対米全面テロ

Yet despite the consensus behind Mr Solana's strategy, Britain and France are not ready to overcome their fundamental differences. For example, Geoff Hoon, the UK defence secretary, said in a speech in London only last month: "The issue is not whether the US decides to develop a unilateral or a multilateral approach over the long term. Whether it finds itself in that position or not will depend on the role played and on the persuasiveness and ultimately the capabilities of its allies."

The EU's new draft constitution does what it can, given these divides. It pushes for consultation and co-ordination of national positions, including in international bodies such as the UN, driven forward by a new EU foreign minister. It even proposes that when there is an agreed position, the EU foreign minister would present it at the UN Security Council, speaking in place of its EU members. But the draft also acknowledges the difficulties of getting agreement on foreign policy from 25 governments and accepts that an "inner core" should be allowed to co-operate more closely. It would remove the right of one country to stop a core group from moving ahead on foreign policy. More radical, it would allowing an inner core on defence capabilities and on mutual defence commitments.

The idea of inner cores is in itself divisive. France and Germany, together with Belgium and Luxembourg, have already shown that they are willing to form a defence avant garde. The UK is strongly opposed, fearing that it would only encourage those countries to establish a common military headquarters separate from Nato. Britain does not want to see a mutual defence commitment outside Nato, either.

If the core group can show the way ahead for EU foreign and security policy, and encourage all EU members to join in, the advent of Europe as a force on the world stage may happen faster than some imagine. If it exacerbates EU splits, the chances of the EU being a credible operator in a multipolar world will recede rapidly. A weak and divided EU will be weak in promoting multilateralism, just at a time when it most needs promoting. A multipolar world is not an alternative to multilateralism. It is a condition for it. This is the challenge the EU faces.

The writer is a senior fellow at the Centre for European Policy Studies

http://news.ft.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=FT.com/StoryFT/FullStory&c=StoryFT&cid=1057562418384&p=1012571727172