The Spanish PM must be disappointed at the outcome of the summit, writes Denis Staunton, from Seville
Like other Spanish football fans, Mr José Marìa Aznar may have felt cheated on Saturday after Spain was eliminated from the World Cup following a dubious referee's decision. But the Spanish prime minister had another reason to feel disappointed - an unlikely alliance of France and Sweden had foiled his headline-grabbing plan to impose sanctions on countries that fail to help the EU to tackle illegal immigration.
Mr Aznar said later that the EU could use measures "in all areas" to put pressure on third countries to stop human trafficking and take back their citizens who are found to have entered the EU illegally. But the Seville summit's conclusions make clear that imposing economic sanctions would require the unanimous approval of all 15 member states - something that is unlikely to be forthcoming. Spain, Britain and Germany had wanted to link development aid to co-operation on immigration and to threaten to suspend trade agreements with countries that refuse to help. But Sweden and France argued that sanctions would be counter-productive because increased poverty would simply increase the number of economic migrants. They suggested that, instead of punishing poor countries, the EU should help them to improve their economy - and their border controls.
"You are not going to solve the problems by brandishing a sword, especially a wooden one," said President Jacques Chirac.
Some observers were surprised to see France's new, conservative government arguing for a softer line while two centre-left governments, in Germany and Britain, wanted tougher action. But the French Interior Minister, Mr Nicolas Sarkozy, himself the son of Hungarian refugees, made clear two weeks ago that France would not allow the EU to react in panic to the rise of anti-immigration parties.
Mr Jörg Haider, the Austrian far-right politician whose Freedom Party is now in government, boasted recently that extremists like himself were now setting the political agenda in Europe.
"A left-winger in Europe can only become more successful if he accepts right-wing ideas. That is the best confirmation of our policies," he said.
The defeat of Mr Aznar's sanctions plan shows that there is a limit to how far the EU is willing to go in pandering to ill-informed public opinion about immigration. But there are signs that individual member states are preparing to create new barriers to immigrants and asylum-seekers.
Despite his disappointment over immigration, Mr Aznar can feel satisfied that the Seville summit was a well-run meeting at the end of an exceptionally efficient Spanish presidency.
Seville was also the last summit of its kind because the EU leaders agreed to streamline their meetings in future, limiting them to one day with a dinner the evening before.
Delegations will be smaller, there will be no set-piece meetings with non-EU leaders and a revamped General Affairs Council will prepare the summits' work more thoroughly. The General Affairs Council, where foreign ministers meet, is not to be divided, as expected, into two separate councils. But it will meet in separate formations, one of which will deal with foreign policy while the other co-ordinates the work of other councils and prepares EU summits.
Governments can choose to send different ministers to the different formations but the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Mr Cowen, is expected to attend both.
The leaders postponed discussion of the difficult issue of extending direct payments to farmers in new EU member-states after 2004.
The German Chancellor, Mr Gerhard Schröder, wants to see the Commission's proposals for reforming the Common Agricultural Policy, which will be published next month, before he agrees to extending the farm subsidy system to the new member states. Mr Schröder faces a general election on September 22nd and the subsidies issue will not be discussed until a new government is formed.
The chancellor appeared a little diminished in Seville and the summit was awash with rumours that some of his staff are looking for new jobs in anticipation of an election defeat. Mr Chirac, on the other hand, radiated confidence and gave the unmistakable impression that the end of his cohabitation with a centre-left government would allow France to pursue a more coherent European policy.
For the Taoiseach, the big event in Seville was the issuing of two declarations affirming that Irish military neutrality is not compromised by the Nice Treaty. Opponents of the treaty grumbled that the declarations did not change anything. But the Government insists that its purpose is to make clear that Nice does not change Ireland's policy of neutrality either.
Mr Ahern was admirably frank in admitting that the Government's campaign in the last referendum on Nice lacked energy and intensity. But he left no doubt that, next time, he will leave nothing to chance and will mount a vigorous campaign to change the public's mind.
Both the Taoiseach and Mr Cowen appeared in Seville to be less defensive about the treaty and to have found, at last, a positive line of argument in favour of Ireland's engagement at the heart of the EU. This change of mood should ensure, if nothing else, that the next referendum campaign will be more closely fought and more stimulating than the last.