Come election time, it is votes that matter, not national interests. This is true of politicians everywhere — Africa, Asia, or America. France is now busy proving that it is no exception to the rule.
When the Mont Blanc tunnel, one of the main transport arteries between Italy and France, was closed three years ago following a fire in which 39 people died, it was assumed that once repair works were done and improvements made, it would be open again as usual. Instead, it has become the source of a worsening diplomatic row between the two countries.
Heavy trucks were to have been allowed through as of this week but the French government has now decided not to decide on the matter until June at the earliest. The Alpine-blocked Italians, for whom the tunnel is a vital link to the rest of Europe, are furious. Yesterday they made formal complaint to the European Commission.
There is no doubt that the French are playing domestic politics with Italy’s livelihood. The date on which the Paris will make its judgement is conveniently after the upcoming presidential elections. The reality is that neither of the two leading candidates in the elections, President Jacques Chirac for the Gaullists and socialist Prime Minister Lionel Jospin, wants to antagonize the environmentalist lobby. It wants to ban vehicles over 19 tons from using the tunnel. After the elections, it will be another matter. Whoever wins will have to agree to Italy’s (and almost certainly by then the European Commission’s) demands, and let the trucks through. The Italians have no doubt about the real reason. “It appears to be purely for domestic political purposes” complained the Italian transport minister this week.
There are other examples. Both Chirac and Jospin continue to support a ban on British beef imports, at least until the elections are safely out of the way, even though the Commission has formally ordered France to end it and the European Court of Justice has ruled it illegal. The three-and-a-half-year ban, imposed because of fears of mad cow disease, was lifted by the European Commission in mid-1999. In this case it is the powerful agricultural vote that both candidates fear antagonizing. Nor do they wish to open themselves to accusations of being soft on food safety.
France could have got away with adopting policies that affected other EU members’ interests in the past when Europe was far less integrated, but no longer. There will be financial penalties which it will be forced to pay. But that is the least of its worries. Far worse, it undermines European unity while at the same time threatening to make France Europe’s new whipping boy because of its behavior. British views matter perhaps less; British public opinion is already suspicious of Europe. The Italians are different, however. Anti-European sentiment is growing in Italy, and France’ attitude will enflame it further. It is quite likely that Italy’s populist government will pander to public opinion by blocking some plan dear to France’s heart by way of retaliation.
Such old-fashioned squabbling hits at the very heart of the European ideal.
