Next week's summit of Europe's big three powers is being viewed with a mixture of anticipation and foreboding as heralding a new form of leadership for the expanding EU. The reality may be less far-reaching.
German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder, French President Jacques Chirac and British Prime Minister Tony Blair all have good reasons for needing the meeting in Berlin next Wednesday.
All three are domestically weakened, face awkward foreign policy challenges and want to get the EU moving again after a period of economic stagnation and political setbacks. They have recently joined forces in initiatives to boost European defense integration and persuade Iran to accept tougher inspections of its nuclear program.
There is no shortage of other pressing problems for them to address -- reviving a push for economic reform to boost Europe's limp growth, breaking the deadlock on a stalled EU constitution, healing transatlantic rifts over Iraq and seeking a successor to Romano Prodi at the head of the European Commission.
They are preparing a joint call for an acceleration of economic reform efforts ahead of next month's regular summit on economic policy, which officials say breaks little new ground.
But diplomats and analysts say the big three may not be able to agree among themselves on some of these issues, let alone deliver the agreement of other key partners.
NO "DIRECTOIRE"
Italy and Spain were quick to warn against any attempt to create an inner "directoire" to run Europe -- especially one that does not include them.
Italian Foreign Minister Franco Frattini, whose country has just ended an unsuccessful six months in the EU presidency, said the emergence of such a leadership trio "is a worry for those who believe Europe is a mechanism for power-sharing, not a mechanism for the concentration of a hard core of power."
But some other countries welcome the new "trilateralism," at least as preferable to Franco-German hegemony.
"Of course, it's a novelty that Blair is joining the duo who meet often," Polish Prime Minister Leszek Miller said in an interview. "It can only be beneficial. Blair's presence brings a new point of view. It brings the transatlantic option."
German EU policy expert Ulrike Guerot said the Berlin summit signalled a welcome recognition that the Franco-German axis was no longer powerful enough to drive an enlarged EU of 25 nations.
The traditional theory was that since Paris and Berlin often started on opposite sides of EU debates -- north versus south, agrarian versus industrial, protectionist versus free market, Europeanist versus Atlanticist -- when they reconciled their differences, others would follow. But officials in both capitals now intone the mantra that Franco-German agreement is "necessary, but not sufficient."
"It has become a locomotive without wagons," Guerot said. "France and Germany were seen as riding roughshod over the small countries, not respecting EU budget deficit rules themselves and trying to force acceding states to choose between Europe and the United States."
ENTER THE BRITISH
Enter the British -- free marketeering, pro-American, inter-governmental and presumed to have influence with countries such as Spain and Poland that resent Franco-German dominance.
"Clearly all three leaders are worried about how the EU can take decisions after enlargement," said Charles Grant, director of the Center for European Reform in London.
"Chirac and Schroeder know they can't drive a common foreign and security policy without Britain, and Blair thinks they've all got to overcome the old Europe/new Europe divide," he said.
Grant said Blair might be willing to help coax Poland and Spain towards accepting a deal on member states' voting rights that would unblock the stalled EU constitution after May.
The three might also be able to agree on ways to adapt the EU's budget deficit rules, which might in the long term make it less unattractive for Britain to join the euro, he argued.
But on Iraq and on some areas of European integration, like tax harmonization, farm subsidies or calls for a European public prosecutor, Blair differs strongly from the others. And mistrust between Blair and Chirac runs deep after two years of conflict.
"People shouldn't exaggerate what we three can achieve," a French official said. "But they should accept that we can meet in small groups, because Europe simply won't work if everything can only be discussed by all 25."
Labubu, an elf-like plush toy with pointy ears and nine serrated teeth, has become a global sensation, worn by celebrities including Rihanna and Dua Lipa. These dolls are sold out in stores from Singapore to London; a human-sized version recently fetched a whopping US$150,000 at an auction in Beijing. With all the social media buzz, it is worth asking if we are witnessing the rise of a new-age collectible, or whether Labubu is a mere fad destined to fade. Investors certainly want to know. Pop Mart International Group Ltd, the Chinese manufacturer behind this trendy toy, has rallied 178 percent
My youngest son attends a university in Taipei. Throughout the past two years, whenever I have brought him his luggage or picked him up for the end of a semester or the start of a break, I have stayed at a hotel near his campus. In doing so, I have noticed a strange phenomenon: The hotel’s TV contained an unusual number of Chinese channels, filled with accents that would make a person feel as if they are in China. It is quite exhausting. A few days ago, while staying in the hotel, I found that of the 50 available TV channels,
Kinmen County’s political geography is provocative in and of itself. A pair of islets running up abreast the Chinese mainland, just 20 minutes by ferry from the Chinese city of Xiamen, Kinmen remains under the Taiwanese government’s control, after China’s failed invasion attempt in 1949. The provocative nature of Kinmen’s existence, along with the Matsu Islands off the coast of China’s Fuzhou City, has led to no shortage of outrageous takes and analyses in foreign media either fearmongering of a Chinese invasion or using these accidents of history to somehow understand Taiwan. Every few months a foreign reporter goes to
There is no such thing as a “silicon shield.” This trope has gained traction in the world of Taiwanese news, likely with the best intentions. Anything that breaks the China-controlled narrative that Taiwan is doomed to be conquered is welcome, but after observing its rise in recent months, I now believe that the “silicon shield” is a myth — one that is ultimately working against Taiwan. The basic silicon shield idea is that the world, particularly the US, would rush to defend Taiwan against a Chinese invasion because they do not want Beijing to seize the nation’s vital and unique chip industry. However,
RSS