³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ

Driving by a favourite local restaurant in my neighbourhood of Brussels I was startled to see a crisp looking stars and stripes blowing from its flag pole. My surprise says much. In my three years travelling around Europe I have noticed that the EU flag and flags of many nations are commonplace, but the American flag (except outside US embassies and in Kosovo) has been rarer than a hammer and sickle.

The recent change in US leadership may undermine the suggestion that Europe is anti-American, rather than predominantly opposed to a certain type of American foreign policy. But as they used to say in Yorkshire, fine words, or indeed flying flags, butter no parsnips. Will sentimental approval be accompanied by hard political deeds?

Many of Europe's politicians are almost mesmerised by the new American president. Most watched him sign his first batch of executive orders with utmost relief. The command to close Guantanamo was a poignant symbol of Obama's concern for world opinion and, you could say, coming back in line with mainstream European views. But when the new president starts asking favours there may be more than a bit of foot-shuffling.

This first test may come today when the European Union's 27 foreign ministers meet in Brussels. I don't know what they will eat, although they could do worse than copying the President's . However, definitely on the menu is what Europe should do when Guantanamo closes.

President Obama has set up a task force to look at what happens to former inmates when the prison camp is closed. Some may be charged and stand trial. Some may be sent back to their home countries. But what should happen to those who fear torture if they are sent home? The foreign ministers will be debating the that the EU should provide a home.

The Swedes, Finns and Irish seem to agree. And the German foreign minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier told the ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ: "Germany belongs to the group of countries like the UK who demanded closure of Guantanamo. It's a question of credibility. Its closure is necessary for the USA, especially if the US wants to restore its credibility in the Middle East and in the Arab world. If Europeans are asked we should not rule out helping."

The Council of Europe, as you know a separate body from the EU representing 47 countries, describes the current response as "hesitant". Their human rights commissioner Thomas Hammarberg says there must be no talk of house arrest or surveillance - the men should be freed or charged.

"If there is not the evidence," he says, "we do not have the right to assume these are dangerous people or that they may plan to commit crimes. I think the principles must be respected here. But of course if they begin to conspire in anything similar to a terrorist action they should be charged."

I put it to him that some might say that was too big a risk to take: "No. I think we have to respect basic procedures of justice. If you are not proven as guilty by ordinary procedures of justice then you should be seen as innocent. There is no half way there."

Britain is the only EU country to have already taken in some former prisoners but the Foreign Office says the priority now is the release of the two former British residents. Although European countries want to please the new president the Netherlands has already stated that they support the "you broke it, you fix it" principle, the foreign minister saying Guantanamo was not their mistake so there's no need for them to take former prisoners.

Perhaps the most obvious reason for concern is not a sniffy sense of superiority but the fact that the American administration believe that of those already released 61 have returned to what they call "the battlefield".

The senior French MP told us "public opinion would be shocked". While conceding that perhaps one or two people could be taken on a case by case basis, he states: "This is a risk. My first reaction is that we should not really interfere. I am not keen because France should not be a haven for terrorists."

What should the foreign ministers decide today ?

UPDATE 1400: Do you remember the in Bethlehem in 2002? The French want to use the case as a basis for taking in any Guantanamo inmates. The EU took in 13 Palestinians then (and very it was too).

The point is that there would be a central security vetting procedure before former Guantanamo prisoners are allowed to settle in European Union countries. Some feel this is a sensible way forward, but worry that talk of a mission to Washington or the camp itself is jumping the gun - after all the new President hasn't yet made any official request to the EU.

• Bookmark with:
• |
• |
• |
• |
• - What's this?