I think, it is in them, this comfortable and arrogance.

In my opinion, Sarkozy is only a "cloaked leftist" :). And I'm not alone in this my view.. His European economical proposals .. well, I can't agree with most of them either. I have already criticised the politics of financial injections in the thread about 2009 economy and I'm also against unlimited state guarantee for deposits in private banks.

Regarding our president,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Václav_Klaus

in comparison with our leading government trio, our president Václav Klaus was and still is on the side of Russia regarding the Georgian conflict (and in many other things too - he is also a Pushkin Medal holder.. So I don't symphatize with him regarding his foreign affairs views (nor his Euro-skeptical views although I understand them), but economically he is more or less a libertarian which on the other hand I evaluate positively (the good state is a small state for me).


But, we are a parliament republic, the President has only limited powers.

--

I will comment your possible reactions later, probably sometimes after the weekend. Must rest for a while from boards. This and others :). Thanks for your understanding.
 
Joined
Nov 2, 2008
Messages
106
Location
Czech Republic
Sarkozy is a cloaked lefty? éh... amusing. You should tell this to the french socialists, they would be relieved.

Everything you say about the Czech leadership and its Troïka confirms pretty much what I said. It's pretty weak, and likely won't manage to achieve anything during its mandate. It will demonstrate even more strongly how badly a reform, a constitution is needed in order to give the EU a more democratic, stable and efficient sort of leadership.
 
Joined
Nov 4, 2007
Messages
1,271
Location
Quebec city
You think? IMO the EU is working pretty well as it is -- something that's broad, diverse, and shallow, yet manages to act coherently when the chips are really down (such as when the financial crisis hit). How would strong, stable, and efficient leadership help?

I wouldn't like the EU to turn into yet another strong, centralized super-state; we've had plenty of those over human history, and they always turn into military, imperial powers (and then collapse). The "network model" the EU has unwittingly stumbled into seems to work surprisingly well. I'd like to take that further -- make different "levels" of membership clearer and more official, clarify the opt-in and opt-out nature of them, clarify the entrance criteria, and broaden membership even further -- assuming the entrants meet the entry criteria. I would love to see Turkey and Russia in the EU -- if they want to join and manage to meet the entry criteria (which currently they don't; for the record, IMO some current members don't either, and shouldn't have been given membership.)

The more the merrier, and who cares about "global reach" or "a common foreign policy" or stuff like that. Let's stick to the economy and free mobility of labor and goods on the one hand, and sufficiently stringent economic, political, and human-rights criteria on the other, and let the rest take care of itself in its usual messy way.
 
Joined
Oct 19, 2006
Messages
8,540
Some people try to tell me that the EU equates to the 'feet of clay' from Daniels prophecy!! An interesting theory; what do others think?
 
Joined
Aug 31, 2006
Messages
12,806
Location
Australia
You think? IMO the EU is working pretty well as it is -- something that's broad, diverse, and shallow, yet manages to act coherently when the chips are really down (such as when the financial crisis hit). How would strong, stable, and efficient leadership help?

The general opinion is that it doesn't (work pretty well). That's why The Lisbon Treaty is being accepted.. to make EU more flexible and operational.

I wouldn't like the EU to turn into yet another strong, centralized super-state; we've had plenty of those over human history, and they always turn into military, imperial powers (and then collapse).

Nor do I. But the fact is that EU drifts towards federalization. Whether we like it or not. It has its plus and minus.

The "network model" the EU has unwittingly stumbled into seems to work surprisingly well. I'd like to take that further -- make different "levels" of membership clearer and more official

To distinguish between for example the "big states" and "small states" officially? To build a "multi-level" EU in this way?. That I really wouldn't want to happen. Even The Lisbon Treaty is more than enough in this respect.

, clarify the opt-in and opt-out nature of them, clarify the entrance criteria, and broaden membership even further -- assuming the entrants meet the entry criteria. I would love to see Turkey and Russia in the EU -- if they want to join and manage to meet the entry criteria (which currently they don't; for the record, IMO some current members don't either, and shouldn't have been given membership.)

The question is whether Russia and Turkey are still culturally and geographically part of Europe. Rather, I think, they are not.

The more the merrier, and who cares about "global reach" or "a common foreign policy" or stuff like that. Let's stick to the economy and free mobility of labor and goods on the one hand, and sufficiently stringent economic, political, and human-rights criteria on the other, and let the rest take care of itself in its usual messy way.

The question is if it is even possible.. to have a common foreign policy. Past experience shows that interests of individual states are usually not the same..

Some people try to tell me that the EU equates to the 'feet of clay' from Daniels prophecy!! An interesting theory; what do others think?

Could you exlain more this theory?

I'm familiar with the term "feet of clay" but somehow I do not see any big connection. But of course, all that glitters in not gold. I don't admire EU at all. But I don't hate it either :).
 
Joined
Nov 2, 2008
Messages
106
Location
Czech Republic
Some people try to tell me that the EU equates to the 'feet of clay' from Daniels prophecy!! An interesting theory; what do others think?

Wasn't Daniel's prophecy about Babylon? IMO it applies to any imperial power. The EU isn't one now. There's not a whole lot of iron or bronze in it; it's more like all clay with some gold and silver here and there.
 
Joined
Oct 19, 2006
Messages
8,540
The general opinion is that it doesn't (work pretty well). That's why The Lisbon Treaty is being accepted.. to make EU more flexible and operational.

I know. But I don't share the general opinion on this point.

Nor do I. But the fact is that EU drifts towards federalization. Whether we like it or not. It has its plus and minus.

The EU does a lot of drifting, for sure, but one good thing about drifting is that generally it doesn't result in strong, unified, centralized structures. IMO the centripetal and centrifugal forces in the EU are fairly well balanced at this time; it would be a big mistake to try to force it one way or the other.

To distinguish between for example the "big states" and "small states" officially?

No, the size of the state shouldn't matter. However, the state of the state should -- in order to gain entry to the "core," a state should meet quite stringent criteria of economic stability and performance, democracy and human rights, and stability and lack of corruption in government.

To build a "multi-level" EU in this way?. That I really wouldn't want to happen. Even The Lisbon Treaty is more than enough in this respect.

You wouldn't, because you're in the periphery and want to get into the core as soon as possible. I, on the other hand, am in the core, and want to make sure that any new entrants won't drag it down. The Czech Republic still has some way to go before it meets these standards (although I've no doubt that it will meet them in another few years).

The question is whether Russia and Turkey are still culturally and geographically part of Europe. Rather, I think, they are not.

I agree -- but I think that culture and geography should not be part of the entrance criteria to the EU.

The question is if it is even possible.. to have a common foreign policy. Past experience shows that interests of individual states are usually not the same..

Exactly -- so why bother even trying?

Again, IMO the EU works best as a club that's open to anyone as long as they meet entry criteria that are explicitly defined and the same for all, with varying degrees of participation with similarly open and explicit entry criteria. Most importantly, the mechanisms for quitting the union or downgrading the membership must also be explicitly defined and open: the EU will only work as long as member states want to remain members; if there's any amount of pressure to try to stop them from leaving, it will immediately turn it into yet another coercive, militarizing super-state.
 
Joined
Oct 19, 2006
Messages
8,540
Everything you say about the Czech leadership and its Troïka confirms pretty much what I said. It's pretty weak, and likely won't manage to achieve anything during its mandate.

I wouldn't make such premature conclusions. But two things are probably certain: There will be a lot of compromises and it could be (I'll use "your" word) amusing.. with Klaus at Prague Castle. :).

see for yourself :).

http://www.praguepost.com/articles/2008/12/10/meps-chastise-klaus.php
 
Joined
Nov 2, 2008
Messages
106
Location
Czech Republic
I love Czech Republic, you guys have the best beer in the world and great taste in music! ;) And of course, we (Poland) have many in common with you, for example the most beautiful ladies in the world! :p
And I'm happy that you were chosen for presidency :)
 
Joined
Feb 2, 2007
Messages
142
I love Czech Republic, you guys have the best beer in the world and great taste in music! ;) And of course, we (Poland) have many in common with you, for example the most beautiful ladies in the world! :p
And I'm happy that you were chosen for presidency :)

Thank you.

At least ladies and beer I can confirm :)).

Regarding our presidency of European Council, to be honest, it is a result of rotation system, but we could have been "set" later...

I hope that at least during time of presidency, our internal leftist opposition (social-democrats and communists) wil leave Topolánek's government to do its job because a presidency of EU, or European Council, is a great responsibility. I hope also that nothing scandalous will happen .. (like leaks of sensitive or classified information, of transcripts from meetings which are not meant for public etc as is nearly tradition here...)
 
Last edited:
Joined
Nov 2, 2008
Messages
106
Location
Czech Republic
I guess I belong to the minority who knew of the Czech presidency in advance:p IMHO it will be an opportunity for the Czechs to show their diplomatic maturity (and how well they can keep the twit Klaus gagged, isnt he supposed to be a ceremonial figure rather than influencing policy?), especially as we go through such interesting times. Provided the Czech government is pragmatic and low-key this could work out well (Sarko style leadership probably requires the weight of a large country to be feasible:p).

To distinguish between for example the "big states" and "small states" officially? To build a "multi-level" EU in this way?. That I really wouldn't want to happen. Even The Lisbon Treaty is more than enough in this respect.

It's not a matter of size, but of the degree of integration a country wants to participate in, a so-called multi-speed Europe. We already have a few countries that opt out of a number of European policies, one of which is big United Kingdom. Currently this opting out is treated as exceptions on an ad hoc basis, with each new situation stalling coopearations for the vast majority of members that do want to participate.

Formalising this with multiple tiers of memberships would make EU collaboration run much smoother and reduce the stepping on toes that come whenever a country wants to negotiate exceptions.
 
Joined
Nov 4, 2006
Messages
2,013
Me, I don't have many expectations. I'll just look and see - watch and listen. :)

The town where my mother's family has lived for a long time http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Furth_im_Wald is located near to the Czech border, but apart from that, I don't know too much of the country.
Only about the split with Slowenia.
 
Joined
Nov 5, 2006
Messages
21,909
Location
Old Europe
Back
Top Bottom