The European Policy Centre (EPC) held an event on the theme of the European Council meeting which took place on Thursday 19 and Friday 20 March in Brussels, with main topics on its agenda: the political endorsement of a limited new grand project – Energy Union, Greek situation – Euro crisis, European Semester and Juncker’s Investment Plan. The panelists analyzed the Greek issue and the Euro crisis covering the formal and informal part of the Summit and the ambivalent Euro crisis narratives of the Member States.
Mr. Emmanouilidis wondered whether the March 2015 Council meeting prepared the ground for a breakthrough between Greece and its lenders. The informal meeting -under a frank and honest atmosphere- of seven indicated that all sides want to identify solutions and that EU partners are ready to grant the newly elected and still inexperienced Greek government more time, despite the negative impressions it made in many EU capitals in its first months in power.
The March 2015 European Council outcome of an informal ‘mini summit’ between seven EU leaders has the potential to prepare the grounds for a breakthrough in the negotiations between Athens and its lenders, considering that there is no proactive support to Greece, although a compromise is likely to be found. The fact that 26 EU leaders were not invited urged severe reactions from a number of heads of state or government and delayed the start of the European Council meeting. The prime ministers of the Benelux countries were particularly outspoken, expressing their annoyance with the fact that they had not been invited to the exclusive meeting with the Greek prime minister – a ‘mini summit’ with potentially severe repercussions for the euro area and the EU as a whole.
Besides the Greek crisis, two other issues preoccupied the Spring European Council: Energy Union and issues related to Europe’s economy. EU leaders committed themselves to building an Energy Union on the basis of the Commission’s framework strategy, which has the potential to be one of Europe’s major projects in this political cycle and constitutes a balanced strategy with precarious target though. In general, the Summit Conclusions are another strong endorsement of member states’ robust support for an Energy Union. In terms of the European Semester, in almost all EU countries the implementation rate of country-specific recommendations remains low, which means that more substantial reforms are needed to make it more effective. Regarding the Commission’s ambitious Investment Plan, its basic concept points in the right direction –a good idea for Mr. Emmanouilidis-, but its overall potential is in danger of being undermined by a number of factors, making it unclear whether the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) will live up to its expectations.
In this post-summit analysis, Janis A. Emmanouilidis argued that the search for a compromise promises to be a cumbersome, time-consuming and nerve-racking exercise. But a solution now seems possible, proving all those doomsayers who have been predicting a ‘Grexit’ or ‘Graccident’ wrong. On other topics, EU leaders committed their countries to build an Energy Union, although questions remain about whether member states will agree to cede sovereignty on a number of significant points. This analysis looked also at the economic issues dealt with at the Spring Summit, with a focus on the perspectives for the European Semester and the Juncker Investment Plan. He tends to believe that regarding the ‘mini summit’ there is no likelihood of a ‘Grexit’ and highlighted the geopolitical dimension which has been raised up during the Spring Summit. Although for Ms Valentina Pop (WSJ), the risk of a ‘Graccident’ is still there.