BRUSSELS, Oct. 17 (UPI) -- Former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher once said of Mikhail Gorbachev that the Soviet leader was a man she could do business with. There is little doubt that U.S. President George W. Bush and European Commission chief Jose Manuel Barroso feel the same way about each other.
When Barroso drops into the White House Tuesday, it will be the first bilateral meeting between the heads of the world's two biggest trading blocs in Washington since the Berlin Wall came tumbling down in 1989.
"It is a lunch between pals," the commission's chief spokesman Francoise le Bail told United Press International ahead of Barroso's departure. "The two presidents know each other and so do their wives."
It is not hard to see why Bush and Barroso hit it off. Both are fiercely pro-free market, believe in an iron-tight trans-Atlantic partnership, take a tough line on terror and hail from the right of the political spectrum. Bush will also forever be indebted to the former Portuguese premier for organizing a summit of pro-war leaders in the Azores on the eve of the invasion of Iraq in 2003.
The warmth seems to be reciprocated. With Bush's approval ratings in Europe hovering around 25 percent, there are not many politicians would dare to claim: "President Bush and I share the idea that our strategic partnership should serve to promote democracy, human rights, rule of law, and market economy around the world."
It is not just touchy-feely rhetoric. Since Bush's re-election in November, relations between the two world powers have warmed significantly -- largely at the U.S. president's behest. "We are making progress," Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Kurt Volker told a small group of journalists in Brussels Friday. "This administration made a commitment to put trans-Atlantic relations at the center of its policy agenda and our EU counterparts are ready to talk. When you go through things issue by issue there's a great deal we are able to do together."
"The Americans have realized they cannot do everything on their own," is Le Bail's somewhat less prosaic explanation for Bush's apparent conversion to the European cause.
Since November, the two have worked hand-in-hand to promote democracy in former Soviet republics such as Ukraine and Middle East states like Lebanon. They have also avoided potentially damaging rows over Iran and China after Washington agreed to back the EU's "softly softly" approach to Tehran's nuclear ambitions and Brussels shelved plans to lift its arms embargo against Beijing.
This does not mean relations between the European Union and the United States are all sweetness and light. The two sides, which have an annual trade relationship worth more than $600 billion, are involved in a nasty spat about state aid to airline giants Boeing and Airbus. They are also oceans apart when it comes to reducing the lavish subsidies enjoyed by farmers in Europe and America. In the run-up to a key meeting of the World Trade Organization in December, the U.S. government proposed a dramatic cut in handouts to farmers. The commission, the EU's executive arm, would like to match Washington's offer, but has its hands tied by half of the Union's 25 members who are opposed to any real subsidy reduction.
When Barroso sits down for lunch with Bush and meetings with Vice President Dick Cheney and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice Tuesday, he will be painfully aware the real key to opening up global commerce will not be in his hands, but with EU foreign, agriculture and trade ministers holding an extraordinary meeting in Luxembourg.
Instead of concrete targets for cutting damaging farm subsidies, the two leaders are expected to issue a more anodyne statement highlighting the crucial role the World Trade Organization meeting has to play in boosting growth and trade. "It is important both the United States and the European Union decide politically what they want to achieve in Hong Kong," says Le Bail.
But first the real EU needs to stand up. Will the protectionist, state-subsidizing Union of old prevail in Luxembourg or will the forces of free trade and open markets triumph? The answer will not only determine the success or failure of the ongoing Doha development round of trade talks but the health of transatlantic relations for years to come.
