
Oh the beautiful game! To preside over the European Union, there has been "a battle of personalities" as the press loves. A caricature "peapolisation". What account, is it not, is to have someone who has "an international aura. Which has a beautiful and strong voice and a telephone number that Barack Obama could join it when, in his list of contacts, type the name "Europe". Then, is - not, it is very important to know if this candidate has a "large" countries among the twenty-seven or a "small". Big difference of sensitivity and, especially, of susceptibility. And to appoint a British Can be, even if his country is part of the Eurosystem or the Schengen area Should we not appoint a woman It changes everything women. Of course.
You would not spoil this exciting spectacle but the way, where is the program Who offers what Where are the issues that should be decided That illuminates his vision of the 21st century The time is serious at the time where each of the 494 million European citizens well feels that the Union apart at accelerated speed and that it clears before the US-China Executive Board, which offers a true and complete pattern of rehabilitation of Europe and the Community idea
In response, it will read a formidable "memo" written by Bruegel () Institute on 1 September under the direction of André Sapir. It was, then, to set "economic priorities" for the new commission 2010-2015, but the content remains fully valid for the position of the top, the President of the Union.

That said this memo First, he said, and it is good, Europe for 25 years has achievements which she can be proud. The single market and the Maastricht Treaty with Delors, the euro with Santer, enlargement with Prodi and perhaps a Barroso climate initiative. The Union, forget it, also has a clear strategy: to deal with the challenges of long term, while Governments are too often smothered by the electoral short-termism.
What challenges They are major: the role of Europe in globalization when China and the India "eroding its traditional comparative advantage of human capital" and come to compete on the most advanced technologies. Ageing, with its implications for the funding on debt. Immigration from the South, the Turkey. Energy security, nuclear power, the Russian politics. Finally, and fundamentally, the role of diplomacy and dialogue, the "soft power", which is the brand name of the old Continent but the results remain meagre.
This long-term strategy called structural responses that the Union was starting to put in place following the "step-by-step" method: enlargement, the society of innovation of the Treaty of Lisbon, migration, climate. But, in addition to this step forward is for the less hesitant, strategy is itself challenged by the crisis, to alarm the authors Bruegel. And this in two ways.
First, by the fragmentation. The crisis has dirty affected the economies of Eastern European and broke their momentum of catch-up. Instead of converge, the twenty-seven are threatened by diverge, making it more difficult to search for an overall coherent economic policy. More heavily again, the crisis has permanently enlarged unemployment and cut deficits. How will the European social model to survive
Then, by nationalism. Examples of a renationalisation of policy in the car, in the Bank and, this week in agriculture are multiplying. The crisis has shown, for example, the need for an "overall supervision" of financial institutions but it is not possible if each Government folds.
To avoid the threat of a breakdown, to find cohesion, Europe must reinvent all its policies, starting with its economic coordination mechanisms. But beyond this necessary retightening of the bolts, the preservation of the acquis, Europe suffers from a "disenchantment". She is accused, not without reason, they have been that the tool of the "liberalisation", while the crisis has shown the failures. The Union needs a "new narrative" which brings interest to live together and hope. Mr Blair, Junker, Mrs Robinson, is listening to you.