His name was one of the few mentioned in the various threads, and the one with the most favorable comments. DoDo has expressed some reservations since, but he sounded like a decent choice for me as a tentative ET candidate then. In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes
As for Uffe Ellemann-Jensen, he was strongly atlanticist and was IMHO a bit too quick in recognizing the independence of the Baltic States (that was no small part of the Western-encouraged destabilization of Gorbachev's regime, and my impression is that the Baltic secession was an important motivation in the 19 August 91 coup, which led to the disaster that was Yeltsing and so on and so forth...). On the other hand, he took IMHO the right position on the Danish cartoon controversy, and as redstar points out a foreign minister of a medium-sized country would be a natural choice for President of the Council. We have met the enemy, and he is us — Pogo
Later he suggests regularly inviting US representatives to sessions of the Council of Ministers and points to the failure of Kyoto as a case in point. What I found most troubling while reading his column is that he nowhere acknowledges that Europe and the US could ever have fundamentally different interests. Wait this is important. Someone is wrong on the Internet.
Re Migeru, I was probably more wary of Fischer until a year ago than most of you, but my current opinion was based on this op-ed alone: it shows he didn't learnt anything and got lost ideologically on the American lecture circuit. *Lunatic*, n. One whose delusions are out of fashion.
Sadly the vast majority of the European political elites can't envision a Europe that's not defined by the transatlantic relationship. Wait this is important. Someone is wrong on the Internet.
