Herman Van Rompuy reigns supremacy. Will he deliver?

Herman Van Rompuy (Flemish Christian democrat) could become the first president of the European Council. The man who, just one year ago unexpectedly and reluctantly became the Prime Minister of Belgium, has now been chosen to take one of the top jobs in Europe.

The other top job created by the Lisbon Treaty - foreign affairs supremo - has gone to the EU Trade Commissioner, Baroness Catherine Ashton from the UK..
Earlier, the UK government had said it was no longer pushing for former PM Tony Blair to get the presidency post.
Mr Van Rompuy, 62, had crucial French and German support. He has a reputation as a coalition builder, having taken charge of the linguistically divided Belgian government and steered it out of a crisis.

Herman van Rompuy:
"Every country should emerge victorious from negotiations" .
"Even if unity remains our strength, our diversity remains our wealth," he said, stressing the individuality of EU member states.

US President Barack Obama said the appointments would "strengthen the EU and enable it to be an even stronger partner to the United States".
"The United States has no stronger partner than Europe in advancing security and prosperity around the world," . Though wishes are flying away from around the globe, there are some scepticism surfacing because these little known guys may not be as powerful as the job itself possessed.
In an EU that prizes consensus, compromise and operates as a supranational coalition of different countries, interests, and political forces, Van Rompuy's talents for persuasion and conciliation look to be his prime qualifications for the job of chairing EU summits and trying to harmonise the EU agenda. His appointment frustrated those eager to show greater European muscle abroad by giving the job to a household name like Tony Blair. The criticism is that in an international crisis, Van Rompuy does not have the stature to stand alongside Barack Obama, Vladimir Putin, or Hu Jintao and that Europe will be relegated to the second division of international powers.

In his prime role as chair of EU summits, he is likely to be more the servant of European national leaders rather than their master, another factor in his success.

Non negotiable deal?

Time is nearing on, Nature allows no time to format a plan to combat against inevitable climate change... From the Indian perspective, government persistently insisting on share per capita and also this peninsula wants for the historic accountability for the industrially developed nations... Time is running out guys,If not never to achieve the deal, It is extremely difficult when we postpone this matter.Poor coastal countries are the immediate victim of the climate change especially the countries like Bangladesh, Maldives, Costarica are feeling the heat right now itself. Barack Obama and other leaders have confirmed what has been likely for some time – that there won't be a legally binding deal coming from next month's Copenhagen climate change summit. Instead, and as many insiders have been saying for months, the talks will need to continue into 2010, with a deal hopefully thrashed out during the course of next year. More time might help politicians come up with a workable solution, but time is not on our side.


While politics is sometimes about compromise and being flexible, unfortunately it is not possible to negotiate with nature. The longer the world delays in putting in place the aggressive emissions reductions needed to avoid dangerous levels of climate change, the more risk we are placing before our children and grandchildren. The science tells us that to have a reasonable chance of keeping global average temperature increase below 2C (compared with the pre-industrial average), humankind will need to begin a global cut in emissions within the next five years or so. That will require planning and clear strategies to change energy and land use patterns.


The reasons the world has thus far been unable to do this are familiar enough. Present patterns of economic growth rely on vast quantities of cheap fossil energy, and while countries are not prepared to look at different economic strategies, solving the global climate challenge is virtually impossible. In the west we have become accustomed to ever-increasing levels of material consumption – and developing countries wish to have that too. The result is massive and increasing pressure on natural resources, land and water. And then there is the matter of global inequality and how it will be possible to cut poverty while reducing emissions and to put in place strategies that will enable countries to adapt to what are now already inevitable climate change impacts. Who will pay for that, and how, remains unresolved.


These are really big issues, but leaders need to face them and others with a renewed sense of urgency. Perhaps a wartime analogy is apposite. At the start of the second world war, the US and Britain demonstrated a remarkable ability to rise to a grave challenge. Public support for action was galvanized, and new technologies were deployed on a vast scale in a short time. Both of these things happened, in part through clear and inspirational political leadership. And perhaps this is what the world needs now – some leaders who are prepared to speak of the threat as it really is, and to inspire societies to rise to it with an appropriate response. If we don't get that in 2009, we will certainly need it during 2010.


Each day that goes by the threat grows, each day we delay means more pain and cost in the future. We must urge countries to use the Copenhagen summit to raise humankind's collective ambition, and to see 2010 as the time when that is converted into an action plan that will work. Ball is on Copenhagen whether we like it are not it is our destiny to take the responsibility which we are accountable for... Time will tell the truth about our commitment until lets hope for the best.