Irish class prejudice counts for little elsewhere in Europe, where the Taoiseach is regarded as a good communicator and brilliant negotiator, writes Denis Staunton, European Correspondent
The successful conclusion of last week's summit in Brussels, where EU leaders agreed a constitutional treaty, has generated warm praise throughout Europe for the Irish presidency. President Jacques Chirac of France went so far as to describe it as the best EU presidency he had witnessed, and Irish officials had good reason to feel pleased with the job done.
Beyond such praise, however, lies an important political reality that has seen Ireland position itself close to the centre of the debate on Europe's future in an enlarged Union of 25. The change involves more than an improvement in Ireland's image among EU partners and holds profound implications for the State's European policy in the coming years.
The most striking effect of the presidency has been to restore Ireland's reputation among its EU partners after a series of shocks in recent years, notably the initial rejection of the Nice Treaty and the dispute between the Minister for Finance, Mr McCreevy, and the European Commission over the 2001 budget.
The impression that Ireland was turning cool on the European project was reinforced by robust rhetoric on the part of some Government Ministers, notably the Tánaiste, in her declaration that Ireland was spiritually closer to Boston than Berlin. The Taoiseach's close relationship with Britain's Mr Tony Blair and the uniformity of Irish and British policies on a number of EU issues, particularly concerning taxation, economic policy and justice and home affairs, led many in continental Europe to dismiss Ireland as Britain's Little Sir Echo in European affairs.
The Government's initially dismissive approach to the Convention on the Future of Europe reinforced the impression that Ireland had opted out of the project of reshaping Europe. The Government's appointment of the Minister of State for European Affairs, Mr Roche, as its representative at the convention triggered a change of attitude, however, and Ireland's representatives, from the Oireachtas and the European Parliament as well as the Government, played a significant role in influencing the draft constitution the convention produced.
It is worth noting that, while Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael, Labour and the Greens were represented in the convention, the Progressive Democrats were not and the Irish presidency has been dominated by Fianna Fáil Ministers. Ms Harney and the Minister for Justice, Mr McDowell, chaired the Competitiveness and Justice and Home Affairs Councils with skill and efficiency but their influence on the constitutional treaty negotiations was limited.
In its conduct of those negotiations, the presidency showed not only an even-handedness and willingness to listen that won the confidence of all delegations. Irish officials and their political masters also displayed a deep understanding of the attitudes that inform the divergent views in European capitals about where Europe ought to be going.
One group of countries, led by France and Germany, saw the constitution as an opportunity to make decision-making in the EU more efficient by abolishing national vetoes in some policy areas. They wanted deeper integration in many areas and favoured more effective EU foreign and defence policies as part of an enhanced European role in international affairs.
Another group, led by Britain and including many of the countries that joined the Union last month, were determined to preserve national sovereignty on such issues as taxation and social security, and resisted any development in foreign policy that could undermine the transatlantic relationship by encouraging Europe's emergence as counterweight to the United States.
The Irish presidency understood that the mechanism of "enhanced co-operation", which allows groups of countries to co-operate more closely on individual policy areas within the EU framework, was key to accommodating the demands of both ideological groups.
In formulating the final compromise, the presidency ensured that such co-operation could function efficiently, with groups of countries being allowed to agree among themselves, for example, to make decisions by qualified majority where unanimity was hitherto required. Irish negotiators were careful, however, to make the enhanced co-operation method as inclusive as possible, to discourage the emergence of an inner core, or two-speed Europe.
The compromise on harmonising rules of criminal procedure allows countries such as Britain and Ireland to opt out of measures that might compromise the Common Law system, but will not enable such countries to prevent others from proceeding.
The Government's ambition that Ireland should be involved in as many EU activities as possible is illustrated by the presidency's conduct of the European Security and Defence Policy (ESDP) agenda. Ireland's military neutrality and traditionally cautious approach to defence matters did not prevent the presidency from advancing the ESDP agenda, preparing for the EU's takeover of NATO's peacekeeping mission in Bosnia and Herzegovina and securing agreement on the establishment of a European Defence Agency to co-ordinate defence procurement.
The experience of running the EU for the past six months has done nothing to diminish the Government's determination to resist moves to harmonise tax policy in the EU, nor to weaken the Taoiseach's relationship with Mr Blair. Ireland does not belong within the integrationist camp of France and Germany but the presidency has halted a drift towards the British-led frosty fringe; and Ireland is now situated, along with a number of other small and medium-sized countries such as the Netherlands and Hungary, somewhere in between.
The Taoiseach's personal standing among EU leaders has been greatly enhanced by his success in reaching a deal on the constitution and the manner in which he conducted the negotiations.
"He is disarmingly charming, he appears unthreatening but is good at getting his way, he's patient and he speaks well," said one Scandinavian diplomat after the summit.
The last part of that compliment may surprise some in Ireland, where Mr Ahern's speaking style is the target of snobbish mockery.
Irish class prejudice counts for little elsewhere in Europe, where the Taoiseach is regarded as a good communicator as well as a brilliant negotiator.
Mr Ahern continues to insist that he does not wish to succeed Mr Romano Prodi as Commission President, but the fact that many EU leaders would like him to take the job is testimony not only to the Taoiseach's own qualities, but to Ireland's return to the heart of Europe.