{"id":68936,"date":"2007-06-25T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2007-06-25T00:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2007\/06\/25\/leur-waterloo-a-bruxelles\/"},"modified":"2007-06-25T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2007-06-25T00:00:00","slug":"leur-waterloo-a-bruxelles","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2007\/06\/25\/leur-waterloo-a-bruxelles\/","title":{"rendered":"Leur Waterloo \u00e0 Bruxelles<\/em><\/strong>"},"content":{"rendered":"

Leur Waterloo \u00e0 Bruxelles<\/h2>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\t25 juin 2007 Il n’est pas du tout assur\u00e9 que Sarko soit le Napol\u00e9on de notre temps postmoderne, mis \u00e0 part qu’il n’est pas tout \u00e0 fait fran\u00e7ais d’origine selon des sources bien inform\u00e9es et vigilantes, mais Bruxelles version-juin 2007 ressemble bien \u00e0 un Waterloo pour les Britanniques. Tony Blair laisse derri\u00e8re lui un legs consid\u00e9rable, type patate br\u00fblante, entre Bruxelles-Waterloo et la casserole<\/a> Yamamah<\/em>, en passant par Bagdad-sur-la-Tamise.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tSoit la presse britannique est discr\u00e8te, soit elle fulmine. C’est le cas, pour la fulmination, de The Independent<\/em>, le quotidien le plus pro-europ\u00e9en de Londres, mais pro-europ\u00e9en, tout de m\u00eame, selon les int\u00e9r\u00eats britanniques, et cela se comprend, et les int\u00e9r\u00eats britanniques, \u00e0 Bruxelles… Son commentateur \u00e9conomique Andreas Whittam Smith termine son article du jour<\/a> par cette fulmination rageuse : \u00abMr Blair will be gone in a day or two. Thank goodness. I have been longing for this moment since the misconceived invasion of Iraq began.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tLe m\u00eame Whittam Smith nous explique pourquoi et comment le changement de phrase obtenu par Sarko n’est pas du seul domaine du cosm\u00e9tique. Nous-m\u00eames, fort peu arm\u00e9s pour l’interpr\u00e9tation juridique des textes, \u00e9tions pr\u00eats \u00e0 admettre l’interpr\u00e9tation cosm\u00e9tique, ou RP<\/a>, arguant que c’est bien assez dans une \u00e9poque cosm\u00e9tique et RP. Mais il s’av\u00e8re que c’est bien plus que cela. Pardonnez-nous si la citation est longue mais elle a l’avantage de bien pr\u00e9ciser le cas nouveau o\u00f9 se trouve l’Europe, et que le Trafalgar soft<\/a> est en r\u00e9alit\u00e9 un Waterloo, tout cela \u00e0 contre-emploi historique \u00e9videmment :<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00abFree trade within Europe has been our supreme objective, whereas for our partners the creation of an open marketplace has been only one objective among others. So we come to last week.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbThe newly elected French president, the skilful and energetic Nicolas Sarkozy, had persuaded the German hosts of the meeting to make a small but crucial change in the list of objectives of the European Union. No longer would one of them the most important from Britain’s point of view be an internal market where competition is free and undistorted. Instead M. Sarkozy got the German Chancellor, Angela Merkel, to remove the final six words. Now there is a full stop after internal market.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbWhy did the French President do this? Because the original wording was, in his view, Anglo Saxon, that is to say, British. France does not believe, as we always have done, in free and unfettered competition. She believes in regulated trade. In France, even the price of bread was controlled until comparatively recently. France still sees her major companies as national champions that should be protected from foreign pressure as we do not.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbM. Sarkozy wants to tell his fellow countrymen that the new European Union treaty does not further open the door to globalisation. That is why he had the wording of the internal market objective altered. Mr Blair, with his always poor grasp of British interests, was not disposed to have a fight about this. Did not the precious concept appear 13 times elsewhere in the Union’s legal texts?<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbThat may be so, but the European Court Of Justice, the Union’s highest court, often refers to the wording of the objectives to justify its decisions in competition cases. Moreover, Mario Monti, the former Commissioner in charge of competition, had this to say: This may well please the short-term political appetites of politicians who are impatient vis-a-vis the disciplines of competition policy. It wasn’t, in other words, a trivial change in wording that M. Sarkozy had secured.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbMr Blair should have made the omission of the crucial words a deal-breaker: If you want to change the objectives, we cannot go a step further. Instead, as urged to by Gordon Brown in repeated telephone calls, he secured a new protocol that seeks to assert the sense of the text removed by M. Sarkozy. But whatever a protocol may state, annexed as it is to the treaty, not being part of the main text, it cannot carry the same force as the terms of the original Article 2 dealing with the Union’s objectives.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbTo see why this is so, we do, unfortunately, have to get stuck into the actual wording of the relevant clauses. There are only four objectives. It is the third which, following M Sarkozy’s redrafting, establishes an internal market full stop. Now consider what follows the full stop and I have italicised key words:<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbThe European Union shall work for the sustainable development of Europe based on balanced economic growth and price stability, a highly competitive social market economy, aiming at full employment and social progress.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbAll the words and phrases that I have italicised can be used, innocuous though they may seem, in a protectionist sense. The new protocol merely asserts that the High Contracting Parties, considering that the internal market includes a system ensuring that competition is not distorted, have agreed that to this end, the Union shall, if necessary, take action.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbYou don’t have to be a lawyer to see that Mr Blair’s protocol does not make good the weakening of the old objective with its reference to an internal market where competition is free and undistorted. In any case the lawyers are clear that the changes will make it more difficult to crack down on protectionism and anti-trust abuses.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbMore to the point though, see what M. Sarkozy had to say at the end of the summit meeting. We have obtained a major reorientation of the objectives of the Union, he noted. Competition is no longer an objective of the Union or an end in itself but a means of serving the internal market.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbHe went on: In its relationship with the rest of the world, it is henceforth confirmed for the first time that the Union must contribute to protecting its citizens. The word protection is no longer taboo. He also said that the change could give a different jurisprudence so far as competition is concerned. Europe is there to protect us, not to worry us, M. Sarkozy added.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbThat couldn’t be clearer. France has succeeded in weakening the very aspect of the European Union a level playing field for business which is most important for Britain. Tony Blair, who has been dashing round on his farewell tour, preening himself at every turn, could not, when it came down to it, do the business.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n

L’Europe est d\u00e9sormais un champ de bataille<\/h3>\n<\/p>\n

\tOn ne peut tenir la bataille de Bruxelles-Waterloo pour un coup isol\u00e9, et c’est l\u00e0 l’int\u00e9r\u00eat de la chose. Les Britanniques, qui sont connaisseurs en mati\u00e8re de tactique \u00e0 ambition strat\u00e9gique, ont aussit\u00f4t distingu\u00e9 qu’il s’est pass\u00e9 \u00e0 Bruxelles un \u00e9v\u00e9nement. L’article central de The Independent<\/em> comme un article du Financial Times<\/em> (appr\u00e9ciez le titre de l’article<\/a>, avec sa dose de sarcasme amer : \u00abSarkozy tells EU how to run industry<\/em>\u00bb) mettent en \u00e9vidence combien le discours de Sarkozy au Bourget (cl\u00f4ture du Salon de l’A\u00e9ronautique et de l’Espace) poursuit Bruxelles et capitalise sur l’avantage acquis.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tThe Independent<\/em> de ce matin<\/a> : \u00abSpeaking at the Le Bourget air show at the weekend,<\/em> [Sarkozy] said that this meant the end of competition as an ideology and a dogma in Europe. He said EU governments now could and must create an industrial policy to protect European champion companies like Airbus against unfair competition from outside the EU.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t()<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbPresident Sarkozy, emboldened by his success in Brussels, is plainly preparing an offensive for a more protectionist Europe something which will bring him into direct conflict with Gordon Brown. At the Le Bourget show he also called for a carbon tax on imports from countries which fail to respond to climate change. He repeated his desire for political interference to push down the exchange rate of the euro.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tTout cela est, pour les Britanniques, l’horreur pure, bien plus encore que le minitrait\u00e9, ce qui montre bien l’int\u00e9r\u00eat de la r\u00e9union de Bruxelles et l’habilet\u00e9 manuvri\u00e8re de Sarkozy. Le grand sujet m\u00e9diatique du jour \u00e9tait le trait\u00e9. Tout le monde se d\u00e9chirait \u00e0 ce propos et concentrait son attention sur la chose, avec deux ou trois jumeaux polonais en vedettes am\u00e9ricaines. Mais l’important est bien plut\u00f4t dans cette affaire fondamentale de la pol\u00e9mique du libre-\u00e9change : la dictature du libre-\u00e9change soudain mise en question et violemment contest\u00e9e. Toujours dans The Independent<\/em>, Stephen King, collaborateur habituel du journal et directeur de l’\u00e9conomie \u00e0 la banque HSBC (Hong Kong Shanghai Bank Corporation) attaque violemment les id\u00e9es sarkozystes et livre ce jugement, cette condamnation, cet anath\u00e8me qui sont un cadeau royal fait au pr\u00e9sident fran\u00e7ais, du point de vue de son opinion et de sa politique :<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00abThe latest opponent of capitalist competition is Nicolas Sarkozy, the newly elected President of France (and fan of Paris Saint-Germain). When he first turned up at the Elys\u00e9e Palace, some commentators saw him as a French version of Margaret Thatcher, in favour of free markets, competition and caring capitalism. Not so. M. Sarkozy has revealed a deep suspicion of capitalism and, as such, is proving to be very much in the French Gaullist tradition.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tLes Britanniques, \u00e0 cette occasion o\u00f9 la fourberie gauloise et gaullienne a jet\u00e9 le masque, jettent le leur \u00e9galement. C’est ce que nous dit Whittam Smith lorsqu’il \u00e9crit : \u00abFree trade within Europe has been our supreme objective, whereas for our partners the creation of an open marketplace has been only one objective among others.<\/em> [] the very aspect of the European Union a level playing field for business which is most important for Britain.<\/em>\u00bb Bien compris, quant \u00e0 l’objectif supr\u00eame des Britanniques.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tLe probl\u00e8me, comme le voit bien Whittam Smith d\u00e9cid\u00e9ment tr\u00e8s pr\u00e9cieux, c’est qu’\u00e0 part les Fran\u00e7ais et les Britanniques, les deux seuls peuples europ\u00e9ens \u00e0 avoir une pens\u00e9e strat\u00e9gique coh\u00e9rente, \u00e0 part eux, tout le monde s’en fout. Le m\u00eame Independent<\/em> nous en dit long l\u00e0-dessus en rapportant les j\u00e9r\u00e9miades de Prodi \u00e0 la fin du sommet, j\u00e9r\u00e9miades sans fin sur l’esprit europ\u00e9en, sur la vertu europ\u00e9enne, sur le grand dessein europ\u00e9en, sur la feuille de vigne europ\u00e9enne<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00abThe Italian Prime Minister, and former Commission president, Romano Prodi, complained bitterly yesterday about the lack of common European spirit betrayed by the late-night haggling. He singled out Britain and Poland but also criticised the Czechs and the Dutch for putting national interests ahead of European goals. As a European, allow me to be embittered for the spectacle I find before me, he said.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tIl n’a pas tort, le brave Prodi, mais sait-il au moins de quoi il \u00e9tait question? S’est-il aper\u00e7u de ce qui s’est pass\u00e9 \u00e0 Bruxelles o\u00f9, pour la premi\u00e8re fois depuis vraiment tr\u00e8s longtemps, on a d\u00e9gain\u00e9 l’\u00e9p\u00e9e sur la chose fondamentale : \u00eatre ou ne pas \u00eatre Anglo-Saxon? c’est-\u00e0-dire, ouvert \u00e0 tous vents, offert aux pr\u00e9dateurs US, ou bien s’en d\u00e9fendre avec toute l’\u00e9nergie possible? Brave Prodi, qui n’a pas un seul mot contre la France dans son catalogue de dol\u00e9ances, alors que Sarko ne s’est pas g\u00ean\u00e9<\/a>.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tSoyons donc s\u00e9rieux, \u00e0 la fin, minitrait\u00e9 ou pas, qu’importe. Ce qui compte, c’est que la bataille est d\u00e9sormais ouverte, dans une Europe jusqu’alors soumise sans rechigner \u00e0 la tyrannie nihiliste anglo-saxonne, entre l’Histoire soumise \u00e0 l’\u00e9conomie corruptrice et le retour \u00e0 une appr\u00e9ciation donnant le primat \u00e0 une vision historique des choses. Le point int\u00e9ressant est que, dans cette occurrence, les Britanniques n’ont pas une position tr\u00e8s brillante. Ils sont coinc\u00e9s entre leur n\u00e9cessaire vertu europ\u00e9enne puisqu’ils veulent faire de l’Europe un terrain de chasse sans r\u00e9glementation, les pressions int\u00e9rieures pour un r\u00e9f\u00e9rendum sur ce pharamineux minitrait\u00e9 o\u00f9 l’on parlera de la capitulation blairiste \u00e0 Bruxelles, les amis am\u00e9ricanistes qui les soutiennent comme la corde soutient le pendu, et m\u00eame les amis saoudiens, qui les tiennent, par o\u00f9, d’ailleurs ? On vous laisse deviner.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t(Cette affaire BAE-Yamamah<\/em> n’a pas fini de faire des vagues entre le quasi-Sir Gordon Brown convi\u00e9 \u00e0 faire all\u00e9geance<\/a> \u00e0 Prince Bandar et \u00e0 son oncle le roi Abdallah, et l’OCDE<\/a> qui aimerait bien gagner ses galons d’organisation vertueuse en se payant la t\u00eate de BAE et quelques miettes du Foreign Office. Tout cela, p\u00e9rip\u00e9ties courantes des vertus du libre march\u00e9 qui est l’objectif supr\u00eame du Royaume-Uni pour l’Europe. Si les Fran\u00e7ais continuent \u00e0 \u00eatre habiles, l’affaire BAE-Yamamah<\/em> pourrait bien jouer son r\u00f4le dans la grande bataille europ\u00e9enne commenc\u00e9e \u00e0 Bruxelles, disons, comme le\u00e7on de choses.)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tCe qui ne nous emp\u00eachera pas de conclure 1) que ce n’est pas la Guerre de Cent Ans recommenc\u00e9e, \u00e0 moins qu’on ne fasse que la poursuivre depuis Jeanne, et 2) que, demain, Fran\u00e7ais et Britanniques pourraient tr\u00e8s bien s’entendre une fois leur querelle vid\u00e9e, ou bien dans d’autres domaines fondamentaux en continuant leur querelle par ailleurs. C’est \u00e7a, l’esprit europ\u00e9en, celui que regrette Prodi, c’est la puissance, l’int\u00e9r\u00eat et la n\u00e9cessit\u00e9 des nations.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Leur Waterloo \u00e0 Bruxelles 25 juin 2007 Il n’est pas du tout assur\u00e9 que Sarko soit le Napol\u00e9on de notre temps postmoderne, mis \u00e0 part qu’il n’est pas tout \u00e0 fait fran\u00e7ais d’origine selon des sources bien inform\u00e9es et vigilantes, mais Bruxelles version-juin 2007 ressemble bien \u00e0 un Waterloo pour les Britanniques. Tony Blair laisse… <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"neve_meta_sidebar":"","neve_meta_container":"","neve_meta_enable_content_width":"","neve_meta_content_width":0,"neve_meta_title_alignment":"","neve_meta_author_avatar":"","neve_post_elements_order":"","neve_meta_disable_header":"","neve_meta_disable_footer":"","neve_meta_disable_title":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[10],"tags":[705,3631,4909,3922,4082,4434,4590,3050,6789],"class_list":["post-68936","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-faits-et-commentaires","tag-blair","tag-bruxelles","tag-echange","tag-independent","tag-king","tag-libre","tag-sarkozy","tag-the","tag-waterloo"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/68936","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=68936"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/68936\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=68936"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=68936"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=68936"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}