One of the objections that those who oppose the Lisbon Treaty have against it is that a new-style European Union will operate not by consensus, but by a form of majority rule.
Ironically enough, the very battle about the treaty appears to have made it unlikely that the bloc could go into the future operating by consensus. That has been a scant commodity of late, more so than ever, in the politics of the EU.

Aside from the saga of Czech president Vaclav Klaus and his reluctance to sign the treaty, which was further complicated by the country’s constitutional court postponing its proceedings on the treaty and so preventing a final deal at the October 29 and 30 European Council meeting, the candidacy of former UK prime minister Tony Blair to be the
European Council President envisaged in the treaty has been a fine illustration of a divided Europe.

"We cannot imagine a divided Europe. We must find a consensus," Italian foreign minister Franco Frattini said after reports that Luxembourg prime minister Jean-Claude Juncker had expressed interest in the job.

The remark was seen as a blow to the Blair camp, as if Blair was not already a polarising figure, even – especially – in his own country.
In the pages of the Guardian, which has a history of animosity towards Blair, rival voices argued about him. Those who support him argue that he has the profile and the strength of personality to stride the world stage on near-enough-to-equal terms with global leaders such as those of the United States, Russia, China and chiefs of multilaterals such as the UN.

Those who oppose him object precisely to what is seen as his ruthless, undemocratic style – would Blair not, they asked, treat the European Parliament with the same disdain as he did with the UK’s parliament when he was prime minister, subordinating it to an executive body in which he was a powerful presidential figure.

Reported objections by Poland to Blair were along similar lines. Warsaw, similarly to Belgium, the Netherlands and Luxembourg, was said to favour a "first among equals" consensus-builder, a negotiator rather than, as the anti-Blair camp might put it, someone who would want 500 million EU citizens to be on-message. They sought a masseur, not a Messiah.

Reportedly, so does Bulgaria. Sofia-based daily Trud quoted Foreign Minister Roumyana Zheleva, herself a candidate for the future European Commission, as saying that she was "truly glad" that Juncker was a candidate and wishing him "good luck".

About eight countries are said to back Blair, not necessarily because of sharing Blair’s nominally centre-left place in the political spectrum. The Czech constitutional court could have done the European Council a favour by allowing the bloc’s heads of state and government more time, should they want it, to deal with the question of the future European Council President.

That is to say nothing of the post of the new-style "foreign minister" of the EU, about which one could say for certain that it would not be taken by a Bulgarian, after Sofia confirmed that it would not be attempting a candidacy. Various names were being floated, notably Olli Rehn, current the Enlargement Commissioner.

Several others were doing the rounds, although not regarded as seriously able to defeat Rehn, who privately has expressed interest in the job; these names included UK foreign secretary David Miliband (he denied wanting the job, and in any case it would be difficult, should Blair get the presidency post, the EU allowing both plum jobs going to people from a country that has rejected the euro and opted out of a number of EU deals);

Austria’s former foreign minister Ursula Plassnik, and even Dora Bakoyannis, Greece’s former foreign minister, now tipped as the next leader of opposition New Democracy, and seen as highly unlikely to get the backing of the Papandreou government.


Beyond the uncertainty and public and private struggles about the future European Council presidency and foreign ministry, the start of the European Council meeting saw continuing uncertainty about some countries’ nominations of Commissioners. The two most recent names to emerge were those of Austrian former science minister Johannes Hahn as research commissioner, and Guenther Oettinger, minister-president of Baden-Wuerttemberg, as Germany’s candidate commissioner.

Previously confirmed candidate commissioners include Estonia’s Siim Kallas, current EC Vice President for administrative affairs; Spain’s Joaquin Almunia, Economic and Monetary Affairs Commissioner; Italy’s Antonio Tajani, who has transport but could be in for a promotion; Luxembourg’s Viviane Reding, telecoms commissioner and Latvia’s Andris Piebalgs – who has the energy portfolio that Bulgaria covets but is seen as unlikely to get.

Romania has nominated Dacian Ciolos, a former agriculture minister for the EC agriculture portfolio, Slovenia has nominated Janez Potocnik, the incumbent in the research portfolio, while Slovakia’s Maros Sefcovic is said to be also interested in the much-sought-after energy portfolio.

Portugal is represented in the form of European Commission President Jose Barroso, who amidst the elusive and perhaps futile battle for consensus in the EU, probably had as scant idea as anyone else about the future composition of the EC, and who he would be facing across the table as European Council President.