those of the
German ethnic community (REP 1987: 3), and the 1990 programme added
the demand for more German control over its own territory and people.
After reunification little support for NATO seems to remain. The REP wants
NATO to be converted into an ‘all-Europeansecurity structure, in which
Germany keeps its sovereignty’ (REP 1993: 9), even though the party is very
sceptical about the current attempts at creating such a structure within the
EU (REP 1999: 22).
Populist anti-party sentiment
A theme which clearly combines and guides all ideological themes is that
terms, success with foreign policy was important
for the Labour government, as it provided an opportunity for Labour
to demonstrate that it was capable of representing the nation, and not
just class interests.
The Labour government had four areas of foreign policy for which
it is remembered. First, its achievement in dealing with the main
problem at the heart of Europeansecurity, namely Franco-German
relations. In opposition, Labour had been united in its condemnation
of the Versailles Treaty, and its election manifesto had called for its revision, particularly with
something to which a common defence policy ‘might in time
lead’. ‘Might’, ‘in time’ and ‘lead ‘ are all heavy qualifiers, again there at
the insistence of those who did not wish any strengthening of a Europeansecurity and defence policy to come at the cost of transatlantic ties.
Co-operation in the spheres of justice and home affairs constituted a
separate pillar of the treaty. It comprised such things as asylum policy,
border crossing, crossings by persons, immigration, the fight against drugs
and international fraud, judicial co-operation in civil and criminal matters
allied will or to resent it;
the re-establishment of armed forces outside of parliamentary
that military force remained a viable tool of foreign policy in the
pursuit of national interests;
that citizens should be compelled to perform military service; and
the re-establishment of unilateral security and military policies;
a striving to return as a leader in Europeansecurity;
the seeking of a security alliance with the Soviet sphere;
rearmament and reinstallation of the role of the soldier without
that the mobilisation of armed
original question, are the peoples, national parliaments and national governments prepared to relinquish such authority
to the European Parliament? This is far from certain.
New EU transparency rules
In the summer of 2000 the Council of Ministers pushed through a new
secrecy directive banning public access to most EU correspondence and
documents. This was deemed necessary to protect confidentiality on
matters touching on the EuropeanSecurity and Defence Policy. However, the directive also inevitably came to include much of the rest of the
EU. At the end of 2000 the
2001; Ursula Sautter, Time , 24 June 2002.
34 Ha’aretz , 22 December 1994; Ha’aretz , Thomas Friedman, reprinted from New York Times , 23 May 1995; Sabri Sayari, “Turkey: The Changing EuropeanSecurity Environment and the Gulf Crisis,” Contents , Vol. 46, No. 1, Winter 1992, p. 12.
35 The Economist , 20 October 1990; Muharrem Kayhan, Chairman of the Turkish Industrialists’ and Businessmen’s Association (TUSIAA), Washington, DC, Washington Institute’s Policy Forum, 19 November 1997; TDN , 15 December 1997; TDN , 5
Agreement (also called
the Helsinki Final Act) was drawn up by 35 nations which took part in the
Helsinki Conference of 1975, on Europeansecurity, East–West economic
co-operation and human rights. It did not have the status of an
international treaty, but was rather a statement of joint commitment and
political intent. The signatories included all the European states (except
Albania), the USA and Canada. The Helsinki Conference