A foreign policy test for Europe

The chain of events that led Libyan-Swiss relations to hit rock-bottom is well known. But it is worth recapitulating in view of what is at stake for the European Union as a whole, not just Malta or the southern European member states.

It is true that last weekend Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi hinted that the matter may soon be resolved. At the time of writing, it still has not. However, even if the issue had to be resolved by the time this article is printed, analysing the stakes involved is still instructive.

It all started with a civilian arrest on July 15, 2008. Hannibal Gaddafi, one of the sons of the Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi, was accused of assaulting two of his staff in his hotel room in Geneva, Switzerland and was eventually detained at a police station. The news was released to the press.

Whether what happened next is really linked or not is part of the dispute. However, two Swiss businessmen ended up being arrested in Tripoli on technical charges of immigration law. Switzerland blacklisted 180 Libyans, including the Gaddafi family, preventing them from being granted visas to travel within the Schengen area. Libya retaliated by refusing to allow most citizens of Schengen states to enter Libya, even if they had already been granted a visa. It is an action that, as many Maltese businesses know, has a direct impact on travel, trade and commerce.

Libya also withdrew over $3 billion from its Swiss bank accounts. On the anniversary of Prophet Mohammed's birthday, Col Gaddafi urged all Muslims to boycott Swiss products and services, in a speech widely reported as a declaration of "jihad" by the world's news agencies, leading to a UN condemnation. A few days later Libya announced plans to impose an economic embargo on Switzerland.

Many have already pointed out that the case has wide repercussions. Can a member of the Schengen area use its membership to pursue a political agenda instead of a security one? If this issue festers, will Libya begin to care less about its role in preventing human trafficking across the Mediterranean?

However, one issue has not been pointed out enough: This dispute is a test case for the EU as a whole. It tests the EU's ambition to be an influential international actor, able to exercise "soft power".

This case involves issues that are sensitive for a neighbour at its heartland, for an important neighbour in its immediate vicinity and for member states on its boundary. If the EU, with its High Representative and all, cannot address and resolve such a case, then its recent reforms, intended to have a more effective common foreign and security policy, are clearly inadequate.

A second issue also goes beyond the dispute itself. In many corridors of Europe, the general press reports on Col Gaddafi's "jihad" speech appear to have been the basis of the European reaction to that speech. However, the declaration was not as simple as made out to be, as anyone can tell just by checking out the subtitled speech for themselves by consulting any major news outlet's film clip of the crucial declaration.

While these film clips were usually captioned with a reference to the call to "jihad", the clip itself (usually the same one, irrespective of the news organisation) showed Col Gaddafi giving examples of the economic boycotts that ordinary Muslims could undertake.

Although he harshly criticised Switzerland over its attitude to Islam, the fact is that, as the English service of France24 pointed out, when calling for a "jihad", Col. Gaddafi had an economic front primarily in mind. Hardly any other news organisation underlined this context.

Indeed, it was rarely pointed out that the speech as a whole focused on the current fragmentation and weakness of the Muslim world and its vulnerability to insult. The EU, on the other hand, was described as a Christian union and indistinguishable from Nato.

While many Muslims may not follow Col Gaddafi's call for sanctions against Switzerland, he was probably touching a raw nerve. European diplomatic initiatives should seek to counter this harmful perception, if its international ambition is to be realised.

I cannot resist raising a third issue with particular relevance for Malta. During last year's MEP elections I was sometimes criticised, bizarrely, for taking an interest in European external affairs. External affairs, it was said, were not all that relevant for Malta.

Well, here is one example that shows why such critics should be reconsidered. This case goes beyond home affairs. It concerns cooperation with a third country: Libya. It raises a particular dilemma for Malta as Col Gaddafi is scheduled to pay an official visit.

Much has been surmised about the visit, not least the possibility of joint oil exploration with the inclusion of Italy. The dilemma is that, notwithstanding Malta's commitments, it is not clear whether the visit can still go ahead in the current situation.

Such considerations do not just show why external relations are relevant for Malta. They also strengthen the case I have made on another occasion for Maltese full representation on the EP's foreign affairs committee.

Dr Attard Montalto is a Labour member of the European Parliament.