Power, Direct and Derived

When EU Commissioner Gunther Verheugen responded to President Kuchma’s appeal by saying that Ukraine would never be a member, he was not only exceeding his authority but calling into question who runs the European Union, its member states, or some corps of bureaucrats and political appointees in Brussels. The question is not about Ukraine’s current readiness for EU membership: it is clearly not ready at this stage. Yet, things always change. With time, will, and some friendly guidance from the EU members themselves, this country has a chance for membership at some point in the future. This is why a number of EU member states are unwilling to shut the door as firmly as this Euro-bureaucrat would. Yet this is not the point.

The issue here is power, where is comes from, to whom it is responsible, and how far it goes. As a former staff director of a US government commission, I had to learn this distinction very well, and it is precisely this distinction that Commissioner Verheugen hopelessly garbled by usurping the power of those really empowered to decide on EU questions like membership, because they were elected by the political communities they represent. People like the distinguished gentleman in question were appointed to carry out what others, not appointees like him, decide is appropriate for the organization. A political appointee has no other function than to carry out the will of the elected officials whose power comes directly from the people. I, for example, had the power to represent my commission before other government bodies and make public statements, but only so long and to what extent I had the confidence of my commission members and especially its chairman. I knew that should I make any statement to cause embarrassment to those for whom I worked, I could be fired at a moment’s notice because my power was delegated and could be rescinded. Bureaucrats proper, those who serve under appointees empowered to give them political guidance in the interests of those who appoint them, have and require more security, of course, but they are supposed to stay out of politics altogether. Here the issue is of that stratum of appointees who derive power from those whose power comes directly from the people. In America, if any appointee shot from the hip as recklessly as Mr. Verheugen, he would be fired immediately. Why, then, is this verbal gunslinger still in his post?