AS an EU member state seemed on the verge of going to war three weeks ago, it was a US Assistant Secretary of State, Mr Richard Holbrooke, who organised the de escalation of the crisis.
Greek and Turkish troops had gathered around a tiny piece of Greek owned rock in the Aegean, upon which Turks had planted their flag. Mr Holbrooke's telephone diplomacy brought a withdrawal of Greek and Turkish naval forces from around the disputed islet, roughly the size of a football field.
It was the same US administration and the same Mr Holbrooke whose engagement with a real European war in the former Yugoslavia produced the Dayton peace agreement. While the EU had expressed concern, wished for peace and sent monitoring missions and political mediators over the previous three years, US involvement brought quick results.
Patently ineffective in resolving conflicts on its doorstep, senior EU politicians nevertheless resent the recent suggestion by Mr Holbrooke - in reference to the Aegean dispute - that they have "slept through the night" while conflicts raged in Europe. In relation to Bosnia, Mr Holbrooke says the EU is not yet fit for the task of keeping international order. It was only "when the United States engaged in complete concert with Britain and France that we finally began to move forward", he said.
EU figures don't much like Mr Holbrooke's manner: according to a regularly quoted assessment of a "friend", he is "cursed by the conviction that he is the smartest person in the room". EU politicians therefore often dismiss him as an arrogant ambitious American.
His message, however, is not so easily dismissed. The EU is very keen to develop a political and economic role in the Middle East and Mediterranean region. Yet, in former Yugoslavia, in the Aegean and in the Middle East it has been the US that has called the shots politically, and organised the peace talks. But the European Union is trying to get more involved. In the case of Cyprus, for example, the US (that man Holbrooke again) still has the highest profile in the latest international attempts to resolve that island's internal dispute. But Mr Holbrooke, perhaps because of his familiarity with the Northern Ireland issue, suggested that the Tanaiste, Mr Spring, become involved.
MR Spring visited, Cyprus for two days last month wearing an EU hat. He has said that during Ireland's presidency of the EU, Ireland and the Union will do the utmost to find a resolution to the island's political dispute. Mr Holbrooke is expected in Cyprus shortly to open a diplomatic initiative.
This issue appears to be a test case for the development of US-EU co operation, which has been identified by the Government as a theme for the Irish presidency. Success could give the EU some badly needed stature in international relations.
The EU is making a concerted effort, too, to be visible in the Middle East. Last week a troika of EU Foreign Ministers - representing the present, last and next EU presidencies - visited Syria, Israel and Gaza as part of the Union's efforts to define and enhance its own role in the Middle East peace process.
Once again, it has been the Americans who have made the running on the political talks over the last few years. Two rounds of talks in Maryland in the last two months appear to have brought movement on the most intractable strand of the Middle East peace process - the Israeli Syria "track".
While not politically involved in these talks, the European Union fully expects to end up paying a large part of the bill incurred by any Israel/Syria peace deal.
In Damascus President Assad said he would, indeed, like to see an EU role in the peace process. For Syria, this holds out the prospect of a loosening of the US monopoly on peace brokerage in the region. It also holds out the prospect of EU development funding to rebuild the economy and infrastructure in the Golan region.
The European Union will be asked to part fund any Israeli/Syrian peace, and is a growing feeling in Europe, that if it is to fork out ecus, it should not leave the details of the peace to the Americans.
Already the EU is the single largest aid donor to the Palestinians. It has earmarked £397.8 million for the 1994-1998 period for the West. Bank and Gaza to support the peace process; it has paid over the last two years towards reducing the Palestinian Authority's budget deficit; it has pledged £3.17 million towards building administrative and democratic structures; is advising on the development of parliamentary procedures; it ran the monitoring mission for last month's Palestinian council and presidential elections, and may also be involved in the forthcoming Palestinian municipal elections.
IN Jerusalem, the morning after meeting President Assad in Damascus, Israel's Prime Minister, Mr Shimon Peres, also assured the troika that he wanted EU involvement in the peace process. In Gaza that afternoon, the newly inaugurated Palestinian Council president, Mr Yasser Arafat, also said he wanted the EU to have a role.
These attempts to define and enhance economic and political relationships in the Middle East are part of a broader engagement with Mediterranean countries. In November, a conference in Barcelona between the EU and 12 Mediterranean countries (Algeria, Cyprus, Egypt, Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, Malta, Morocco, Syria, Tunisia, Turkey and the Palestinian Authority) agreed in principle to the creation of a European/Mediterranean Free Trade Area by 2010.
At the end of last year, the European Parliament finally ratified a Customs Union agreement with Turkey. The EU also has separate bilateral agreements - Association Agreements - with Tunisia, Israel and Morocco, and similar agreements with Egypt and Lebanon.
These promote "political dialogue", but also have a common economic theme - liberalisation of trade and capital movements in exchange for development aid. A total of £3.727 billion has been earmarked for EU financial assistance to Mediterranean countries from 1995 to 1999. In exchange, these countries may turn into lucrative markets for EU goods.
The EU's wish to increase its involvement in the Middle East and the Mediterranean is based partly on a wish to stabilise a neighbouring region. But there is much economic self interest there too.
For so long as the EU requires unanimity in its decisions on foreign policy, it will not be able to intervene in places such as Bosnia, the Middle East and Cyprus with the same political resolve as the US. The European Commission makes this point in its draft submission to the forthcoming Inter Governmental Conference of the EU.
"The reality of unanimity voting" according to the submission reported in this newspaper this week by our European Correspondent, Patrick Smyth, "is that it paralyses the council or produces a decision based on the lowest common denominator."
Or as Mr Gay Mitchell, Minister of State for European Affairs, told The Irish Times this week: "If we are to have a say in foreign policy commensurate with the size of the European Union we need a stronger co ordination of foreign policy". Until that happens, expect to see more of Mr Holbrooke on this side of the Atlantic.