SIEPS : la Suède « prête à tout imprévu »[en] 

On 1 July, Sweden takes on the rotating EU presidency for six months. What do you expect the main challenges to be?

Sweden's second presidency of the European Union comes at a particularly challenging time. There is a broad variety of ongoing crises and a palette of foreseeable and unforeseeable challenges inside and outside the Union. 

There are also transnational crises that cross EU borders, including the effects of the economic crisis, pandemic influenza and mass migration. 

Taking over the EU presidency as a new Parliament has been elected, a new Commission will be appointed and a new treaty could enter into force is evidently a great challenge in itself. Swedish representatives are well aware of the difficulties they face when handling such a demanding (and moreover short) autumn presidency, or as Swedish Minister for EU Affairs Cecilia Malmström put it, Sweden is prepared to "expect the unexpected and plan for the unplanned".

Still, despite the difficulty of setting priorities in an uncertain context, several prioritised policy areas of the Swedish EU presidency have been identified. Climate change is high on the agenda, with the aim of contributing to a global post-Kyoto agreement at the UN climate conference in Copenhagen in December 2009.

Other priorities are the Baltic Sea Strategy, which might be adopted at the October summit, the follow-up of the Lisbon Strategy, the successor to the Hague programme (the Stockholm programme), and naturally the preparation of the implementation of the Lisbon Treaty. 

Enlargement is another clear Swedish priority. Sweden is taking a very active and consistent pro-enlargement position. Keeping the doors open to the Balkan region (Croatia, Bosnia, Serbia and Montenegro) and welcoming an application from Iceland will undoubtedly remain a Swedish priority.

But as always, there is a large amount of uncertainty when listing priorities. The French and Czech Presidencies have shown that priorities must be constantly reviewed. As Gilles Briatta, secretary-general of EU Affairs to French Prime Minister Fillon pointed out at a SIEPS seminar recently ('Swedish EU Presidency 2009: Finding Solidarity in the Face of Crises', 28-29 May, Stockholm), a presidency is not necessarily judged by the number of priorities that were fully met, but how the presidency managed to face unexpected crises.

The economic recession has dominated the agenda in Europe in recent months. Can Sweden be expected to take particular initiatives in this regard?

Handling the effects of the economic crisis is a defined priority of the Swedish Presidency. There is a rather clear Swedish standpoint, expressed strongly by the Swedish government, in that protectionist measures [in response] to the economic crisis are counter-effective and that the EU can prosper only by strengthening the global competitiveness of the Union and investing in research, innovation, education and training systems.

The Swedish Presidency is expected to bring forward the discussions on the Lisbon Strategy, advocate liberalisation and less regulatory burdens for SMEs, and to follow up on the ongoing work on financial regulation initiated by the de Larosière report.

Institutional issues will also feature highly on the agenda, with the second Irish referendum on the Lisbon Treaty and the new European Commission – two issues which are closely linked. What scenarios do you see in the event of a 'no'/'yes' result in view of the Commission's replacement? Is an extension of the current Commission's mandate inevitable?

As I mentioned, the Swedish Presidency is most probably preparing itself for great uncertainty, which includes leading the EU under a new treaty, or having to deal with the situation if there is an Irish 'no'. 

The Irish referendum will undoubtedly take place during the Swedish EU Presidency, and there is a possibility that the Lisbon Treaty will enter into force before the end of this year. 

However, the new balance to be found in EU leadership – a leadership that will be somewhat fragmented - between the new High Representative, the president of the Council, the president of the Commission and the rotating Presidency depends also on the persons that will be appointed or elected. 

The personalities holding these key positions will undeniably influence the equilibrium to be found in the years to come, long after the Swedish EU Presidency and the current Commission's mandate.

Discussions have begun on replacing the Lisbon agenda for growth and jobs for the period post-2010. Sweden will steer the first discussions among member states in the Council before the new strategy is adopted under the Spanish Presidency. How do you expect member states to react given the current economic recession? Do you see coalitions of countries emerging on some issues?

The Lisbon agenda is one of the top priorities of the Swedish EU Presidency. As I stressed earlier, Sweden advocates a stronger innovation and research policy in the EU, and job creation will be in focus. 

The Swedish Presidency's objective, as it has been expressed, is to lay the foundations for a post-Lisbon strategy, facing the challenges of the decade or more to come. In other words, the ambition is to prepare the work sufficiently for the upcoming Spanish Presidency to take final decisions.

When it comes to the reactions of different member states, one can expect Sweden to be a strong advocate for an ambitious post-Lisbon strategy -including determined goals for innovation, research and training - and a strong opponent of any lower aspirations. 

Climate change negotiations will be a big issue during your presidency, with the Copenhagen conference in December. Can we consider that Europe has already done its homework by adopting the climate change and energy package in December? What can Europe - and Sweden - still do?

The Copenhagen conference in December 2009 was identified and presented as one of the priorities of the Swedish Presidency at a very early stage. Public opinion in Sweden has also identified climate change as a top priority for the EU, and the Swedish government argues that it has, on a national level, put together the world's most striving plan in this area. 

The political opposition in Sweden will be judging the government's results from the Copenhagen conference, and will probably not hesitate to criticise if the outcome does not seem acceptable. 

In other words, success in the climate change negotiations is crucial for the EU presidency on several levels. When it comes to tackling increasing ambition, or even competition as some put it, from the US, the Swedish answer is partly to assert that competition, in this field as well, has mostly positive effects – it is better to have competing partners and increased pressure when it comes to facing global climate change.

Making the Copenhagen conference a success for the Swedish EU Presidency is a complex task, assembling a common European position, a stronger solidarity towards the developing world, and an increasingly determined US in an ambitious yet realist protocol for the decades to come.