Cecilia Malmström is Sweden's minister for European affairs. A member of the Swedish liberal party, Folkpartiet-Liberalerna, she is strongly pro-EU and supports the integration of Sweden into the euro zone. She served as an MEP between 1999 and 2006 and is expected to play a prominent role in the Swedish EU Presidency, which begins in July 2009.
To read a shortened version of the interview, please click here.
Minister Malmström, the current French Presidency has been roundly praised for its handling of the Georgia situation and the financial crisis. However, a byproduct of this success is the notion that small countries like Sweden and the Czech Republic lack the capability to deal with crises as they occur. How do you assess this attitude?
I don't agree with that. I think that Finland handled the Lebanon issue quite well under its presidency two years ago, and Finland is a so-called "small country". This shows that you can have preparations for the unprepared, you can have a crisis organisation that can be quickly activated. We are very much looking into what the Finns did when the war in the Lebanon occurred, and we will also talk to our French friends when their presidency is over in order to learn from their experiences and see how we can prepare ourselves.
In this particular case, of course, Sweden is not a member of the euro zone, which would have been a problem in dealing with the financial crisis, but we have worked closely with the Eurogroup – there has been daily if not hourly contact with our EU partners, including the non-euro countries, so we have been very involved.
I think smaller countries can, if they're organised, successfully react to crises.
One potential 'crisis' under your presidency may entail resolving the Irish Lisbon Treaty situation, if current speculation in Ireland is anything to go by.
First of all, let's wait for the Irish statement in December. They have asked us for time, so let's give them time. We won't do anything until then.
But as you say, we have also heard the rumour that a second referendum may come in the autumn of 2009 – under our presidency- and of course if this happens then we will deal with it.
Though I am convinced that these institutional matters are extremely important - I'm a political scientist and a 'Euro-nerd', and can spend hours talking about catalogues of competencies and so on - the citizens want us to focus on issues, and we have some very important issues during our presidency: the climate and energy packages is the top priority, but also other things such as police and judicial cooperation, the continuing of enlargement and budget reform. We need to focus on these, as institutional issues tend to drain so much energy from the European Union.
You mentioned the Eurogroup. What do you think of the French ambition to install President Sarkozy as a leader for the euro zone, given that Czech officials have declared themselves to be not very much in favour?
We are not very much in favour either. I think this should be seen more as a consequence of the great enthusiasm the French Presidency has right now for Monsieur Sarkozy's mission. We don't deal with European issues this way.
We [Sweden] are not part of the Eurogroup, and though I deplore that personally, I accept it. But we should not build new institutions that divide Europe – in this moment we need unity, not division.
Following Danish Prime Minister Rasmussen's announcement that he hopes to hold a new Euro referendum in Denmark by 2011, some of your Swedish ministerial colleagues indicated to EurActiv that Sweden might follow suit.
Well, I definitely hope so. I campaigned for a 'yes' in the last referendum, and I haven't changed my mind. I speak in favour of the euro whenever I can. However, we have an agreement within our government coalition that we will not raise the issue until our current mandate runs out in 2010.
We will campaign for the euro in the European elections – not because the European Parliament has any influence on Sweden's choice but because it's a good way to talk about European visions.
We very much envisage that we could have a new referendum at the beginning of the next mandate, around 2010-2011, and I think with the Eurogroup having shown its importance during this difficult time, we could see a change of opinion [in Sweden]. And, of course, a 'yes' in Denmark would be helpful.
Coming back to next year's European elections – these will in all likelihood be fought on the basis of the Nice Treaty. What effect might this have on turnout and the make-up of the next parliament?
It's hard to judge. I think it’s a pity if we can't run the elections on the new treaty [Lisbon], first of all because Sweden loses two seats under Nice, but most importantly because those running for the European Parliament should know the circumstances under which they are to operate.
As it stands, they will run in a sort of institutional limbo, which is unfair to them. I deplore this very much. There is also a risk that this limbo will raise a new euroscepticism across Europe.
As a MEP, you were very vocal in your opposition to the European seat in Strasbourg. Is this issue of lesser importance to you now that you are a national minister? Will the Swedish presidency bring it up?
I have not forgotten about it. I am still very active on this issue and I still very much deplore that the authorities didn't use the opportunity when the ceiling collapsed in Strasbourg (Euractiv 26/08/08) to have a real discussion about this. I am less vocal publicly because I am in a different role but believe me, I raise this issue as often as I can with my colleagues in the Council – they are very aware of my opinion!
No presidency can open this issue unless we are sure lots of other countries are backing us. Today, I must say, it seems very few countries are willing to take any initiative on this with us.
