Pax Mediterranea

Stephen C Calleya is one of the architects of the Euro-Mediterranean Coastguard Agency, a proposal he hopes will be taken up by the Maltese government in a bid to consolidate a vision for a more stable Mediterranean

For years of his academic career, Stephen Calleya, the deputy director of the University of Malta’s Mediterranean Academy of Diplomatic Studies, floated about the idea of a border guard in the Mediterranean. With a corpus of work which has focused on regional dynamics in the Mediterranean and Europe, his interest in the Barcelona Euro-Mediterranean Process has permeated over the years since 1995, the year the Process was launched, but which so far, have yet not produced any tangible results.
The Barcelona Process brought together the Southern and Eastern Mediterranean states, from Morocco to Syria, along with the EU, to establish a common area of peace and stability based on the respect for human rights and democracy. The idea develops further on the concept of a free-trade area and the development of cultural rapprochement across the Mediterranean ‘divide.’
Following the collapse of Middle East, peace talks in the late nineties, the divide has only continued to deepen and 9/11 re-established a new pattern of fear and security concerns. Many still ask about what has happened since 1995, and only recently, with Michael Frendo’s appointment as foreign minister, has the Mediterranean dimension been actively acknowledged by a foreign minister following EU accession. So what is happening with Barcelona today?
“The Barcelona process is very much alive and kicking. Unfortunately it hasn’t succeeded to deliver any tangible results on a major scale, which means that the expectations raised in the beginning were too high, but that there is a major necessity to come forward with tangible proposals and take a leadership role by forming coalitions of the willing,” Calleya says.
According to the international relations analysts, the first choice would be having Southern European Member States of the European Union, “for obvious reasons,” but also other states who have an interest in the Mediterranean, brought together to work actively for the development of the Process.
“The good news is that the Scandinavian countries, for instance, have demonstrated an incredible interest in the Mediterranean. The EU works through lobbying. Malta’s comparative advantages are its understanding of the issues pertaining to the Mediterranean, and its ability to communicate.
“The Euromed partnership brings together the EU and the Mediterranean’s Southern shore: unless the Southern shore is intricately part of the process, the implementation of the process is not going to happen. I would argue that in the last decade we have seen a major disconnection between the EU and the Mediterranean partner countries. Along comes Malta, which is in an excellent position to help explain the necessity, and also to articulate and bring together the two sides, and hammer out a common agenda. To date, this has been lacking.
“As far as I’m concerned, I’d say that the latest foreign policy pronouncements by the new foreign minister Michael Frendo, seem to be right on the ball because they are focused first and foremost on the Mediterranean. Of course, the trick is in the detail: we have to identify specific, tangible initiatives, form coalitions, and garner the support we need to get these proposals going. It has to be a continuous and consistent process.”
Much of course, has been said about Malta being a ‘bridge’ across the Mediterranean, a form of nexus connecting the ‘misunderstood’ world of Islam with the European mainland. Calleya shares a certain degree of scepticism towards the concept, or at least, prefers not to commit himself to such generalisations. When recently Libyan leader Ghaddafi decided to bridge the Mediterranean divide himself by zipping off to the seat of the European Union in Brussels, what form of bridge Malta could have served for this kind of rapprochement, despite its historic relations with Libya, was certainly a debatable one.
“I would be very careful of using that phrase. Unfortunately, the sweeping concept of ‘bridge’ can mean a lot and mean a little. I think it’s essential to focus on tangible, specific proposals. There’s no denying we have a comparative advantage.
“If one looks at Libya, I would argue they hit the nail on the head: it is one of those case studies where Malta has a very good relationship with the country, and as a result of the correct application of being an interlocutor between Libya and the rest of the world, we can play an important role which is in the interest of Malta, given our proximity, the national interests of Libya, and the interest of whoever we interact between.
“When one looks at Muammar Ghadaffi’s visit to Brussels, certainly I would argue that we should be continuously looking at that equation and seeing what type of nation-building role we can play vis-à-vis the rapprochement into the international community, and I think the two ports of call would be Brussels and Washington DC.
“Malta is a global player with a regional focus. If one of our neighbours happens to be seeking rapprochement, certainly we should be offering our services: Washington DC would surely be a port of call in this case. At the end of the day, it is in our national interest. It is essential that Malta identifies its national interests and then unfolds an agenda that focuses on this interests, such as ensuring that our immediate neighbourhood is a prosperous and peaceful neighbourhood, and Libya is part of our neighbourhood.”
I ask Calleya whether Malta’s hosting of US warships in our port is posing a threat to our security, given the heightened climate of post 9-11. Calleya offers his take on the neutrality debate.
“All this debate of neutrality is unfortunately not addressed seriously enough. First and foremost, the concept is still relevant. From a realistic and a rationalistic perspective, the post-Cold War world is very different from the Cold War scenario, and unless one updates and upgrades these concepts, they become irrelevant. So the concept is relevant, but anachronistic.
“As far as we are concerned, neutrality is relevant as long as it is interpreted and defined in a relevant manner. And to be extremely specific, neutrality should be seen as something active, something alive, not something static. To refer to two superpowers in these times immediately puts you on a different bandwagon. When it comes to hosting warships in our ports, I don’t see any immediate contradiction as long as these are not participating in any military operation. As long as there is no direct linkage with an immediate military operation, I see no problem with it. It’s another form of tourism. The moment they are linked to a direct military operation, then one is correct to raise objection.”
Calleya says it is clear that neutrality should be of the active form: “It is ludicrous to think that we can just sit back and sit on the fence as events around us unfold, thinking that these will not have any repercussions in the future. It could be, for instance, situations in which humanitarian disasters are unfolding. It is nonsensical to argue that one should demonstrate no interest. When it comes to natural disasters, genocide, you name it: Malta should be offering its services in clearly defined operations, even peacekeeping missions. We live in a world where the potential of failing states is around us. I don’t see any reason why Malta should not be offering its services in the management of these situations.”
Pointing towards the Parliamentary Committee on Foreign and European Affairs, Calleya expresses satisfaction at what he has seen in recent weeks where he presented a new proposal designed to tackle the migration phenomenon affecting Malta, amongst other things: “The whole issue of neutrality should be tackled in the fashion adopted by the current Parliamentary committee, of which I am impressed at the bipartisanship in which both sides have come together to discuss similar issues.”
Along with Major Martin Muscat-Inglott, Calleya is proposing the idea of a coastguard agency for the Mediterranean, a concept which has continuously featured in his body of work.
“Increasing sources of instability across the Mediterranean such as illegal migration, drug trafficking and the potential proliferation of weapons dictate that serious consideration be dedicated to the establishment of a effective security mechanism that can address such security challenges. At the moment there are no elaborate mechanisms to contend with security crises such as an accidental collision at sea between transport tankers crossing the choke points such as the Straits of Sicily, or the alarming rate of degradation which is currently taking place in the environmental sector. One must also refer to the increasing flow of drug consignments that are reaching ever deeper into the societies of the Mediterranean, and the accentuation of illegal migratory flows from south to north which risks destabilising the legal structures of the state.”
He says that as the Euro-Mediterranean Partnership approaches its tenth anniversary, a concerted effort should be made to immediately take incremental steps towards setting up a Euro-Mediterranean Coastguard Agency (EMCA). The agency would be mandated to immediately identify security threats and risks in the Mediterranean and assess their likely impact on Euro-Mediterranean relations in future.
“Once this has been achieved the co-operative maritime security network can be instructed to draw up policy positions on security issues that require immediate attention. The EMCA would also be mandated to carry out tasks that are normally conducted by a coastguard. EMCA could initially carry out stop and search exercises in two principal areas: maritime safety and maritime pollution. This phase could be enhanced at a later stage by monitoring other sources of insecurity such as narcotics trafficking and the transport of illegal migrants.
“Such an agency should be open to any of the Euro-Mediterranean members that wish to participate. Any two or more Euro-Mediterranean partner states should be allowed to start co-operating without having to wait for all the other members to join in. In order to ensure that such a security arrangement can become operational in the shortest time possible, EMCA could start carrying out soft security types of missions in areas such as those of maritime safety.”
In addition to strengthening political and security channels of communication, the establishment of a Euro-Mediterranean Coastguard Agency will assist in cultivating more intense crises management mechanisms in a region of the world where a security vacuum currently exists.
“Vulnerable areas that require immediate attention include conducting simulation exercises of oil spills, ensuring that international standards are observed during the cleaning of oil tankers and monitoring the activities of non-Mediterranean fishing boats that are operating in the Mediterranean with a particular emphasis on over-fishing.
“I recently presented a policy paper together with Major Martin Cauchi Inglott on the concept of setting up a Euro-Mediterranean Coastguard Agency and the important role that Malta could play in such an initiative to the Foreign and European Affairs Parliamentary Committee. I was very impressed by the systematic nature of questioning by the Committee on the topic. The Committee also expressed an interest in following up on feasibility of setting up such an Agency which demonstrates that proactive nature that the Committee has been taking throughout this year.”