Blair out of race to be High Lord Proconsul Imperator President of EUSSR

[Stavroforos]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8367589.stm

Former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair has dropped out of the race to be European Council President - just as EU leaders meet to decide who to appoint.
Belgian PM Herman van Rompuy has been put forward for the job, with French and German support, diplomats say.
The socialist group of EU leaders is now urging the appointment of EU Trade Commissioner Baroness Catherine Ashton as the new foreign policy supremo.
A UK government spokesman revealed the dramatic twist in the British position.
EU leaders are in Brussels to select their first full-time president and the High Representative for Foreign Affairs - new posts created by the Lisbon Treaty, which will come into force on 1 December.



Wanted: Someone with star quality

The heads of the 27 EU member nations have various candidates to choose from, and after-dinner negotiations may last into the night.
Mr Blair had been an early favourite for president and was the highest-profile candidate.
Seeking balance
The EU leaders are having a working dinner together to negotiate the appointments.
They are widely expected to strive for a balance in the two posts, with one likely to be filled by a candidate from one of the bigger EU states, the other from a smaller country.
Similarly, the presidency is expected to go to a centre-right politician and the post of foreign affairs chief to the centre-left.
By abandoning Mr Blair, and persuading the seven-strong socialist group of governments to back Lady Ashton for the foreign policy position, Prime Minister Gordon Brown may well have broken the logjam and vaulted a British candidate right into one of Europe's top jobs, the BBC's Jonny Dymond reports from Brussels.



Quite a few countries are deliberately shielding their hands, waiting to see what happens when the leaders meet face to face




Gavin Hewitt's EU blog



The combination of Mr Van Rompuy and Lady Ashton would also achieve the balance that EU leaders seek, he says. Both are seen as low-key consensual figures.
The BBC's Europe editor Gavin Hewitt says Mr Blair was an early frontrunner for the presidency, but some leaders feared he would overshadow them and so the mood shifted in favour of a lower-profile name instead.
The EU president will chair regular meetings of the European Council at which decisions are taken about the political position of the bloc.
However, correspondents say the High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, as the post is officially known, could have an even more powerful role.
THE PRESIDENT'S ROLE
Chosen by 27 member states by qualified majority vote
Two-and-a-half-year term
Can be re-elected once
Chairs EU summits
Drives forward the work of EU Council of Ministers
Facilitates cohesion and consensus
Represents the EU on the world stage



Send us your comments

Whoever is chosen will have a seat as vice-president of the European Commission, as well as a budget worth billions of euros and a new diplomatic service of up to 5,000 people.
Mr Van Rompuy is seen as a consensus-builder and has been described as a pragmatic rather than a charismatic figure.
During his time as budget minister in Belgium's Christian Democrat-led government, he took a tough stance on balancing the economic books, drastically reducing the country's public debt.
Mr Blair had not put himself forward for the role, but had not ruled himself out either.
Currently working as Middle East envoy for the US, UN, EU and Russia, he was earlier described by Mr Brown as an "excellent candidate".
The UK's Foreign Secretary David Miliband had been tipped as a possible contender for the job of EU foreign affairs chief, but he has said he is not available.

Apparently all those "fears" of President Blair were unfounded. What do you have to say about this authoritative position now?

[Barry Ferguson]

I would have rather had Blair. The first president will define the role, and under Blair the President might have become a real global figure.

More than that, I would like Presidential elections, rather than the Germans choosing someone

[Lucas the Great]

Comrades!
Today it's a great day for the Union of European Socialist Republics. A guy from country that is about to fall apart has become elected in "fully democratic voting procedure" to the office of the General Secretary.

Arise, wretched of the earth
Arise, convicts of hunger....

[CtrlAltDe1337]

More than that, I would like Presidential elections, rather than the Germans choosing someone

Welcome to das 4th Reich, mein freund.

[removeduser_487563287433]

Apparently all those "fears" of President Blair were unfounded. What do you have to say about this authoritative position now?

That France and Germany have made it impotent to maintain their own dominance of the EU.

[6th Vigil]

That France and Germany have made it impotent to maintain their own dominance of the EU.

This.

[BlackPirate]

Well Blair is a skillfull politician but his name is somwhow controversial.It wouldnt be wise to start with a controversial pm.

[Poach]

I must admit, I was looking forward to the mighty statues of Blair dressed as a common worker striking a heroic pose going up in every town square. Looks like it'll be some other guy now

[6th Vigil]

I must admit, I was looking forward to the mighty statues of Blair dressed as a common worker striking a heroic pose going up in every town square. Looks like it'll be some other guy now

Van Rompuy doesn't sound much better to me. Committed federalist from what i've heard and plus he looks so bloody freaky:

[Erik]

Van Rompuy doesn't sound much better to me. Committed federalist from what i've heard and plus he looks so bloody freaky:

Blair: Lied about Saddam's WMD's so he could start an illegal war, killed hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians.
Rompuy: has a freaky appearance.

Yeah, sounds about the same

[6th Vigil]

Blair: Lied about Saddam's WMD's so he could start an illegal war, killed hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians.
Rompuy: has a freaky appearance.

Yeah, sounds about the same

Don't get me wrong I wouldn't want Blair in the job as I know what a he is, I'm British. All I'm merely saying is that I'm not keen on Van Rompuy as I believe he is very much in favour of increased integration.

[Erik]

All I'm merely saying is that I'm not keen on Van Rompuy as I believe he is very much in favour of increased integration.

And all I'm saying is you can't compare him to a racist war criminal.

Plus: ANYONE who could ever get the job must be in favor of increased integration, it's in the job description.
It's not like the EU is going to appoint a EU-skeptic, you know?

[Dr. Croccer]

Not too suprising, seeing as nobody likes Blair.

[Treize]

OOohhh, evil federalist grin...

Reminds me of Gollum.

[ShockBlast]

Stavroforos you mean General Secretary of the European Union of Soviet Socialist Republics?

Comrades this is a day of great joy for the entire Euro-Soviet people.

[Tiberios]

Stavroforos you mean General Secretary of the European Union of Soviet Socialist Republics?

[Syron]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/8367589.stm

Both are seen as consensual politicians with limited foreign policy experience.

They could of at least picked competent dictators.........


These are people who are essentially puppets, very federalist puppets. I suspect their powers (when they are fully decided) will be fairly strong so the puppeteers can play their games.

[wilting]

These are people who are essentially puppets, very federalist puppets. I suspect their powers (when they are fully decided) will be fairly strong so the puppeteers can play their games.

Er, no. Two relatively weak and consensus-building figures have been selected (by the Member States, that is by Intergovernmental means, as opposed to elected, which would be Federal means) so as not to overshadow the power of said Member States (So The Union will continue to operate on an Intergovernmental basis, not a Federal basis).

So what we have here is yet another manifestation of the lack of direct democracy and relative weakness of the Union as a result of Intergovernmentalism.

And as usual people make noises about the evil Federalist demons that are behind it all, when the system the Union operates under is the opposite of Federalist, and Federalism would solve the problems the Union is habitually criticised for. The same broken record we hear every day from people who consider themselves insightful critics of the Union, but haven't the slightest notion about how it actually works.

[Lance-Corporal Jones]

Er, no. Two relatively weak and consensus-building figures have been selected (by the Member States, that is by Intergovernmental means, as opposed to elected, which would be Federal means) so as not to overshadow the power of said Member States (So The Union will continue to operate on an Intergovernmental basis, not a Federal basis).

So what we have here is yet another manifestation of the lack of direct democracy and relative weakness of the Union as a result of Intergovernmentalism.

And as usual people make noises about the evil Federalist demons that are behind it all, when the system the Union operates under is the opposite of Federalist, and Federalism would solve the problems the Union is habitually criticised for. The same broken record we hear every day from people who consider themselves insightful critics of the Union, but haven't the slightest notion about how it actually works.

Ah, the same old Federast fallacy.

No, federalization will not lead to democratization. Democratic institutions aren't the only element in democracy (even though they help).

First of all, without a demos, there is no democracy and no democratic legitimity.

I have been consulting several very rabidly eurocratic articles on the subject (for instance: Europeanization, J. Borneman and N. Fowler, Annu. Rev. Anthropol. 1997 26:487-514) and while all agree that a European demos is necessary, their theories on how to "manufacture" a European demos remain wishful thinking, at best.

In fact, as the latest Eurobarometers point out, support for the EU and identification with it have been in steady decline since the 1990's; this contradicts Monnet et al.'s theories, which supposed that an increasing European sentiment would rise. The fact is that Monnet, Schumann and their cabal could not predict that in the 21st century, people would travel all over the world and communicate effortlessly with the rest of the human race whilst feeling British, French, Italian or German.

The European demos is not forming; furthermore, would it even be ethical to "form" a European demos, with the subsequent losses in terms of culture and identity?

The Belgian "experiment" is eloquent in this regard: 4 million Walloons and 6 million Flemings united in one artificial state since 1830; and they still mostly hate their government and consider that it represents nothing, to the point of the country's crisis back in 2003.

If this experiment failed at such a small scale, it is obvious what the results will be at a scale of 500 million.

And I repeat: without a demos, there is no democracy.

NEXT: as someone pointed out biasedly, there are some very successful federal states out there, such as the United States and Germany.

Indeed, Federal states that compromise only one nation (Americans are a cultural nation, as are Germans and Mexicans) tend to be successful.

However, lump in different nations (even two, as in Czechoslovakia) and you have failure and/or internal strife: for instance, Yugoslavia, the USSR, Czechoslovakia, Canada, Belgium...

Why? Simply because federal states tend to become more and more centralized and behave like nation states (if they are to survive): For instance, the anticonstitutional FBI and Federal Reserve in the US are NOT elements proper to a Federal state. Of course, this doesn't cause any problems, as Americans are a nation and do not resent federal power as foreign.

You have little idea what the USSR was and what the EU is, thats clear.

The only thing that is "clear" here is that this statement is laughable, at best.

[Azog 150]

Germany and France realized they couldn't dominate Europe single handedly (At least not for long) as they have both previously tried and failed. Now they have ganged-up.

Don't make us give them another arse-kicking...