Leading Article: Europe rejects a chance for change

THE MAN most likely to succeed Jacques Delors as President of the European Commission is Jacques Santer, Prime Minister of Luxembourg. Unless there is a last-minute switch, which is still possible, he will be chosen today at the special summit of European leaders in Brussels.

The choice says quite a lot about the present state of the European Union. We are passing through one of those rare defining phases in European history when the continent has a chance to reshape itself. Decisions taken now should set the course for the next half century or so. It ought to be a time for visionary statesmanship and grand gestures. The European Union should take the lead because it is supposed to represent more than the sum of its parts.

Jacques Delors had a vision that originated before the collapse of Communism, with a mandate from the Treaty of Rome to complete the Single Market. The logic of that mandate pointed to economic and monetary union, which in turn demanded political union. For all the trouble that Mr Delors provoked, he drove Europe down that road and forced member governments to define their policies by reference to his aspirations.

Today's needs are different, and there is no clear mandate. The central task is to bring in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe without alienating Russia. This will mean changing the structures and habits of the Union in fundamental ways that have yet to be defined, while also confronting internal problems such as unemployment.

A fair case can be made for the view that Mr Santer will be quite good at the job. It is too easy to look down on him as no more than a relatively unknown politician from a tiny country. He has long experience in European politics and many qualities that will be useful at the Commission. He is a decent, shrewd, intelligent, moderate person who mixes well and is good at negotiating compromises. He is very close to Helmut Kohl, but also pro-British. He was particularly helpful to Britain during the Maastricht negotiations. He believes in European integration but is not an ardent federalist. His pragmatic approach may sometimes smooth the way to agreements more effectively than the acerbic manner of Jacques Delors.

Nevertheless, the fact that the governments of Europe are on the brink of opting for the comfort of cautious pragmatism at a time of such dramatic historical change reflects the poverty of their aspirations and the fragility of their domestic support. They should have had the courage to choose someone more likely to stand up to them.