Ireland risks increasing marginalisation in the discussions at the Convention on the Future of Europe, writes Denis Staunton, in Brussels
Over dinner in Brussels last week, a group of ministers met to discuss Europe's future. The host was the Dutch European Affairs Minister, Mr Atzo Nikolai, and almost all of the EU's smaller member states were represented, along with a handful of candidate countries.
No Irish representative was present, however, for the simple reason that the Government was not invited.
A Dutch government spokesman explained that countries that had expressed an interest in ideas for the Convention on the Future of Europe being developed by the Benelux group - Belgium, Luxembourg and the Netherlands - were invited to attend. He said that Ireland had not expressed any interest in the joint strategy.
"They haven't contacted the Belgian or Dutch foreign ministries to discuss a common position. We invited countries that showed an interest in our initiative," he said.
Ireland's exclusion from last week's meeting is the latest sign of the Government's marginalisation at the convention, which is creating a constitutional treaty for the EU. What makes Ireland's isolation more troubling, however, is that it is a direct consequence of the Government's open contempt for a process that could shape Europe's future for decades.
On the afternoon of the Dutch dinner, the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Mr Cowen, was blithely dismissive of the convention's work, sneering that he would not be surprised at what came out of it. And he repeated the Government's view that all "political decisions" would be taken by heads of government at the Inter-Governmental Conference that follows it next year. The Inter-Governmental Conference (IGC) is the EU's traditional way of doing important business.
It involves months of negotiations between national governments, followed by days of sordid horse-trading at a treaty-making summit.
The most notorious example of this process led to the agreement of the Nice Treaty in the dead of night after four days of wrangling. Even before Ireland's rejection of the treaty, most European policy-makers agreed that they needed to find a better way of doing business.
After all the heartache the Nice Treaty caused the Government, it is astonishing that Mr Cowen should remain so attached to the process that created it.
The convention brings together representatives from national governments, national parliaments, the Commission and the European Parliament, as well as delegates from the candidate countries. Since last March, they have been discussing everything from the reform of EU institutions to foreign policy, economic policy co-ordination and justice and home affairs.
Next summer, the convention will produce a new treaty for the EU - almost certainly a constitutional treaty that will establish firmly the relationship between member states and EU institutions such as the Commission.
The Government made its attitude to the convention clear the moment its first representative, Mr Ray MacSharry, came to Brussels for the first session. He said that the present institutional balance had served the EU perfectly well and he dismissed the need for a constitutional treaty.
"Europe has served us well so far and what we want to do is build on that success, build on that progress rather than seek to undermine it as people might suggest in going too far about a new constitution for a united Europe, a European state. That is not going to happen," he said.
The clearest evidence of the Government's conviction that the convention does not matter is its reluctance to exploit Ireland's most senior representative there. The former taoiseach, Mr John Bruton, is a member of the convention's powerful 12-member praesidium, which steers the work of the entire body. As a former head of government and a vice-president of the conservative European People's Party, Mr Bruton has access to informal political networks in Europe.
But it emerged last week that the Government has never asked Mr Bruton for a briefing and has never asked him to raise any issues in the praesidium.
It is difficult to imagine any other member state squandering such an opportunity to influence the debate in the convention.
But no other member state shares the Government's view that the convention is no more than a loquacious prelude to a bout of old-fashioned dealmaking between EU leaders.
Germany and France have recently appointed their foreign ministers as their representatives at the convention and they have signalled that they will work towards a joint approach to the new treaty.
Indeed Britain - which shares some of the Government's caution about European integration - has embraced the convention with extraordinary vigour.
London has formed flexible alliances with Paris, Madrid and Berlin and has even flirted with some smaller member states. And Britain's was the first government to propose its own draft constitution for Europe.
Ireland, by contrast, appears stuck on a few tired issues, such as opposition to tax harmonisation and support for an enhanced role for national parliaments in EU policy-making. The Minister for Justice, Mr McDowell, is concerned about moves to give the EU competence in criminal law and is wary of incorporating the Charter of Fundamental Rights into EU law.
Mr McDowell views the convention as a threat but at least he acknowledges its importance - which is more than can be said for the Minister for Foreign Affairs. Perhaps, now that Ireland's term on the United Nations Security Council is ending, Mr Cowen should consider coming to Brussels himself as the Government's representative.
Such a move would signal that the Government is taking the convention more seriously and would allow Mr Cowen to influence the shape of a future treaty.
But smug in the after-glow of its belated Nice victory, the Government appears confident that its deeply conservative approach to Europe's future will win the day.
This analysis is almost certainly wrong and if the Government does not move fast, it will be out-manoeuvred in the final negotiations.
Such an outcome would not only damage Ireland's national interest; it would leave the Government once again with the sorry task of selling to the Irish people a treaty it does not itself believe in.