This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 BRUSSELS 001736 
 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 04/20/2014 
TAGS: PREL PGOV EUN USEU BRUSSELS
SUBJECT: EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT: IMPACT OF ACCESSION 
 
REF: A. A. USEU BRUSSELS 01090 
 
     ¶B. B. USEU BRUSSELS 01094 
     ¶C. C. PRAGUE 00461 
 
Classified By: USEU Poloff David Armitage for reasons 1.4 (b,d). 
 
¶1. (C) SUMMARY. Until now, politicians from the ten accession 
states have only been observers of the European Parliament 
(EP).  We expect a culture clash when these observers become 
full-fledged members.  They are generally younger and look at 
the EP as a vehicle for political advancement.  They are also 
more likely to pursue national, vice "European," interests 
(although national cooperation probably will fade over time). 
 We doubt the overall balance of power between European 
political groups will change very much.  The generally 
pro-U.S. outlook of many accession state parliamentarians 
will be tested once they enter the EP.  END SUMMARY. 
 
------------------------------ 
Series of Pre-Election Reports 
------------------------------ 
 
¶2. (SBU) This is the third in a series of cables exploring 
the June 10-13 European Parliament (EP) elections, focusing 
on the expected impact and potential influence of MEPs from 
the countries set to join the EU on May 1.  Previous cables 
(reftels A-B) provided general background on the European 
elections campaign and the role of the EP in the EU 
decision-making context.  Subsequent telegrams will go into 
more detail on the role of U.S.-EU relations in the 
elections, re-election prospects for key MEPs, and possible 
realignment of party groups. 
 
------------------------------------------- 
Brussels confusing but good training ground 
------------------------------------------- 
 
¶3. (SBU) As a general rule, new members view serving in the 
EP as of more benefit to them than current members do.  Many 
EP observers consider working in Brussels as an essential 
launch pad for their political careers and a definite plus 
for making it big back home.  This is certainly the case in 
the Czech Republic (reftel C), but also in Hungary and other 
parts of Central Europe (less so in the Baltic states, Malta, 
and Cyprus).  The young, talented future stars in national 
politics are cutting their teeth in Brussels and Strasbourg. 
(18.5% of the EP observers are under 40, compared to 6.4 
percent of the MEPs)  This contrasts with a traditional 
attitude in the current EU-15, where the EP is sometimes 
perceived as a place for those in the autumn of their careers 
or who could not make it in the national arena.  Joszef 
Szajer (European People's Party - Christian Democrats, 
Hungary) and Agnes Vadai (PES - Party of European Socialists, 
Hungary) both remarked that their experiences had helped them 
be better politicians back in Budapest.  Interestingly, 
Szajer (age 42) plans to run for a seat in the June election, 
while Vadai (age 29) plans to return to the Hungarian 
parliament in Budapest.  Both plan to go where their 
respective parties should be in the majority.  As both noted, 
it is no fun to be in the opposition. 
 
¶4. (SBU) In contrast, Magda Kosa Kovacs (PES, Hungary) said 
that what would be important over the long term would be to 
have competent professionals working in Brussels and 
Strasbourg.  She stressed that one should already have some 
experience and proven political skills before becoming an 
MEP.  According to (the 64-year old) Kosa Kovacs, "The EP is 
not for people in their early 20's."  Kosa Kovacs (and 
others) also complained of the difficulty in grasping the 
opaque and complex EU legislative process.  The terminology, 
rules, and procedures were confusing, leaving many observers 
frustrated. 
 
--------------------------- 
Bluebloods meet Blue Collar 
--------------------------- 
 
¶5. (SBU) Besides increasing the EP's size from 626 to 732, EU 
enlargement will bring stylistic changes.  The EP observers 
we spoke with commented on how the European Parliament is a 
debating club - very formal and "proper."  This contrasts 
with the down-and-dirty, rough-and-tumble political style in 
many Central and East European states, they said.  Szajer 
noted how combative politics are in Budapest.  Vadai said 
that current MEPs are rushing to pass legislation before May 
1 because they fear how the new members might vote, given 
their "take-no-prisoners" political style.  The Strasbourg 
style is very different.  There is plenty of "nice talk and 
philosophy," but the accession states are more used to 
"fighting" and seeking "practical" solutions. 
 
------------------------- 
Greens Influence May Wane 
------------------------- 
 
¶6. (SBU) Of the 162 EP observers, only one (from Latvia) is a 
member of the Green political group.  This is quite a 
contrast to the numbers in the current EP, in which Greens 
comprise almost 8 percent of MEPs.  Even Socialists such as 
Vadai noted that pushing for the environment was not a big 
campaign plus.  If given the choice between resources for 
environment or resources for people, Vadai said that she 
would choose the people.  Thus, the sway of the Greens in the 
Parliament may diminish somewhat, but it will depend on the 
numbers: The future MEPs from the accession states will 
comprise only 22% of the entire European Parliament. 
Therefore, even if the MEPs from the accession states have 
strong views, their influence will be felt only if they can 
place themselves on key committees or succeed as rapporteurs. 
 The new MEPs will have to fight for these plum positions. 
 
----------------------------------- 
National Trumps Partisan...for Now 
----------------------------------- 
 
¶7. (C) Many of the accession-state observers we spoke with 
view their role as defending national interests in Brussels. 
As Vadai mentioned, accession states saw three basic models 
to dealing with the EU: the British (Thatcher's rebate - 
rolling back EU agreements in pursuit of national interests); 
Finnish (follow everything); and Austrian (ask for opt-outs). 
 She said that Hungary was adopting a mixture.  For too long, 
Vadai said, accession state capitals were told to do this and 
that by Brussels, and many are biding their time to push 
back.  Vadai said she could hardly wait to begin pushing back 
once she can vote as a full MEP in May. 
 
¶8. (C) For many from the accession states, national identity 
will remain very important - but probably only in the short 
term.  For example, Vadai and Szajer, although they are from 
opposite sides of the political spectrum, were consistent in 
saying that their loyalty was national first and partisan 
second.  Part of this is the feeling that the accession 
states need to "catch up" to the current EU-15.  Szajer said 
that there might also be ad-hoc cooperation among the Central 
European countries (Poland, Czech Republic, Hungary, 
Slovakia), but that there would be nothing formal.  Such 
regional coalitions probably would be rare and would be 
determined by the particular issue under consideration. He 
also noted that nationals would receive regular briefings and 
that national interests would be pursued through the parties. 
 EP Observer Toomas Ilves (PES, Estonia) noted that his party 
was the only one in his country not to use a variation of the 
slogan, "Protecting Estonia from the EU." 
 
¶9. (C) A final remark concerning nationality: some of our EP 
observer interlocutors were sensitive to the possibility of 
being treated as inferiors from the more established western 
European democracies.  Vadai said she was chastised by a 
Spanish MEP (presumably a fellow Socialist) during the run-up 
to Iraq for her country's stance in favor of U.S. policy. 
The MEP said Hungary was not abiding by "European 
solidarity."  She wondered whether such treatment would 
continue after May 1. 
 
¶10.  (C) COMMENT: Given experiences from past enlargements, 
however, national cooperation probably will fade over time 
since the EP is structured to steer members toward partisan 
coalitions rather than national coalitions.  As one academic 
expert told us, "It will be hard for the new members to 
remain nationalist because the EP simply doesn't operate that 
way."  The generally pro-American attitudes among accession 
state parliamentarians will be sorely tested once inside the 
EP, where anti-American views run deep, and pressures to 
conform will be significant.  END COMMENT. 
 
SCHNABEL