Let’s try to cut through all the spin on the Reform Treaty which was put on the IGC rails on Saturday morning 23 June.

First of all, the compromise reached is no more and no less than the draft Constitution brought in through the backdoor. In a mockery of the two no-referenda in France and the Netherlands, EU leaders have cynically undone any citizens’ reluctance to continue with the current European project. Even if they will manage to prevent future referenda on the Reform Treaty, this contempt for European citizens will come back to haunt the EU. At least, the “elitist” leaders of the past had the guts to defend their elitism, whereas the current generation preaches “better communication” (try to read the compromise text) and “reconnecting to citizens”.

Secondly and more important, what happened in Brussels in the last three days confirms that European leaders are not interested in a long-term vision for the continent but more in bringing something home that they can sell as “their” victory (be it the Polish victory on the double majority voting, the British opt-out of the Charter, the French surprise attack on “free and undistored competition”, or the German “Merkel does it again” triumph).

What the summit has proved is that the two-speed Europe is already a reality, as Belgian former Commissioner Karel Van Miert underlined to his country’s press. French journalist Jean Quatremer makes the same evaluation in the Libération article “L’ébauche d’une Europe à deux vitesses“.

Now it is time to move on from a two-speed Europe to a “two-vision Europe” because behind all the obvious European politicking, there are two different visions on the future of the European project (which political leaders do not dare to pronounce or politicise openly). The first vision is based on the 20th century liberal competitiveness-economic growth ideology which aims to have Europe win the “battle of globalisation” without understanding that globalisation means increasing interconnectedness where there is no winning without losing in some other respect.

The second vision is one of ecological industrial modernisation of Europe which recognises the interconnectedness of globalisation and the “new scarcity” as expressed in the recent urgency of climate change and energy security policies.

The problem with the two-speed Europe or the concept of “enhanced cooperation” is that it splits up EU member states in “leaders” and “laggards” or “avant-garde” and “arrière-garde”. Maybe the two-vision Europe could overcome this problem. A Europe consisting of two groups of countries each developing cooperation along their vision might also remobilise citizens’ interest. And may the best vision win!

More interesting reading on the Reform Treaty summit:

• EurActiv: Summit seals mandate for EU ‘Reform Treaty’
• BBC News: At-a-glance: EU treaty proposals
• EU Referendum blog: The European Council “mandate” analysed
• Federal Union: The new EU Reform Treaty

Do we need a new European treaty in order to save our climate? EU President Barroso certainly seems to think so.
According to today’s Financial Times, the Commission President has warned future UK prime minister Gordon Brown not to block a compromise deal on a watered-down European treaty. If the UK would fail to agree to the new compromise, it might undermine efforts to fight climate change and reach a Doha trade deal. With this threat, Barrosos is putting pressure on Mr Brown, according to the FT.
Well, I am sure that Blair’s successor is not that dumb
There was nothing in the old, failed draft Constitution, nor in the current compromise which, in any way, would make a big difference as to Europe’s ability to tackle global warming. Suddenly now for the Commission President any reference to climate change seems a good argument to use to win his power fights. What happened to the Lisbon agenda, Mr President? Where did you forget your old battlehorse?