David Cameron has proved Radek Sikorski completely right

If you followed the Jean-Claude Juncker battle David Cameron has been waging with other EU leaders (my thoughts on the whole thing are here) then you'll have seen that the Polish foreign minister had some less than savory words about the prime minister's strategy when it comes to EU affairs.

Radoslaw Sikorski, Poland's foreign minister, said that Cameron's approach to the Juncker debate had displayed "a kind of incompetence in EU affairs" and accused him of listening too much to the 'stupid propaganda' of Eurosceptic backbenchers. He also said that Cameron had 'fucked up' several earlier encounters including his much noted veto of an EU fiscal union treaty back in 2011.

Radek Sikorski is an interesting guy. He was effectively a refugee to Britain in the 1980s when martial law was declared by the communist government in Poland. He studied at Oxford, was a member of the Bullingdon club that David Cameron and Boris Johnson made famous and in 1987 he became a British citizen, only renouncing it in 2006 when he became minister of defence in Poland. Since he became foreign minister in 2007 Poland has stopped being the angry post-communist child of the EU, when the Kaczynski twins famously demanded voting rights in the Council of Ministers that took into account Poland's population loss in the Second World War, and has gradually become a country with significant diplomatic and economic clout in Europe. This week's Economist has a special report on Poland which is well worth reading.

Sikorski himself is most famous for two speeches about the EU, both made in Britain. In the first he appealed for Germany to do more to solve the Euro crisis by saying that he was the first Polish foreign minister to fear German power less than he feared German inactivity. Given the two countries' history, this was a fairly remarkable statement.

The second was a little less widely reported and focused on Britain. Mr Sikorski told his audience that, while Poland wanted Britain to be part of the EU as a counterweight to the federalising instincts of Germany and the economic protectionism of France, Britain's approach to the EU has made it an unreliable ally. He also said that Britain suffered from a 'false consciousness' where our politics have become much more Eurosceptic even while our country itself has become much more European. Again, the full speech is worth reading.

The point of telling you so much about Radek Sikorski and Poland is that they are naturally sympathetic allies to Britain in Europe. Like Angela Merkel they agree that some reasonable reforms are necessary and desirable and would be key parts of a Northern coalition to help push these through along with other countries like the Netherlands.

But David Cameron has so far proved incapable of making the most out of that possibility because he completely, repeatedly subordinates European policy to party management and appeasing the 100 or so Tory MPs who would vote to leave the EU by sounding 'tough'. The Juncker fight has proved Mr Sikorski completely correct, particularly this quote:

"You know, his whole strategy of feeding them scraps in order to satisfy them is just as I predicted, turning against him; he should have said, fuck off, tried to convince people and isolate [the sceptics]. But he ceded the field to those that are now embarrassing him."

'Standing up for what he believes' made Juncker's appointment inevitable because trying to get as much high profile coverage of his opposition as possible alienated other EU leaders and allowed Juncker to frame it as blackmail. Choosing the Commission President is nowhere near as important or life-changing as Cameron made it appear to be and threatening to leave the EU over it made him sound like one of those Tea Partiers constantly saying Obama is bringing in socialist tyranny: childish. This backlash was apparent in the anti-Cameron reaction of the German press which forced Merkel to publically back Juncker and thus make his nomination the natural choice.

Cameron's EU policy appears to consist of nothing but PR schemes to appease his backbenchers. Actual policy or results don't seem to matter, it's entirely about image. The highest his approval ratings have ever been is shortly after he vetoed the EU fiscal treaty but that proved entirely pointless as the other states simple enacted it as a separate treaty between individual countries rather than part of the EU. But again, actual results are less important than adulatory Daily Mail front pages.

The best case scenario for this - given that Cameron has repeatedly said Britain should stay in the EU and, one senses, would otherwise have been happy not to ever talk about Europe if his party weren't insistent on doing so all the time - is that his approach to the actual 'renegotiation' is a bit more intelligent and is taking place behind the scenes. We have to hope that he's impressing on Angela Merkel et al that much of his bluster is for show and that the referendum will be when Mr Cameron finally stands up to his backbenchers.

There are now several pieces (of which this in the Spectator is a good example) saying that renegotiation is in a better position now because, having been so thoroughly humiliated by the rest of the European Council, Cameron can now claim several IOU's which he can cash in for his reform agenda. I think renegotiation is in a better position but more because several other countries (Germany, Poland, Netherlands, Sweden to name a few) back some sensible reforms than because they feel they owe Cameron a favour. Radek Sikorski is the perfect example of this. 

Many countries share Britain's concerns about Europe being too centralised and would back reasonable reforms but are utterly baffled by the counter productive approach that Cameron has taken on the Juncker question. Hopefully Mr Cameron won't treat the actual renegotiation attempt as an exercise in throwing meat to the likes of Peter Bone who will never be satisfied with anything but a 'Brexit'.