THE German Chancellor, Dr Kohl, emphatically repeated his commitment to the timetable and ambition of the Inter Governmental Conference in the Council and at a press conference. He wants to see it completed by June next year in Amsterdam and expects decisive progress to have been reached by the Dublin European Council in mid December.
He also insisted there is no question of postponing agreement on the decision making methods needed to allow an enlarged EU to function effectively. This would probably mean postponing enlargement for some 10 years. It would be "extremely dangerous to let the timetable slip like that", he said.
Dr Kohl told the Danish Prime Minister, Mr Rasmussen, that remarks he made in Dublin last Thursday about the need for a "Maastricht 3" had been "wilfully misunderstood", to suggest Germany is sealing down its ambitions for the current IGC. This is not so and it is "absurd" to suggest otherwise, he said.
While compromise is the normal way of doing EU business, he would not be prepared to change the basic German orientation to these negotiations. He underlined the importance of more majority voting, more powers for the European Parliament and more common action and new institutions in justice and home affairs. He repeated his support for an FBI type body to handle these throughout the EU.
Dr Kohl and his advisers explained that what he had in mind for a Maastricht 3 would be the possible need to revisit the outcome of this IGC when enlargement talks are underway and EMU is in place from 1999. "History goes on" and there are politicians in Europe who will want to raise further questions.
He did not spell out what these might be. They could well include security and defence issues, the common foreign policy, the EU budgetary review, which must be completed by 1999, and the proper methods of governing a currency union politically.
Germany has strong views on each of these subjects and Dr Kohl regards European integration as a continuous process. "It is not something that begins and ends within defined limits, within one particular constitutional review conference," as one senior German official put it. The enlargement negotiations themselves amount to an intergovernmental conference, which many may feel should be accompanied by further treaty changes.
Experienced observers believe the flurry of speculation about German intentions in recent days was designed to smoke out its leaders into expressing their intentions more plainly.
There is, however, still a good deal of confusion over how closely Germany and France are able to co ordinate their approach. President Chirac seems to exemplify the traditional French demand for a strong Europe with weak institutions.
Some of the smaller states are worried that Dr Kohl might be tempted to sacrifice the strength of the institutions which small states see as protecting their interests in order to reach agreement with Mr Chirac.
