NATO SUMMIT: The EU is so split over Iraq that many diplomats believe the presidency made a mistake in calling the meeting. Denis Staunton in Brussels examines the prospects for tonight's summit
When European Union leaders meet in Brussels this evening, they will face an agenda with just two items - Iraq and the Middle East peace process. But after a week that saw the Iraqi crisis split both NATO and the UN Security Council, tonight's meeting could be one of the most difficult EU summits in recent memory.
The EU is so deeply divided over Iraq that many diplomats believe that the Greek presidency made a bad mistake in calling the meeting. In a letter to his counterparts last week, the Greek Prime Minister, Mr Costas Simitis, said he was determined to work towards achieving a common EU position on Iraq.
"It is now clear that the current crisis will soon reach a new, possibly decisive, turning point. This is why I deem it important that we get together and discuss the latest developments, especially in the light of the report that the UN inspectors will submit to the UN Security Council on February 14th, 2003," he wrote.
In fact, Dr Hans Blix's report to the Security Council on Friday has probably made a common position more difficult to achieve than before. The report has undoubtedly strengthened the hand of France and Germany, who are leading EU opposition to US policy towards Iraq. Saturday's demonstrations, which brought millions of Europeans onto the streets in protest against war, will also encourage the peace party at tonight's summit.
Germany's Foreign Minister, Mr Joschka Fischer, said yesterday the weapons inspectors should be given unlimited time to complete their work. France, Belgium, Sweden, Finland, Luxembourg and Austria all support giving them more time.
Britain's Mr Tony Blair, who is Washington's most valuable ally in Europe, has agreed that the inspectors will be given more time but he wants tonight's meeting to send a message that will maintain pressure on Saddam Hussein to disarm. Britain, Spain and Italy are concerned that tonight's meeting should produce a declaration that leaves open EU support for a new UN resolution that could open the way to war. But France's Foreign Minister, Mr Dominique de Villepin, said yesterday that a second resolution was unnecessary as long as the inspectors were making progress.
"France is convinced that resolution 1441 offers many possibilities, all of which have not been explored. This resolution does not set any deadline. As long as the inspectors can report progress on the ground, there is no need to go off in new directions," he said.
For those who favour the development of a functioning EU common foreign policy, the worst outcome of tonight's meeting would be a bland, minimalist statement restating the few areas of agreement on Iraq. EU foreign ministers issued such a statement on January 27th, declaring bravely that Iraq must disarm and expressing confidence in the UN and its inspectors. But this weak show of unity lasted two days before five EU governments signed a letter of support for Washington and implicitly criticising Franco-German opposition to war.
Friday's report by Dr Blix and Saturday's anti-war demonstrations have swung momentum behind Paris and Berlin. Some of the biggest protests were in Britain, Spain and Italy - countries governed by Washington's loudest cheerleaders.
Elsewhere, Denmark's Prime Minister, Mr Anders Fogh Rasmussen, has been almost silent on Iraq since he signed last month's letter of support for Washington. And the Dutch Prime Minister, Mr Jan Peter Balkenende, is inhibited by coalition negotiations from taking too strong a position of support for the US.
Three of the four neutral countries - Sweden, Finland and Austria - are moving firmly into the peace camp, with Austria refusing to allow US troops to cross its territory or use its airports. Ireland's position remains a cautious one, with the Taoiseach, Mr Ahern, determined to avoid being too closely identified with either the French or the British positions.
Tonight's meeting could make it more difficult for Mr Ahern to avoid declaring where he stands but, if past form is anything to go by, it is a challenge to which he will almost certainly be equal.