EU: EU foreign ministers presented an unusually united front on the Iraq issue, writes Denis Staunton, in Elsinore
As a setting for a European Union foreign ministers' meeting, Hamlet's castle in Elsinore was an almost irresistible invitation to ridicule. What better symbol could there be of Europe's notoriously indecisive and ineffective foreign policy than Shakespeare's unhappy prince, the greatest ditherer in European drama?
Such sneering would be unfair, however, not least because the weekend's meeting was an informal one at which no formal decisions were envisaged. More importantly, on the most pressing foreign policy issue of the day - how to deal with Iraq - the ministers presented an unusually coherent, decisive front.
But if the meeting showed the ministers at their best, it also highlighted the deficiencies of Europe's mechanisms for making foreign policy. And it illustrated the difficulty Europe faces in becoming a major player on the world stage as long as it has 15 separate foreign policies rather than one.
In their press conferences after the meeting, the ministers stressed that it was imperative that Saddam Hussein should admit United Nations weapons inspectors and allow them to do their work without delay or hindrance. The Minister for Foreign Affairs, Mr Cowen, emphasised that concern over Iraq's putative arsenal of weapons of mass destruction was not confined to the United States but was shared by the entire international community.
The EU's foreign policy chief, Mr Javier Solana, said that the EU supported the efforts of the UN Secretary General, Mr Kofi Annan, to negotiate the inspectors' return to Iraq. And the ministers made clear that they regard the UN Security Council as the appropriate body to determine what action should be taken if Iraq does not co-operate.
In emphasising the primacy of the UN, the EU has outlined a clear alternative to unilateral US military action against Iraq. And although most ministers avoided direct criticism of the US administration, they made clear that there was no support for a pre-emptive attack aimed at removing Mr Hussein from power.
Germany's Foreign Minister, Mr Joschka Fischer, was the most outspoken in his opposition to such a war but even Britain's Mr Jack Straw is understood to have told the meeting that regime change was not an adequate pretext for an invasion.
In making clear their opposition to a pre-emptive strike against Iraq, EU governments hope to influence the internal debate in Washington and to strengthen the hand of more cautious members of the administration such as the Secretary of State, Mr Colin Powell.
EU unity could fracture if the US actually decides to go to war but for the moment, Europe has a coherent position on Iraq, albeit with various nuances.
Such coherence and political astuteness is signally lacking in Europe's attitude to Washington's demand for bilateral agreements guaranteeing its soldiers immunity from prosecution by the International Criminal Court (ICC). Based in The Hague, the court is mandated to try individuals suspected of war crimes, genocide and other major human rights abuses.
The EU Commission believes that such agreements are incompatible with membership of the court, a view shared by most member-states. But Italy's Prime Minister, Mr Silvio Berlusconi, blurted out on arrival in Elsinore that his country is inclined to sign such an agreement and Britain has hinted that it could follow suit.
The US is putting pressure on a number of countries in central and eastern Europe that want to join both the EU and NATO. And US diplomats are working hard to exploit the division within the EU's member-states.
Reluctant to confront the US a few days before the anniversary of the terrorist attacks on September 11th, the foreign ministers have passed the issue to the lawyers. But they are unlikely to be able to dither, Hamlet-like, for too long.