From Mediterranean Ambition to European Compromise (2/5)

After defining the geographical scope of the Mediterranean Union and explaining why adjacent seas and non-Mediterranean riparian countries were excluded, the Baltic and Nordic Councils and their objectives will be presented in order to identify what brings them closer to this Union and the differences in their respective goals.

The geographical boundaries of the Mediterranean Union were precisely defined: the Mediterranean Sea, delimited by the Straits of Gibraltar and the Dardanelles, as well as the Suez Canal. The countries concerned included those forming what may be called the European Mediterranean arc (including Portugal, by virtue of its language, history, and culture), as well as the southern and eastern riparian countries, numbering sixteen: Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Libya, Egypt, Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, Palestine, Syria, Turkey; for the Adriatic: Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Albania, and Montenegro; and finally Mauritania, for a reason similar—though not identical—to that justifying Portugal’s inclusion.

The initiator intended that the Mediterranean should not appear as a mere continuous succession of countries surrounding an empty space, but rather as a living space of production and human, commercial, and cultural exchanges, composed of the Mediterranean Sea and the countries bordering it. It was conceived as an inseparable whole: a union of countries, thus of lands, but also a union of these lands with the sea—the central space that connects them. Yet it appears that the objectives assigned are essentially land-based. None directly concern the sea.

At the time, the German Chancellor Angela Merkel demanded that this project include all twenty-seven countries of the European Union. To avoid any confrontation, French President Nicolas Sarkozy had to modify the project by integrating all EU member states and adapting its name in order to remove any ambiguity.

It is nonetheless sometimes useful to revisit the different phases in the creation of a process in order to understand the reasons for its successes or failures and, consequently, the difficulties encountered by the Union for the Mediterranean (UfM) in progressing at the desired pace. We shall see that it is not a failure, but perhaps—at least in part—a victim of the constraints inherent in its macro-structure, of the kind Europe is well known for producing.

Two institutions are presented here: the Council of the Baltic Sea States, which bears a distant resemblance—through its ambitions and objectives—to the Mediterranean Union (or the UfM), and, for the record, the Nordic Council. The latter will be dealt with very briefly, as it is not centered on or around the Baltic Sea in its vocation.

The Council of the Baltic Sea States

This Council was established in 1992 at the initiative of Germany and Denmark to promote cooperation in the Baltic Sea region, particularly in the areas of security and the environment. It plays the role of a regional cooperation platform addressing civil, environmental, maritime, and societal issues.

It is a regional forum bringing together ten states—Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Iceland, Latvia, Lithuania, Norway, Poland, and Sweden—of which all but Iceland and Norway are members of the European Union. Countries such as France also hold observer status at the national level. Its secretariat is based in Stockholm.

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine altered certain aspects of the Council, notably with the suspension of Moscow.

Its objectives are to:

* promote regional identity and cooperation around the Baltic Sea;

* foster sustainable and prosperous development of the region;

* ensure a safe and secure region (civil security, protection of people, cross-border cooperation);

* guarantee environmental protection and democratic resilience;

* encourage human contacts and balanced economic growth.

Its fields of action notably include maritime protection, the sustainable maritime economy, combating human trafficking and organized crime, as well as education, youth, and culture, with an enhanced role in European regional cooperation in Northeast Europe.

The Nordic Council

Created in 1952, the Nordic Council, along with its ministerial counterpart established in 1971, aims to strengthen cooperation among the Nordic countries across a wide range of fields (mobility, environment, culture, society). Its vision is clearly oriented toward political, economic, social, and cultural cooperation and integration. It constitutes a model of democratic regional union.

The Council brings together Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, and Sweden, along with their autonomous territories (Greenland, the Faroe Islands, and Åland). Its headquarters are in Copenhagen. Its core objectives are to promote an integrated Nordic area—free movement, equality, sustainability, and innovation—and to uphold democratic values and regional solidarity.

The Nordic Council does not include Germany or the other EU member states. It is nonetheless mentioned to demonstrate that geographically constituted institutions, bringing together certain EU countries around common projects with non-EU countries within a defined geographical area, coexist and operate actively. They likely function more smoothly than the UfM, which is vast and perhaps too heavy to carry and to operate dynamically.

Only the Council of the Baltic Sea States can be compared to the Mediterranean Union, as both are structured around a maritime ensemble based on riparian countries. The objectives of the Baltic Council, however, do not match the scale of those of the Mediterranean Union.

Yet the latter, despite encompassing the Mediterranean Sea—along with an Adriatic component and an Atlantic opening—remains devoid of truly maritime objectives.

The Mediterranean Union was short-lived. It gave way to the Union for the Mediterranean, which exists today. This is essential for Mediterranean peoples. Lebanon has its rightful place within it.

Next article: The transformation of the Barcelona Process into the Union for the Mediterranean (3/5)

Previous article: Mediterranean Union: what became of the Barcelona Process? (1/5)