If Richard Youngs did not borrow the rhetoric of the Euro-Mediterranean Partnership (EMP), his already sceptical analysis of its shortcomings might be even sharper and more astringent. Ten years after Barcelona, the EMP has not yet taken root and it has instead turned into an instrument of “external action”, cared for by the European Commission and chaired by the rotating EU Presidency. Almost all its budgets are decided upon within the EU’s structures, and follow its administrative and financial rules. Everything is a “project”, leaving little space for synergies and strategies, and not much room for joint decision-making. The language of development assistance divides partners into “donors” and “beneficiaries”.

 

So the actions undertaken as part of the EMP should not be assessed in terms of the Barcelona Declaration, but against the EU’s own objectives. These achievements include the establishment of a political instrument that enables frequent meetings of senior officials from all 35 countries, including Israel, Palestine and Syria, as well as periodic ministerial meetings. Bilateral association agreements have been signed between the EU and all its Mediterranean partners, which have since increased their trade with the EU by an average of over 50%. The EU has become the leading provider of foreign investment, and the prospects for a Euro-Mediterranean free trade zone by 2010 are good.

 

Should we blame this policy for not having achieved peace in the Middle East? The Israeli-Arab conflict is not the only one where the EU is just one actor of a quartet, and it is not even fully empowered by its citizens to undertake conflict settlement in Cyprus or the Balkans.

 

The spirit of the Barcelona Declaration derives from two words, culture and civil society. These are to be found in its third chapter, and few would deny that they are the poor cousins of political and economic cooperation. Youngs is right when he says that the cultural divide between Europe and the Middle East has widened. Perhaps it took the cartoon crisis of early 2006 for Europeans to begin to understand how the prevailing concept of inter-cultural dialogue went wrong, and why it could not cope with critical situations like that. Thousands of dialogue events, attended by “representatives” of different religions and major cultural entities, ended with shallow conclusions about common values, but failed to arrive at common perceptions of differences. Only recently has a departure from the logic of Samuel Huntington’s “Clash of Civilisations” scenario found its way onto the agenda of almost every stakeholder in the inter-cultural dialogue.

 

We at the Anna Lindh Euro-Mediterranean Foundation for the Dialogue between Cultures have a mandate to provide new ideas, opportunities and skills needed for a more meaningful dialogue, especially with young people. It is the first common institution of the Barcelona Process with its headquarters in Egypt that is also co-financed by all 35 partner countries. It started operations in August of last year as a network of 35 national networks, bringing together more than 1,000 bodies in the worlds of education, culture, science, media and women and youth organisations. Our first joint product is a study with practical recommendations on education, culture and the media as key factors for changing mentalities between men and women. With the Council of Europe and the Arab League Educational, Cultural and Scientific Organization (ALECSO), a Euro-Mediterranean teacher training programme on cultural and religious diversity has been put in place; 1,000 young artists are expected in Alexandria for a Biennale on “creative diversity”, and 1,000 young people between 18 and 25 participate in the ”Dialogue 21” project. The foundation has been created top-down, yes; but it has also developed mechanisms to reach out to civil society at large, together with the three other Euro-Mediterranean networks EuroMeSCo (political science institutes), FEMISE (economic institutes) and the Non-Governmental Platform.

 

It is not too late to rekindle the flame of Barcelona. Ten years after Helsinki, most western Europeans considered the Helsinki process a failure – too early. We need to revitalise our ambitions, with more patience and perseverance.