At a time when Greece assumes, for the fifth time in its recent European history, the six-monthly presidency of the EU Council, some might find it paradoxical to entrust this responsibility to the most economically devastated member state of the European Union. A country whose exit (if not the expulsion) from the Eurozone was advocated by some authoritative European national leaders no more than a couple of years ago.
“Is it acceptable – that someone might ask – that a member state under the supervision of a task force of consultants assigned to it by the troika (European Union – European Central Bank – International Monetary Fund) is entrusted with the task of guiding for six months what to some extent can it be considered the government of the EU?”.
Everyone is free to give the answer they deem most correct. But taking into account what he anticipated less than a month ago in Brussels, the Greek Deputy Foreign Minister Dimitris Kourkolas, very little known outside national borders so far. "The fact that the country at the epicenter of the economic-financial crisis assumes the presidency of the EU - he said - is the confirmation of institutional equality between the member states, which is one of the most important principles of the European Union". A "principled" answer to which it is not easy to reply if one does not want to drown in the most sinister indifference so fashionable these days. And that could be supplemented by the observation that even Ireland, when it assumed the rotating presidency for the first half of 2013, was not yet out of the EU-IMF financial assistance program (from which it only exited in mid-December).
On the other hand, Greece, which also has its responsibilities (in relatively recent times its leaders have admitted to having "rigged" the accounts to join the euro), can be considered the victim that suffered the most serious wounds inflicted by an austerity policy that is right in principle, yes, but often applied according to rigid ideological schemes. A policy that not only the reality of the facts, but also a recent rethinking of the Monetary Fund (and others), has shown to be inadequate to restart national economies shaken by shock waves originating on the other side of the Atlantic.
And in any case, it should be remembered that the assignment of the rotating presidency to Greece for the first half of 2014 was established by the European Council in 2007, in the aftermath of the great enlargement which opened the doors of the Union to eight Central and Eastern European states and to two tiny Mediterranean countries (Cyprus and Malta). But before the explosion of the US "subprime" scandal, the spark from which the fire that engulfed the financial balance of the whole world was born.
Be that as it may, the Greek presidency will not be the certified copy of the previous two (Ireland and Lithuania), even if the three member countries in question form a "trio" (Brussels invention which aims to give continuity to the application of European policies ) which should involve all three of them at least in the choices that have the greatest impact on all European citizens.
It will not be, as elections for the new European Parliament will be held shortly before the end of the semester (May 22-25); and it is understandable that MEPs who reapply will be more engaged in their respective constituencies of origin than in the plenary hall in Strasbourg and in those of the parliamentary commissions in Brussels.
It will not be because objectively Greece has little money to use to fulfill this commitment. “It will be a presidency marked by austerity, ie cost efficiency – deputy minister Kourkolas put his hands forward – for substantial and symbolic reasons. Few people, only nine hires from outside, many secondments from the Foreign Ministry, all meetings in Athens always in the same building”.
It will not be because, despite what Prime Minister Antonis Samaras has said (“We will maintain the same operational rhythm as the Lithuanian presidency”), it is presumable that, not so much in reference to the pace of work but rather to the contents of the programme, the objectives of the Greece are different from those of Ireland and especially Lithuania. Just listen to what Samaras said at his first press conference in Brussels.
“We intend to further promote economic growth, employment and cohesion; the further integration of the EU, and in particular of the monetary union”, the Greek prime minister announced on that occasion, so far in line with the objectives of the previous six-monthly presidencies. Assuming however - this is the novelty - that "the security problems at our external borders oblige us to deal with issues concerning immigration which must be resolved in a global way (read: at European level - ed.) both for asylum seekers and for illegal migrants".
Still on the subject of immigration and border security, the head of the Greek government also listed four objectives. The first is the blocking, or at least an effective reduction, of uncontrolled migratory flows towards the European Union, safeguarding respect for human rights and strengthening the fight against the criminal organizations that manage trafficking in human beings. The second is better coordination of policies governing legal immigration. Then there is more effective coordination of return policies for illegal migrants. And finally, Greece will fight to strengthen the synergies between immigration policies and economic growth policies to attract "educated and talented" workers.
Within the framework of this strategy of the Greek presidency is the intention of relaunching European maritime policy by setting its guidelines in a proposal, to be launched at the European Council in June, which, according to Samaris, "should bring together the issues of security, growth and 'power". These are issues, the Greek prime minister says, "on which I have agreed with Enrico Letta to work in close collaboration, also in consideration of the fact that in six months the rotating presidency will be Italy's turn".
