| 摘要 | Senior US and European Union officials on Thursday put on a public show of confidence in the future of the transatlantic partnership despite uncertainties hanging over the future of European integration following rejection of the constitutional treaty by French and Dutch voters.
Ms Rice, accompanied by a trio of European counterparts, sought to dispel the widely held opinion in Washington as also expressed by US officials in private that the Bush administration is quietly delighted at the setback to the treaty and the political embarrassment foisted on certain European leaders, namely President Jacques Chirac of France.
“Today, Europe faces important questions about its future course and this is, of course, a matter for Europeans to decide,” Condoleezza Rice, US secretary of state, said after talks with Javier Solana, the EU foreign policy chief, Benita Ferrero-Waldner, the EU external relations commissioner, and Jean Asselborn, foreign minister of Luxembourg.
“But I do want to say that the United States of America is very glad that we have a strong partner in Europe to work on vital issues of peace, of hunger, of poverty, of opportunity and of freedom. We are confident that this partnership will continue to grow and to be put to use in the service of great goals,” Ms Rice told a joint news conference.
Mr Asselborn said he was hopeful that Luxembourg’s referendum on July 10 would reverse the negative trend. He noted that if 20 of the 25 member states ratify, then the European Council could decide “what to do with the other five countries”.
Mr Solana said the existing “very profound co-operation” would go on.
Ms Ferrero-Waldner acknowledged concerns in the US that Europe would become too absorbed in its own internal crisis to address external problems. “I promise you this will not be the case.”
The US had a longstanding interest in “European integration, in the European project”, Ms Rice said.
“It is our view that a strong and united Europe that is able to act as a global partner with the United States, given its democratic values and our long history together, will only serve to multiply the forces that are fighting for democracy and freedom and for prosperity across the globe,” she added.
“We have a big agenda ahead of us, whether it’s in the Middle East or in Iraq or in trying to deal with a potential nuclear breakout in Iran. We have a lot ahead of us and we’re going to continue that agenda.”
In reply to a question, Ms Rice said it was important for the US that Europe look outwards and not inwards and that integration be extended to Turkey.
Conservative commentators in Washington have gloated over the French rejection of the treaty and the humiliation of Mr Chirac, the most outspoken opponent of the US war on Iraq. There was also satisfaction that the French “non” might have extracted Tony Blair, the UK prime minister and close US ally, from a difficult political corner.
Analysts, who have been joined by some but not all US officials, argued that this was the dominant view within the Bush administration that it was happy with the status quo.
This did not mean the US wanted a weak Europe or one frozen within current borders, they said, but the Bush administration was profoundly uncomfortable with a more centralized Europe run by a less democratic process in Brussels that would be less susceptible to “ad hoc” coalition making.
A senior state department official who briefed reporters but refused to be named said this view was totally wrong. The “new Europe, old Europe” remarks made two years ago by Donald Rumsfeld, secretary of defence, were an “old discussion”, he said.
Radek Sikorski, a proponent of strong transatlantic ties at the right-wing American Enterprise Institute (AEI), said there was a diversity of views within the administration and that some officials did believe greater European integration served US interests. “It depends who you ask and on what issue,” he said.
David Frum, a conservative analyst at AEI and former speech-writer for President George W. Bush, revealed that an early draft of a speech Mr Bush gave in Brussels in February would make it clear that the US supported the drive toward European unity.
“That enthusiastic language was cut before the speech was finally delivered,” he wrote in the Wall Street Journal. “But the thinking that produced the language survives inside the Bush State Department and National Security Council.” |
