Euro-Mediterranean Information System on know-how in the Water sector

Barcelona Process: Union for the Mediterranean – Joint Declaration adopted

2008-07-18T00:00:00Z

The ‘Barcelona Process: Union for the Mediterranean' gives a new impulse to the Barcelona Process in at least three very important ways: by upgrading the political level of the EU's relationship with its Mediterranean partners; by providing for further co-ownership to our multilateral relations; and by making these relations more concrete and visible through additional regional and subregional projects, relevant for the citizens of the region, according to the Joint Declaration adopted at the Paris Summit for the Mediterranean (13 July).

The Summit, co-chaired by French President and President of the European Council, Nicolas Sarkozy, and Egyptian President, Hosni Mubarak, brought together 43 European and Mediterranean States, the Community institutions and the regional organisations.

The Heads of State and Government agreed on the creation of a co-presidency and decided that a joint secretariat will be established, with one of the co-presidents from the EU and the other from a Partner state. The Arab League shall be invited to the meetings.

The Ministers of Foreign Affairs will finalise the modalities for the institutional set-up of the initiative during their next meeting in November. The new structures for the initiative should be fully operational before the end of 2008.

Joint Declaration

A focus on key projects

The 20-page Declaration notes that this initiative will build on the Barcelona Declaration and its objectives of achieving peace, stability and security, as well as the acquis of the Barcelona Process. The leaders share the conviction that this initiative can play an important role in addressing common challenges facing the Euro-Med region, such as economic and social development; world food security crisis; degradation of the environment, including climate change and desertification, with the view of promoting sustainable development; energy; migration; terroris m and extremism; as well as promoting dialogue between cultures.

An Annex to the Declaration sets out the priority fields and key initiatives, which the future Secretariat is mandated to detail. These are:

· De-pollution of the Mediterranean.

· Maritime and Land Highways.

· Civil Protection.

· Alternative Energies: Mediterranean Solar Plan.

· Higher Education and Research, Euro-Mediterranean University.

· The Mediterranean Business Development Initiative.

According to the Declaration, the Barcelona Process: Union for the Mediterranean will be complementary to EU bilateral relations with the Partner countries, which will continue under existing policy frameworks such as the Association Agreements, the European Neighbourhood Policy action plans, and, in the case of Mauritania, the African Caribbean Pacific framework. The leaders underscored the importance of the active participation of civil society, local and regional authorities and the private sector.

How it will operate?

The leaders agreed to hold biennial summits, which will result in a political declaration and a short list of concrete regional projects. Annual Foreign Affairs Ministerial meetings will review progress in the implementation of the summit conclusions and prepare the next summit meetings, that should take place alternately in the EU and in Mediterranean partner countries.

The Euro-Med Parliamentary Assembly (EMPA) will be the legitimate parliamentary expression of the initiative and the Anna Lindh Euro-Med Foundation for the Dialogue between Cultures will contribute to its cultural dimension.

EC President's address to the Paris Summit for the Mediterranean

Through the ‘Barcelona Process: Union for the Mediterranean' we want to elevate our partnership to other, higher, levels, European Commission President, José Manuel Barroso, said at the Paris Summit to launch the new initiative, attended by heads of state and government of the Euro-Med Partnership countries and other representatives. He said this will be done through concrete projects and by concentrating on priorities that are to the benefit of the citizens, outlining the four issues on which emphasis will be given. President Barroso assured that the EC is parti cipating in this effort with enthusiasm and determination.

Speech (FR only)

EP and EMPA President's address to the Summit for the Mediterranean

"Since 1995 the Barcelona Process has unquestionably achieved a certain prestige. Its attainments to date should not be disregarded; however the time is ripe to give the Process a new impetus," European Parliament and Euro-Mediterranean Parliamentary Assembly (EMPA) President, Hans-Gert Pöttering, told the "Barcelona Process: Union for the Mediterranean" Summit (July 13). "Above all," he said, "our citizens should feel implicated in this cooperation process. If we put into place practical projects su ch as access to water, food and energy sources, the resultant benefits and direct effects on people's everyday lives will be immediately tangible."

Press release

EU approves Mediterranean Union proposal

2008-03-14T00:00:00Z

EU leaders approved a controversial French proposal for a Mediterranean Union aimed at strengthening cooperation with countries from Morocco to Turkey, the EU's Slovenian presidency said Thursday.

"The project received wide support," Slovenian Prime Minister Janez Jansa told reporters after the first day of an EU summit in Brussels.

"It is now a question of working on this in different forums. It's now a question of doing what is needed so that this project can see the light of day," he said.

French President Nicolas Sarkozy raised the plan during last year's election campaign, but complaints from Germany saw the grand project watered down.

Germany had feared that he would try to use it as a counter to Berlin's growing influence in central Europe as the EU expands, by limiting the club to southern European countries.

"Tomorrow morning, the decision will be formally taken to transform the Barcelona Process into a Union for the Mediterranean. That was decided unanimously tonight," Sarkozy said at a separate press conference.

Launched in 1995 as a framework for political, economic and social ties, the Barcelona Process has regularly been thwarted in its aims by confrontations between Israel and Arab countries.

France, Italy, Spain Announce Mediterranean Union Summit

2008-01-14T00:00:00Z

France, Italy and Spain united behind a planned Mediterranean Union on last December 20th, announcing a July summit in Paris of the countries bordering the sea.

French President Nicolas Sarkozy announced the July 13 summit at a joint news conference in Rome with the Italian and Spanish prime ministers, Romano Prodi and Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero.
The three leaders earlier discussed the plan to establish an E.U.-type union of the zone in talks in the Italian capital.

"Convinced that the Mediterranean, crucible of culture and civilization, should resume its role as a zone of peace, prosperity and tolerance," the three leaders said they had met to "think about the broad outlines of a planned union for the Mediterranean."

The bloc "would have a mission to reunite Europe and Africa around the countries along the Mediterranean rim and to set up a partnership on an equal footing between the countries" north and south of the sea, they said.

"The added value of the Mediterranean Union should reside first in the political boost it should give to cooperation around the Mediterranean and the mobilization of civil societies, businesses, local communities, associations and NGOs (non-governmental organizations)," the statement said.
The Paris summit will precede by a day an E.U. summit on July 14 in Brussels.

The Mediterranean Union will focus on "peace, development and respect for the environment," Sarkozy said separately. "It's a great dream, a great vision, which I'm sure can be realized. We three have decided that this will be a united Mediterranean, a war against despair."

Sarkozy advocates the grouping partly as an alternative to Turkish membership of the European Union. Italy favors Ankara's entry into the E.U.

The plan also comes against the backdrop of attacks in Algeria, and other north African states on the Mediterranean, by the group calling itself al-Qaida's Branch in the Islamic Maghreb.

Germany, France announce Mediterranean Union 'compromise'

2008-03-04T00:00:00Z

German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French President Nicolas Sarkozy said last 3th March they reached a "compromise" on Sarkozy's proposal for a Mediterranean Union, about which Berlin had expressed misgivings. They settled their differences over the proposed Mediterranean Union. The new body, to cultivate closer relations across the sea, would go ahead as a project of the whole 27-nation European Union (EU), the two leaders decided over dinner at a government mansion in Hanover, Germany.

"We reached a compromise regarding the Mediterranean Union that we both want and that excludes no one," Sarkozy told a news conference following talks with Merkel in Hanover, Germany.

"We are in agreement about the Mediterranean Union," Merkel said.

Officials said the two leaders would propose at an EU summit next week that the Mediterranean Union be adopted as an extension of an existing EU diplomatic initiative known as the Barcelona Process.

Merkel and Sarkozy also agreed to jointly propose EU plans to fight tax havens and to set up a working party to draft proposals on the automobile industry and preventing climate change.

Sarkozy reportedly aims to unveil his Mediterranean grouping at an EU summit on July 13-14 in Paris.

The arrangement it would effectively replace, the Barcelona Process involving 12 non-EU Mediterranean nations, has had a lacklustre history.

Interview with Moroccan Royal aide, André Azoulay on the Union for the Mediterranean

2008-10-24T00:00:00Z

André Azoulay is the archetypal princely adviser: diplomatic, discreet and politically adept. He is familiar with the corridors of power, not only in Morocco, but also on the international scene. Azoulay’s determination to bring together the people of the Mediterranean led to his appointment as President of the Anna Lindh foundation, a network which promotes dialogue among countries of the region. Being a Jewish adviser to the Muslim King of Morocco, he is uniquely positioned to press for the building of a Palestinian state which recognises the existence of Israel.

euronews: What do you think are the main strategies which have to be implemented with regard to the Mediterranean Union?

André Azoulay, Special Adviser to King Mohammed VI: The feeling that one side is granting something to the other must be replaced with a sense of parity. And once the technicians, the eurocrats and politicians have finished talking, you also have to think about the men and women you want to draw up the future. These men and women have to be committed ideologically, politically, culturally and socially.

euronews: The economic dimension is very important —business and trade — but in the end what is missing in Europe is a political dimension, even in the Maghreb.

Azoulay: I am less pessimistic than you are. On the contrary, I think right now, that we are in the process together of re-creating a new momentum for the Euro-Mediterranean. It is not a gimmick, a measure which would be a luxury for some people. It is a must. A political imperative, a human imperative. But it is also a chance for Europe, maybe through the Euro-Mediterranean, to re-discover an influence which has been partly lost with globalisation. Because when you speak of the Euro-Mediterranean, you can not erase, or obscure the most difficult issues which have confronted the international community. I am thinking mainly of this yet-to-be-created peace between the Palestinians and the Israelis. I am thinking of the situation in Iraq, or Afghanistan — the wider picture anyway — which is also affected by very strong tensions between the great civilisation of the Islamic, Muslim Arab world, and the western world, the world of western Christianity.

euronews: You have almost always advocated the creation of a Palestinian state alongside the state of Israel. Do you think that time has come?

Azoulay: The whole world today recognises both the legitimacy and the absolute necessity to have a Palestinian state, which has re-discovered its identity, whose rights have been restored, but the world has not arrived at that point yet. And that is not because there is a conflict of religion; not because there are religious and political leaders who have, wrongly, wanted to channel our respective beliefs and religions. By that logic, we are all hostages to some kind of buyout, a takeover-bid for our spiritual domaine, for our private convictions. You know, whatever, Muslim, Jew, Christian, in the end we all answer to the same one up there. The way I was brought up in the town of Essaouira in southern Morocco as a Moroccan Jew, was to look out for my neighbour, and my neighbour was a was a Moroccan Muslim. Today, in my mind, he is a Palestinian, and this neighbour must benefit from all the same rights as me. So that is what I’m pushing for today — just as I did yesterday and as I will tomorrow — pushing for a Palestinian state. I am also fighting to protect my true beliefs, if not, it would not make sense.

euronews: When Pope Benedict visited France recently the question of a positive secularism was raised. What you just said reflects that concept a little, doesn’t it? What do you think about the idea of positive secularism?

Azoulay: I subscribe to it, but I think everyone among us must be driven by the will to do everything to ensure that these choices are not simply theories and rhetoric. We all have to apply them to our daily lives, and we must be committed to them.

euronews: Morocco was one of the first countries among the Maghreb and the Arab world to instigate a process of democratic reform. How is Morocco dealing with the return of instability, with al-Qaeda building itself up in the Maghreb and sub-Saharan Africa – two areas which are obviously of interest to Morocco?

Azoulay: The building of this modern Morocco, this open Morocco, a Morocco anchored in its roots and identity, that is irreversible. The problems you raised just now are not Moroccan problems. They are multi-national, they are international. They could exist eventually in Morocco, that has been considered, but they will be short-term.

euronews: Do you think that, generally, democratisation and the war against terrorism are compatible?

Azoulay: Absolutely, in fact I believe building this open and democratic society, which is growing in its consensus to move as far as possible in that direction, is the best response.

2008-10-29T00:00:00Z

2008-02-21T00:00:00Z

2009-02-28T00:00:00Z

Meetings of the Union for Mediterranean adjourned

2009-02-19T00:00:00Z

In early February 2008, at the request of the Arab group, the French-Egyptian co-presidency informed member countries that all Union for the Mediterranean meetings are suspended till the end of March.

Thus the meetings envisaged within the context of the World Water Forum in Istanbul are cancelled. The 1st meeting of the Water Expert group could take place in April or May and the Ministerial conference on sustainable development, that should approve 3 to 5 water projects, is foreseen in June 2008. This announcement confirmed the freezing of the process noticed since the beginning of January following the Gaza events.

--
Some references:

2009-04-07T00:00:00Z

Paper 68: Putting the Mediterranean Union in Perspective

2008-06-30T00:00:00Z

The broad debate kick-started by French President Sarkozy’s electoral campaign proposal to create a “Mediterranean Union” of sorts has stimulated a renewed interest in the Euro-Mediterranean region and a much-needed re-evaluation of the Barcelona Process. Mixed reactions, marked by Germany’s vehement response, led to an evolution of the original idea into the present compromise of a “Union for the Mediterranean” (UfM), which has been incorporated into a revised Barcelona Process and now includes all 27 EU member states alongside the Mediterranean partner countries. The outlines of this union have been traced, yet its final shape will only begin to emerge during the 2nd half of 2008, when France assumes the EU Presidency.

In this context, the study “Putting the Mediterranean Union in Perspective” seeks to enhance the present debate by providing an overview of the different views emerging in the main zones of the Euro-Med. A comparison of the four distinct expert perspectives outlined – namely from Southern Europe, Germany, North Africa and Israel – highlights the main issues of contention, but also those around which consensus has rallied. Paper 68 takes stock of the EU’s past and current policy for the Mediterranean in order to determine its future potential within the UfM framework. Now that this project is in full-fledged development, such region-specific assessments should hopefully contribute towards the establishment of an inclusive, responsive, relevant and effective Union for the Mediterranean.

2008-05-29T00:00:00Z

Reflections on the Mediterranean Union

2008-04-08T00:00:00Z

By Dr. Ahmed Driss

21 February 2008

1) Is the proposed Mediterranean Union a valid framework to structure future Euro-Mediterranean relations?

Although one is tempted to answer “no”, it is both difficult and premature to evaluate the solidity of such a project in relation to the restructuring of future Euro-Mediterranean relations; firstly, because initially only the Mediterranean countries were seen as having a stake in this union, and also because, since then, the formulation of this proposition has been constantly changing and evolving. Effectively, the Mediterranean Union proposed by the then candidate Sarkozy, in his speech at Toulon in February 2007, does not have much in common with the Union for the Mediterranean outlined following the December 2007 tri-party France-Italy-Spain summit, after which the formal framework originally envisioned became a union based on a reinforced cooperation on clearly determined dossiers. This revision fell short of initial ambitions, yet overcame some major obstacles inhibiting the partnership.

Nonetheless, this will not in itself assure the general advancement of Euro-Mediterranean relations; on the one hand, many important actors cannot claim a Mediterranean identity or will be absent from the project by choice (as is the case with Turkey, which rejects the idea in its entirety), while on the other, sensitive issues such as territorial conflicts and the spread of democracy, will not even be considered. At most, the project will eventually benefit the Western Mediterranean Basin, a region already addressed within the 5+5 framework.

2) What purposes / needs might the Mediterranean Union serve that are not already encompassed by the Euro-Mediterranean Partnership (EMP)?

The three pillars of the Euro-Mediterranean Partnership generally deal with the differing needs of a Euro-Mediterranean cooperation; yet, the project suffers from a lack of appropriation among Southern Mediterranean countries, which find that the EU does not consider them equal partners, that they are not granted full participation in the decision-making process, and that the issue of development is often sidelined in the cooperation proposals.

The Mediterranean Union appears to answer some of these worries. The many documents outlining this project insist, for example, on the principle of equality between its future members and the involvement of all in the implementation of its common policy. However, such worries remain ones of a procedural nature, and essentially there is nothing to suggest that within the framework of a Mediterranean Union things will improve.

3) What future do you envision for the proposed Mediterranean Union and the EMP?

In this early phase of reconnaissance, the question of the future remains uncertain. Nonetheless, the proposal of this union can be credited for having re-launched debate on the central character of the Mediterranean in regional geopolitics and on the importance of Euro-Mediterranean relations, not only for those countries bordering the Mediterranean Sea, but for all the countries engaged in this process.

Amongst the diverse reactions of the non-Mediterranean European countries, one can identify a renewed interest in the Mediterranean, which is defined as a question common to all and not just to the Mediterraneans. In addition, this new project has highlighted the problems confronting the EMP, as well as the uncertainties relative to this process plaguing both sides. It is true that at this stage the bond between the unification project and the EMP is but fragile, yet the engagement of those countries that traditionally defend the Barcelona Process - such as Spain and Italy, which are in favour of the Union for the Mediterranean - should certainly allow the galvanisation of the EMP within a reviewed and improved format. It now remains to be seen whether this might eventually result in a Mediterranean Union - a Euro-Mediterranean community as we have defended it within the EuroMeSCo framework.

Ahmed Driss is an Academic and Researcher in International Relations.
He is the Director of the Center for Mediterranean and International Studies, Tunis.

By Dr. Dorothée Schmid

25 February 2008

1) Is the proposed Mediterranean Union a valid framework to structure future Euro-Mediterranean relations?

The framework proposed by the French government remains vague, particularly as regards the articulation between French diplomatic priorities and the interests of the EU and its 27 Member-States. The project was originally conceived in response to the Euro-Mediterranean work programme, with which it was destined to develop in parallel, rather than reinforce. The progressive re-orientation of the French project towards a more European direction results from a late recognition of the existing constraints, in both institutional and financial terms. It’s only through consultation with its other EU-partners that France will from now on succeed in envisioning efficient synergies with the Barcelona framework.

2) What purposes / needs might the Mediterranean Union serve that are not already encompassed by the Euro-Med Partnership (EMP)?

The idea of a periodic GMed, mirroring the G8 model - which would regularly establish the main strategic priorities for the region, without being as restrictive or dependent on costly administrative structures - is a good one. Any initiative promoting North / South interaction within the Mediterranean is welcome; it allows a better explanation, if need be, of the functioning of the Euro-Mediterranean cooperation policy such as it is managed by the Commission in Brussels. Furthermore, it is becoming evermore imperative to outline a genuine strategic vision for the region - something that has always been difficult within the Euro-Mediterranean framework, which remains dominated by its European actors. One can imagine that the Mediterranean Union will eventually encourage ad hoc cooperative initiatives, demonstrating greater flexibility and response capacity than existed within the Euro-Med framework. It is, however, improbable that new work themes will emerge.

3) What future do you envision for the proposed Mediterranean Union and the EMP?

Two broad scenarios are possible: that of a French “sole rider”, which lacking means and perhaps fighters, is in my view fated to fail; or then that of a Barcelona re-launch via the Mediterranean Union – this if the French take the time to pursue a thorough audit of the successes and constraints of the Euro-Mediterranean Partnership, notably since the introduction of the Neighbourhood Policy. This would also presume an effort to redefine the shared priorities with the Member-States which have strongly reacted to the French initiative – such as Germany.

Dorothée Schmid is a Research Fellow at the Institut français des relations internationales , Paris, and specialist in European policies in the Mediterranean region and the Middle East.

The Rome call for an Union of the Mediterranean - 20 December 2007

2008-01-17T00:00:00Z

Rome Call for the Union for the Mediterranean, by France, Italy and Spain (December 20, 2007)

Convinced that the Mediterranean, melting pot of culture and civilisation, must recover its role as an area of peace, prosperity, tolerance, the President of the French Republic, the President of the Council of Ministers of Italy and the President of the Government of Spain met in Rome on December 20, 2007 to think together about the main lines of the projected Union for the Mediterranean. The Union for the Mediterranean will aim at linking Europe and Africa around the countries on the Mediterranean and at creating a equal footing partnership between the countries of the Mediterranean basin.

The added value of the Union for the Mediterranean should lie initially in the political dash it should provide to the Mediterranean co-operation and in the mobilisation of the civil society, the enterprises, the local communities, the associations and ONGs.

The Union for the Mediterranean is intended to become the heart and the engine of co-operation in the Mediterranean and for the Mediterranean. It should aim at making clearer and visible the actions that the various institutions develop in favour of the Mediterranean. The Union should be founded on the principle of co-operation and not on that of integration.

For this purpose, they agreed to invite the Heads of State and Government of the countries on the Mediterranean to meet with the European Union countries on July 14 in Paris to define their common vision. This summit will be preceded by a meeting of the bordering countries on July 13. It should define the principles and the organisation of the Union for the Mediterranean with the objective of implementing an approach based on concrete projects and the recognition of a common destiny among all the bordering countries and with the European Union.

In the coming months and until the summit, France, Spain and Italy will start the preliminary work in close consultation with the countries invited to participate. The purpose of this work will be to identify the fields of priority co-operation, the most adapted projects, the study of their feasibility, the sources of funding and to consider the list of the stakeholders wishing to commit themselves in each concrete project.

The Union is not intended to replace the procedures of co-operation and dialogue already linking the countries of the Mediterranean, but to supplement them, and to give them an additional momentum, in a spirit of complementarity and co-operation with all the existing institutions.

Therefore, the Barcelona process and the European neighbourhood policy will remain central in the partnership between the European Union as a whole and its partners of the Mediterranean. The Union for the Mediterranean will interfere neither in the process of stabilisation and association for the countries concerned, nor in the process of negotiation in progress between the European Union and Croatia, on the one hand, between the European Union and Turkey, on the other hand.

Union for the Mediterranean – a Tunisian Viewpoint

2008-04-08T00:00:00Z

The idea of a union in the Mediterranean region was for a long time ambiguous and blurry. Its contours remain only loosely defined, however, it has recently been much discussed and has been the object of several attempts at analysis, most of which were eventually challenged, leading to successive changes being made to the original concept. It thus evolved from the initial “Mediterranean Union”, to the “Union for the Mediterranean”, and later becoming the “Barcelona Process: Union for the Mediterranean”, following the European Summit in Brussels, 13-14 March 2008.

It should be noted that while initiatives targeting the Mediterranean have not been lacking, none has to this day truly managed to achieve its objectives. European initiatives such as the European policy for the Mediterranean, the EMP, and the ENP each sought to make the Mediterranean a space of peace, stability and prosperity. All lauded the stabilisation of the region through the virtues of free-exchange. Europe demanded that its Mediterranean partners adhere to its system, notably that of democracy and the State of law, offering them in exchange a share of the prosperity bred by its liberal economy, and even promising access to the “four liberties” to those who progressed most quickly within the framework
of the new Neighbourhood Policy. These diverse arrangements failed to convince, however, the
Southern Mediterranean countries, resistant to rapid social and political changes, as well as those
of the North, little inclined to direct investments, technological transfers, or the global treatment of
cultural and migratory issues related to the field of security. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict
aggravated an already complex situation and resulted in a political block within the Partnership.
Considering this backdrop, can a Mediterranean union resolve or work around these issues? By not addressing them immediately, or even ignoring them, does this union not risk mortgaging the
future of what is a potentially successful Mediterranean neighbourhood? Does such a paralysis not
risk affecting the proposed union, thus fuelling reactions wavering between prudence and
enthusiasm?

Starting from this, it is unavoidable that the southern EU partners be tempted, with France’s
announcement of the Mediterranean Union project, to evoke a negative balance of the Barcelona
Process (BP), coupled with a certain reticence vis-à-vis the European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP).
As regards the first, for a few years now, the governments of the South have voiced much criticism
concerning the BP’s incapacity to attain its set objectives. The last exasperating straw was on the
occasion of the BP’s tenth anniversary, where the absence of Arab Mediterranean leaders was
sorely noted. Most southern Mediterranean experts claim that the Process has not improved the
asymmetries still dividing the opposite shores of the Mediterranean.

Despite these criticisms, the southern Mediterranean leaders of the Maghreb region emphasised
the importance of not disassociating this new project from the EMP, estimating that such a union
should contribute towards a re-launching of the Barcelona Process. The project’s evolution and its
adoption during the March European Summit as a continuity to the Barcelona Process, finally
lends reason to those from the South who predicted this development and who feel reassured by
the participation of all EU member states, confirmed by the Franco-German compromise
announced in Hanover on 3 March 2008. This springs from reactions expressed by Maghreb
leaders who insisted on the importance, in one form or another, of Germany’s participation, seeing
as it is a crucial actor in the Mediterranean and a privileged economic partner in the Maghreb
region. Now that the participation of all is assured, consensus has emerged regarding the proposal
that the Union for the Mediterranean act instead as an updated and improved model of the EMP.
But will it live up to this expectation? A question difficult to confirm at this stage, especially since
the Partnership does not operate solely on a multilateral basis, but mainly through multi- and
bilateral agreements of association that at present will remain unchanged.

Nevertheless, certain elements of this “new and improved” Barcelona Process, within the context of
the Union for the Mediterranean, appear to command a particular interest and, at the same time,
respond to demands expressed by southern partners. The preoccupation is in establishing a
balanced basis that will allow all actors to engage in the elaboration of common projects on an
equal footing. This notion of equality, flawed within the Barcelona framework, failed to promote a
sense of appropriation amongst the partners of the southern shores. Calls from these countries
requested that they be more integrated in the decision-making process, at the very least on a
consultative basis, seeing as these were matters perceived by the South as ones of shared
interest.

For a long time, the southern Mediterranean states, or at least many of them, demanded that the
EMP outline a concerted direction as a means of assuring a rebalance between the two groups of
partners. Some affirmed that it was necessary to reach this solution in order to “rotate responsibility
amongst each State, directing or otherwise implying a global vision of related matters”. The
principle of co-presidency surfaced within the framework of the Union for the Mediterranean, or at
least that is what emerges from the Franco-German agreement on this initiative, which also
indicates an intention to establish a small secretariat of around twenty people that shall be
jointly-led by a Director from the North and another from the South, who are also charged with
assisting the co-presidency. This does not impede criticism and reticence from the part of certain
European actors, who doubt that the new structures will be compatible with already existing ones,
and from certain southern Mediterraneans, notably Arabs, who not seeing being subject to an
Israeli presidency in a good light, altogether refuse the possibility of this eventuality.
If the principle of co-direction is definitely maintained, it shall require a reformulation of the
Partnership’s institutional plan, with the creation of an exclusive competence within the domain of
the EMP. This competency should permit it to contribute, or at least have a say, in the elaboration
and implementation of the Partnership’s policy, and not only in the organisation of summit
meetings. It should also allow watchful management of the application of the associative Accords,
and finally, assume a role as mediator in disputes between partners.

In relation to the initiative’s content, a Union for the Mediterranean founded on the notion of a
union of projects and building on the domains where progress is already in evidence, seems to
respond to some southern Mediterranean expectations, while at the same time discarding the
integrationist aspirations, as were formulated in the project’s original version, where the focus was on creating a union that would permit a form of political integration an aim provoking great
enthusiasm. The initial orientation, of structuring the initiative around the idea of integration, was,
however, dashed by the reticence of certain European states and their desire for re-equilibrium.
This ended up reframing the project, by explicitly pursuing a logic of cooperation that from then on
prevailed over the integrationist logic a tendency confirmed following the adoption of the project,
during the recent European summit, as a continuity to the Barcelona Process.

Although it appears that the southern Mediterranean countries are interested in this new
orientation, they reveal differences in approach linked to the lessons learnt from the failures of the
Barcelona Process: namely, lack of means, lack of structures, deficiencies in the area of
governance, and shortcomings in trans-Mediterranean market integration. Others highlight
objective difficulties that would be dangerous to obscure and that question the efficiency of the
project method, with countries’ stability threatened by terrorist, migratory and climactic challenges.
On the other hand, serious conflicts (Sahara being a main one) persist between some southern
partners, weighing heavily on public opinion and the government of each country, and preventing
them from accomplishing their process of integration – a necessary condition if companies and
private investors are to be offered a driving role, as is predicted and hoped for the projects of the
Union for the Mediterranean.

See also.