Wiki Leaks

Wikileaks has based its reputation on playing the game on many levels. What Assange placed online for the theme US - EU gives a truly typical portrait of the relationship that the greatest army in the world has with its allies, in terms of policy and spending. It is obvious that in the new globalised world, the EU is playing in the second division when it comes to foreign policy. Beyond environmental, training and transition projects, the EU does not appear in Wikileaks’ reports as a significant diplomatic power. Its purposes represent an institutional ’superstructure’, not comparable to the ’political’ state.

First of all, EU interests are much closer to American interests than we usually think. There is noEuropean country that doesn’t have to deal individually with the US, despite public opinion. For example : in 2007, during the war on terror, the U.S. embassy in Spain reported : ’We must not give Zapatero the idea of having to choose between the US and the EU.« Washington knows Zapatero’s socialist views mean that they cannot target a common political interest. But the diplomat said : »We have many well-established interests in Spain, as do NATO. We need to act on France and Germany. We strongly support the European Union and its enlargement. " This enlargement seems to be at odds with the economic crisis of the PIGS countries (Portugal, Italy, Ireland, Greece and Spain ), which are the Member States with more default risk in the eurozone.

In this respect, the Italian Prime Minister declares himself hopeful, indeed, in a conversation with Ambassador David Thorne in January 2010, he recalled how his close friendship with Prime Minister Papandreou would solve any risk of contagion for Italy. This is only a statement, certainly, but still a private visit by the US ambassador to the premier in office. Many private opinions have emerged about this, also in light of what is happening in politics on a national level. Today Ambassador Thorne’s website states that he recently took part in a campaign for a Gay Help Line. We can perhaps assume that recent statements by Prime Minister Berlusconi have not gone unnoticed.

But what the US (and NATO) are really interested in is the war on terror. Without this war there would be no Wikileaks. According to Washington, the EU Member States - Germany especially - should collaborate more actively in training activities taking place in Afghanistan. Italian Foreign Minister Franco Frattini is also talking about Afghanistan, proposing to the Secretary of Defense Robert Gates that opium plantations should be transformed into olive groves, and that schools should be created where the Afghan ruling class can be educated.

To find something more specifically related to the European Union, we must look to our MIddle Eastern borders, where Turkey, in a file dated 20/01/10, is described as ’very close to Europe’, especially regarding imports from the European Community. But, at the same time, Turkey is described as being attracted to the idea of ’Neo ottomanism’, which would lead to it being classified more and more frequently as Middle Eastern and therefore Muslim, and thus jeopardizing its already uncertain participation in the project of the European Community.

Friction is also present in US relations with France, also regarding foreign policy. In February this year, Paris accused the US of failing to adequately consider its European allies in the Afghan strategy. A diplomatic way to justify the sale of four Mistral warships to Moscow, which was completed just 2

months later, for 600 million euro. This was Russia’s first acquisition of heavy weaponry made in the EU. Less than a year earlier, on 3rd November 2009, Sarkozy and Kouchner sent a warm welcome to a US official, reiterating that the EU “is the strongest and closest ally of the United States, and France and Germany are the natural leaders”.

Ambassador Rifkin noted that this was a very different attitude to the one long presented by former President De Gaulle. Business is business, as we all know, but US protests at France taking the opportunity to arm Russia have not gone unnoticed. Even better, we can find them in one of the several files Wikileaks has made available to the public. An event that no one could have imagined, that may not change the forces at work, but that marks the “9/11 of world diplomacy “, as Franco Frattini put it.

Those hoping to have formal talks with the top institutions in Europe will remain disappointed, confirming, amongst other things, that the real diplomacy is still played out among the sovereign states, thus bypassing the European diplomatic institutions. It is clear to Washington that it is easier to play on separate tables rather than to develop practical solutions in an enlarged Europe. This is the reason why Washington prefers to test the waters by asking for the support of Germany, France or even Slovenia, regarding giving asylum to Chinese Uighur refugees and former Guantanamo detainees, before dealing with Brussels.

The EU is considered as a cover or a symbol for charitable or cultural initiatives, such as a programme put forward by France in 2007 to encourage Iranian civil society. These efforts take a back seat, however, compared to the interests cultivated by the US regarding Israel and Turkey, two key allies in conflict with one another. Here the European Union can play an important role, as long as it does not continue to make gaffes of the sort that Wikileaks is currently helping to spread. Such as, for example, the document dated 07/31/2009, telling how the EU sent “low-rank” diplomats to the inauguration of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s new mandate (controversial to say the very least).

According to the source in the report, “if Iran had found out the hierarchal status of the Europeandiplomats, it may have withdrawn the invitation, as had already happened in the past”. Although many of the statements published by Wikileaks are claimed to be “irrelevant”, it seems necessary to reiterate that the sources are so numerous, relevant and detailed that Wikileaks cannot be considered as a simple collection of “what has already been said”.

There is a huge amount of information regarding global hot spots, but the European Union is not among these, apart from the Balkans, which are often mentioned and where the contribution of theEuropean Union is crucial. Angela Merkel is careful indeed to ensure that Serbia will not enter the EU without giving up Kosovo permanently. A significant convergence of policies on both sides of the Atlantic has been clearly defined, with some “laissez faire” granted by the US to the EuropeanUnion. For example, the US does not have much to say about the popular trend amongst Europeancountries to be far less active in the African diplomatic field, and to focus instead on commercial initiatives.

This means missions dedicated to business (who knows, maybe even the sale of weapons ?) and more “pragmatic” and less substantial diplomacy. Wikileaks will certainly help here, by pillorying the real opinions of US diplomats, and especially the pro-Western policy with its tactics which are to the detriment of others. And, according to Sarkozy, the “others” in the European Union are the 25 EU countries apart from France and Germany.

It has been already said, but deciding who plays the part of the good guy and who plays the PIG has an impact. In the US files, Italy appears on the inside, as many Italians would like to see (or not). During the visit the US ambassador paid him in the aftermath of the attack at Milan Cathedral, Berlusconi said he was depressed, but he expressed his appreciation for Pierluigi Bersani, chairman of Italy’s Democratic Party. He did however stress that Massimo D’Alema remains the opposition party’s most authoritative speaker, mainly due to the “brave decisions” taken in the Balkans. A more than dignified picture, which paints Italy in the role of loyal ally to the United States first and founding member of the European Union second. However, EU interests have a long reach, so much so as to be summoned by Mauricio Funes, the President of San Salvador, who - in an article in El Pais - requested Europeansupport as well as American to ward off the crisis that broke out in Honduras as a result of the coup d’état in 2009.

Another example is in Russia, where the EU seeks to remind the US that Moscow’s support for sanctions against Iran needs the power of Brussels to mediate between the two former Cold War rivals. However, the Hot War is elsewhere, even if Wikileaks does not fail to reveal the ambiguity of the EuropeanUnion regarding Georgia and Chechnya, where Putin is certainly not an easy ally. The US is said to be moving away from the European Union, preferring the leaders of tomorrow, such as China, India and Brazil, but also Turkey, Iran and Israel, the Mediterranean half moon which slipped out ofEuropean hands a long time ago in the rush of decolonisation. It was a move wanted by the US in the face of European power, as they hoped to directly manage dialogue with rational and sovereign democracies. A very optimistic plan, considering that now “re-colonisation” is occurring in the form ofEuropean goods and rights, but without the anthropological appeal that was there first time round. Nobody trusts the US, nor Europe, which is today facing a crisis of identity in terms of foreign policy like never before.

Where is the strong Europe that was ready to accept Turkey, Russia and even Israel ? Wikileaksdoes not tell us, and it is certain that newspapers now finally have more realistic sources to draw from, rather than reporting vague quotes from many leaders from Europe and beyond. Yet, despite the low budget and the enormous deficits - that will reach 12% for England in 2010, according to the governor of the Bank of England, reported by Wikileaks on 17 February - in its current state theEuropean economy does not have any effect on the interests that seem to be important for Member States : the institutional support of companies such as italian energy company Eni, real multinational powers, which Europe cannot give up if it wants to have voice in a global world. Yet the then EU Commissioner for External Relations Chris Patten, stated even in 2004 that : « The EU will never be a real power, the dubious value of its leaders, the Cyprus problem and the difference between an alliance and a union count for too much. Not to mention the ’killer eyes’ of Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin. »

Patten ended his mandate in 2004, but only after getting some things off his chest, declaring his admiration for the US to US envoys in Brussels : « In Europe there is always someone at the table who is too cautious, we do not take decisions like the United States. » Not to mention the quality of the leaders of some countries. « If you have to dine with them, you’d better bring a long spoon. »

All this is about Berlusconi’s friend George Papadopolous, inevitable interlocutor in the Cyprus-Turkey affair, for which the EU does not know how to spend funds at their disposal. « But then » – the U.S. diplomat adds - « We could not expect much from someone who was Milosevic’s lawyer.” »We are too dependent on Russian energy,« Patten insisted in 2004. »Putin seems to be very reasonable when it comes to the Middle East or energy policies, but when it comes to Islamic extremism in Chechnya, his eyes become those of a killer.” It has been dubbed the “Very British Worldview of Chris Patten”, so why did he accept the task of looking after European interests abroad, if these are his beliefs ? Because Europe is very democratic, but it is an alliance, not aunion.