UNION FOR THE MEDITERRANEAN

Marcin Zaremba
Final essay

Union for the Mediterranean

1
Union for the Mediterranean

The Union for the Mediterranean (French: Union pour la Méditerranée;

previously known as Mediterranean Union, French: Union méditerranéenne) is a
proposed community of European Union member states and countries bordering
the Mediterranean Sea planned to be established in July 2008.

It was suggested by French President Nicolas Sarkozy as an alternative to Turkish

membership of the European Union, which would instead form the backbone of
the new union, but with the scaling down of plans in March 2008 that idea has
been abandoned. When Turkey was offered a guarantee in that it would not be an
alternative to the EU, Turkey accepted the invitation to participate.

Such a union, even if primarily economic, would necessarily involve the member
countries in discussions of controversial issues like Turkish membership in the
European Union and illegal immigration via North Africa. It would bring Israel
and its Arab neighbours into a new assembly that Sarkozy apparently hopes could
tackle the problem of Middle East peace.

A proposal by Nicolas Sarkozy to gather the European, Middle Eastern, and

North African countries of the strategic Mediterranean rim into an economic
community along the lines of the early European Union has begun making waves
even before the president-elect takes office.

Initial reactions have ranged from enthusiasm in Spain to cautious approval in

Israel to outrage in Turkey, which sees the proposal as a ploy to keep it out of the
European Union.

Union for the Mediterranean

2
History

The proposal was originally made as part of Sarkozy’s election campaign. Sarkozy
discussed it during meetings with his counterparts in Tunisia and Algeria in a July
tour of the Maghreb, talked it up during a working dinner in Slovenia with
foreign ministers of EU Mediterranean states, and advertised it during a joint
press conference earlier this month with Egypt’s Hosni Mubarak.

Initially, many observers saw Sarkozy’s proposal as a political gambit, aimed at

Turkey, whose bid to enter the EU the French leader has vocally opposed. A
leading role in a new Mediterranean Union, he suggested, could be a consolation
prize for the majority Muslim country1 .

Following his victory the idea was reiterated, with plans being drawn up. Despite
the potential division it could cause with the Muslim world, President Sarkozy
sees the initiative as a way of promoting peace between Israel and its Arab
neighbours. It is hoped that an institutional core will be established by the end of
the French presidency of the European Union in 2008. On 23 October 2007
Sarkozy invited all Mediterranean leaders to a summit in France to take place in
June 2008 where they would “lay the foundations of a political, economic and
cultural union founded on the principles of strict equality.”

At the start of 2008 Sarkozy began to scale down his plans for the MU due to
widespread opposition from other states in the EU and the Commission. At the
end of February of that year France’s minister for European affairs, Jean-Pierre
Jouyet, stated that “there is no Mediterranean Union” but rather a “Union for the
Mediterranean” which would only be “completing and enriching” to existing EU

1“Sarkozy pushes Mediterrarean Union” Nicole Itano, The Christian Sience Monitor,
VIII.2007

Union for the Mediterranean

3
structures and policy in the region. Following a meeting with German Chancellor
Angela Merkel it was agreed that the project would include all EU member
states, not just those bordering the Mediterranean, and built upon the existing
Barcelona process. Turkey also agreed to take part in the project following a
guarantee from France that it was no longer intended as an alternative to EU
membership. The MU will be launched on the 13-14 July 2008.

Concept

The whole Mediterranean is slated to eventually fall within the European Union’s
sphere of influence. This initiative is being spearheaded by France and was
officially kicked off by Nicolas Sarkozy on a tour of the Mediterranean that
started in Algeria.

The idea of a “Mediterranean Union” was presented to Europeans with the

election of Nicolas Sarkozy, but this idea is not as new as the mainstream media
presents it. Zbigniew Brzezinski acknowledged in 1997 that “France not only
seeks a central political role in a unified Europe but also sees itself as the nucleus
of a Mediterranean-North African cluster of states that share common concerns.”
An extension of the E.U. sphere of influence will also result in an extension
of Anglo-American influence and the economic diktats of the Washington
Consensus. In this case the question is how much Anglo-American influence
will there be within the Mediterranean Union?2

Idea of Mediterranean Union is focused on regional cooperation in the fields of

energy, security, counter-terrorism and immigration on a trade agreement, and
creation a Mediterranean Investment Bank, modeled on the European

2 http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=6879

Union for the Mediterranean

4
Investment Bank, that would help develop the economies on the eastern and
southern edge of the region. President Sarkozy has offered also French expertise
on nuclear energy in return for access to North Africa’s gas reserves.

The idea of a Mediterranean dialogue is not new. In 1995, the European Union
launched the so-called Barcelona process, a framework for regular meetings
among the union’s members and other countries ringing the Mediterranean.

But where most past initiatives were ineffective - and where Sarkozy’s proposal is
different - is that they involved all of the EU. His plan involves only the countries
with an immediate coastline and interest in closer cooperation.

The E.U. is a shared body which support both Anglo-American and

Franco-German interests. It is through America’s “special relationship” with
Britain and NATO that America has a foothold in the European Union.
However, the E.U. is still predominately managed by Paris and Berlin. Thus, the
Mediterranean littoral will be brought largely under Franco-German
influence when the E.U. model is fused onto the Mediterranean.

The mechanism and structure established by the extension of the E.U. in the
Mediterranean will determine the level of Anglo-American influence within the
Mediterranean littoral. If the E.U. creates an overlapping mechanism in the
Mediterranean where the nations of the Mediterranean littoral are linked
only directly with E.U. members bordering the Mediterranean and indirectly
with other E.U. members, then Anglo-American influence will be much weaker
than it would be in the case of full integration between the E.U. and
Mediterranean. This type of relationship would greatly empower Paris and
Berlin.

Union for the Mediterranean

5
Hypothetically, this arrangement could exclude Britain, as well as America. The
Mediterranean could strictly fall into the Franco-German orbit, but this seems
to be an unlikely scenario. Anglo-American control and influence will be
maximized if the Mediterranean is wholly amalgamated into the European
Union. However, this could damage the E.U. and hurt Anglo-American and
Franco-German interests for different reasons, including demographics, if it is
not done at a proper pace. If amalgamation is not achieved gradually, the E.U.
could face internal instability. In reality, it is in the interests of the
Anglo-American and Franco-German sides to share the Mediterranean.

This is another case where cooperation with the Franco-German entente, is in

t h e i n t e r e s t o f b o t h a n d B r i t a i n a n d A m e r i c a .   To i n s u r e a
strong Anglo-American role, NATO has been involved, and Israel has been
integrated into the framework for a Mediterranean Union. 

Israel’s role in this process also hinges upon its bilateral relationship with

Turkey.

The role of Turkey as a Mediterranean country is considered pivotal in the

creation of a “union in the Mediterranean region,” as one of its backbones.
What has been created is an extensive network of relationships and links that
will make the whole structure of a Mediterranean Union easy and quick to
formalize. The far-reaching economic and military ties between Turkey and Israel
will ensure that Israel is well integrated into the proposed Mediterranean
entity.

Dual membership for Turkey within the E.U. and the Mediterranean Union, but
without full E.U. benefits, would also benefit Anglo-American interests. This

Union for the Mediterranean

6
may explain why Britain and America publicly support the direct entry of Turkey
into the European Union. The roles of Turkey and Israel in the Mediterranean are
also topics that must be touched upon to themselves.

The plan bears some resemblance to the “Greater Middle East” project favoured
by the American neo-conservative strategists. Although the membership of the
two proposed bodies is different (the Greater Middle East encompasses Arabia,
Iran, Central Asian states and even Afghanistan and Pakistan) the ideology is the
same: supranational and anti-national.

The idea is to neutralise the Arab-Israeli conflict by “integrating” the Middle

Eastern countries into a single political unit, rather as the Franco-German
conflict was allegedly neutralised by the creation of the European Community.
For there is nothing the neo-cons want to neutralise more than Arab nationalism.

Even more striking is the resemblance between Sarkozy’s plan and the existing
Mediterranean Dialogue set up by NATO in 1994. Numerous Maghreb states
have already signed partnership agreements with NATO. In other words, the
Mediterranean Union would be but a political superstructure over a military
organisation which already exists and which is under US leadership. Sarkozy is
known to be extremely friendly to the US and Israel (the Israeli president has just
been in Paris, the first head of state to be received with full honours since
Sarkozy was elected last year) and his plans therefore resemble those which led to
the creation of the original EEC which was also set up on the back of an existing
US-led military structure (NATO was created in 1949, the European Coal and
Steel Community in 1951).

Union for the Mediterranean

7
Aims

The geopolitical and political motives behind this proposal seemed fairly obvious
at first sight. Politically, Sarkozy’s interest in setting up the Mediterranean Union
would be to offer Turkey an alternative to full EU membership. This is certainly
how the plan is being peddled in Paris.

The second geopolitical motive would be to reinforce France’s weight on the

world stage. European enlargement since the end of the Cold War has been
directed almost exclusively at countries which are more or less in the German
geopolitical orbit – not just the former Communist states integrated in 2004 but
also Austria, Sweden and Finland which joined the EU in 1995. The creation of a
political “Club Med” is perhaps a typical example of the French love of the
politics of the grand gesture, but there seems little doubt that it would
institutionalise France’s leadership role in an area where she has huge historical
ties and considerable political influence, from North Africa to Lebanon and
Syria3.

The Mediterranean Union would be a looser grouping than the EU. Sarkozy
called on the Mediterranean people to “do the same thing, with the same goal
and the same method” as the European Union, however he stated it would not be
based on the EU model.

However when the project began to be scaled down in 2008, many proposals
were dropped, such as a Mediterranean Investment Bank (modeled on its
European counterpart), and a raft of agencies. Instead it would focus on more
practical projects.

3 “What is really behind the Mediterranean Union?”, John Laughland, 12.III.2008

Union for the Mediterranean

8
Under the original plans, members would form a regular council under a rotating
presidency (similar to the current EU model) dealing with:

• energy,

• security,

• counter-terrorism,

• immigration

• trade.

French nuclear expertise would be exchanged for North African gas reserves. The
Mediterranean and European Unions would work together and share some
institutions, including a common judicial area to fight:

• corruption,

• terrorism,

• organised crime

• people smuggling.

Barcelona was seen as a failure by some, in part as it, in contrast, included all EU
members; by including only Mediterranean states it is hoped that it would have a
clearer direction, as northern European States are less interested in
Mediterranean affairs. This would avoid the lack of ambition and co-ordination
in Europe.

Union for the Mediterranean

9
Members

The MU would consist of all the EU states and those countries on the
Mediterranean rim/participating in the Barcelona process. The idea is to form a
“bridge” between Europe, North Africa and the Middle East.

The original proposals would have only included those EU states who were
bordering the Mediterranean:

Portugal, Spain, Italy, Malta, Greece and Cyprus. All other EU states would have
been silent observers which angered those countries who would not be involved
such as Germany as it did not approve of EU funds being used in a project which
it did not have influence in.

International response

INSIDE EUROPEAN UNION

The project is supported by Spain, Italy, and Greece. However the EU itself and
Germany have been more cautious about the idea: The European Commission
has stated that such initiatives promoting regional co-operation are “good”,
however they say the project should build on existing structures. That was in
reference to the Barcelona process which the Commission noted as being
“successful”. It fears Sarkozy’s project would undermine the work of the
Barcelona process. The Commission and EU capitals would like to know more
about the details of the project.

For European countries like France and Spain – which are increasingly feeling the
effects of North African poverty and political insecurity – the idea of a new
regional grouping for the Mediterranean is attractive precisely because it may

Union for the Mediterranean

10
offer a forum for tackling the diverse region’s many problems. Egypt, Tunisia, and
Spain have attached at least tentative support to the idea in recent months,
despite the absence of any concrete suggestions from France as to how exactly
such an entity would work.

OUTSIDE EUROPEAN UNION

Israel, Morocco, and Tunisia and have supported the proposal while Turkey
rejected the proposal as an alternative to EU membership. When Turkey was
offered a guarantee in March 2008 that it would not be an alternative to the EU,
Turkey accepted the invitation to participate.

The Libyan government was concerned by the proposal and sent its foreign
minister Abdel Rahman Shalgham to both Tunisia and Algeria to discuss the
matter with their presidents prior to the arrival of Sarkozy to the region. The
same source mentioned that according to well-informed sources that Libya said
that it thinks that it is a mistake on the part of France to publicize this project
before listening to what the countries of North Africa have to say about it, while
calling attention to the fact that Qaddafi refuses that France should impose its
hegemony over the countries of the Arab Maghreb Union under the name of
Mediterranean cooperation.

Critisim

However the lack of details provided at that stage was a source of criticism.
Further more there was concern about the relationship between the proposed
MU and the existing Euromediterranean Partnership, which might reduce the
effectiveness of EU policies in the region and allow the southern countries to

Union for the Mediterranean

11
play on the rivalries to escape unpopular EU policies. There were similar
economic concerns in the loss of civil society and similar human rights based
policies. Duplication of polices from the EU’s police and judicial area was a
further worry.

Germany objected to the plan because the EU already has a forum for
Mediterranean Policy, the so-called Barcelona Process, and it says that a new
structure would only undermine that part of EU policy, over which Berlin
obviously has a say. Austria has concurred: the Austria Foreign Minister has said
she does not see the point of Sarkozy’s new initiative.

Summary

Thanks to a recent deal between President Sarkozy and Chancellor Merkel, the
new Union will indeed be launched on 13th July – but all EU member states will
belong to it. Any geopolitical advantage for France is thereby completely
neutralised and the new “Union” is nothing but the Barcelona Process idea
presented in different way.

Union for the Mediterranean

12