An EU Embassy for Ukraine…….

http://euobserver.com/9/29308

As some readers may know there are EU deligations in many nations…….136 of them to be exact.

But there are deligations and there are DELIGATIONS.

“The super-delegations have taken on the role previously carried out by the national embassies of the member state holding the six-month EU presidency at any given time.

As such, they now co-ordinate the work of the member states’ bilateral missions to the countries in question. The heads of the 54 delegations are also empowered to speak on behalf of the EU as a whole. But their statements have to be pre-approved by the 27 EU countries during meetings in Brussels.

“They are going to be a bit more political. They will provide the same function that was provided by the given [EU presidency] member state before,” an EU official said.

Eight of the new-model units are in Europe: Armenia, Georgia, Macedonia, Moldova, Norway, Serbia, Switzerland and Ukraine.”

Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear.  I see a lot of people being employed doing very little other than trying to look busy.  I assume that these “super-deligations” answer to Baroness Ashton ultimately.

So who represents the UK bi-lateral missions with Ukraine?  Leigh Turner the Ambassador or the “EU Super-deligation” for Ukraine?

And what if the consesus built opinion or policy of the EU is not the opinion or policy of the UK……or France……or Germany…….because it has been watered down so much to keep all 27 member states reasonably comfortable?

Who does Ukraine listen too when the EU Super deligation says one thing but the 27 Amabssadors for the 27 member States are stating quite another on specific bi-lateral issues relevant to themselves?

How many lines of commication are needed into Ukraine?  27 Ambassadors who are there specifically to represent their own nations interests in Ukraine……and now an “EU Super-deligation” to represent the views of the EU as a whole.

I thought that Ambassadors and Embassies…….amongst their tasks…….were there specifically to represent their particular nation’s interest in a specific country without needing the consensus of opinion of their neighbours.  They are there to, in the case of the UK for example, use available carrots and sticks in the diplomatic bag to negotiate issues with Ukraine specific to those 2 nations.

Now, if there is a policy difference between the UK and the EU……Ukraine is being told two different stories both with the sanction of the UK?

What of sensitive issues the EU may not know about between Ukraine and another nation?

Fortunately anything which will come out of the EU via Baroness Ashton’s Empire will be “fluffy” because it is consensus built…….where as what comes out of the mouth of an Ambassador will (hopefully) be pointed, concise and truly representative of a particular national stance!