Chris Patten

Europeans - including the British - have got used to the American gibe that we are trying to be an economic superpower while at the same time being a foreign policy and defence midget.

But amid signs of a new enthusiasm in France and Germany for a common European Defence Force there are equally familiar signs of alarm in Washington.

The row is over whether a rival to NATO is being created, with America's ambassador to NATO speaking of great dangers to the transatlantic relationship.

The EU's Commissioner for External Affairs, Chris Patten suggested to Gavin Esler that Europe really did have to do more on defence if it wants to be listened to.

CHRIS PATTEN:
EU COMMISSIONER FOR EXTERNAL AFFAIRS:
I think we have to do more in the security field, for two reasons. First of all, in order to correct the impression that the Americans have of us, not entirely unfairly, that we are free-riders or free- loaders. That we are prepared to lecture them, to read them sermons, but aren't actually prepared sufficiently to pull our weight. Now, that is an exaggerated criticism when you look at the number of UN peacekeeping operations and so on around the world that we are involved in, but nevertheless there is a bit of truth in it. But secondly, there will be occasions - it was the case in the Congo, where NATO doesn't want to get involved. It's very important that we Europeans should be able to get involved.

GAVIN ESLER:
The other argument is that, if it is a credible European force, it would inevitably be a rival to NATO, because otherwise it simply wouldn't be credible. It would be doing the things that NATO doesn't want to do in a different way?

CHRIS PATTEN:
Well, I think here the Americans don't make it easier for Mr Blair, who I happen to think is winning the argument in the European Union. The Pentagon only in the last few days has been leaking that Britain is going soft on the red lines which we have put around some of the issues, which I will come to in a moment. The Pentagon is to diplomacy what the chainsaw is to pedicure. They don't make it easier for their best allies. So put that on one side. Put on one side the fact that Mr Rumsfeld talks not about allies but about a toolbox, and speaking as a Brit I don't much like being thought of as part of a toolbox! Mr Blair has been saying, "Look, it's perfectly reasonable for us as Europeans to do more for ourselves. And we can plan strategically for doing more for ourselves." But we don't need our own command structure. If we set up our own command structure for Europe, it's bound to undermine what NATO is doing. He has been arguing - and I think, frankly, he is winning the argument - that we should use the five existing military commands that there are in Europe, based on national forces, and I think he can hold the line on that.

GAVIN ESLER:
Isn't the problem for Britain that the Pentagon consistently says Europe must do more for its defence, and every time Europe tries to do more for its defence the Pentagon says, "Not that more, a different kind of more"?

CHRIS PATTEN:
Precisely. That is part of the problem. There is a certain schizophrenia in the Pentagon. They want Europe to do more, but when it does try to do more they start giving the impression that they think we are getting uppity. If the Americans want us - as they should - to do more for our own defence, then they have to accept that that gives us a rather larger voice in the partnership.

GAVIN ESLER:
In terms of that, isn't Britain's role in any future European Union military force likely to be almost wielding a practical beater, because the French are saying it would be incoherent without the British. The British are saying it wouldn't be possible to undermine NATO. In which case future British prime ministers would have a veto effectively in the use of this force?

CHRIS PATTEN:
Without Britain and France working together, frankly, European initiatives have great difficulty in getting off the ground. Germany matters as well. Others make a contribution, but the two keys - whether it's military or diplomatic - are Britain and France. I think when we do see eye to eye, when we do work together, it's in our mutual interests to do so.

GAVIN ESLER:
Isn't that the core problem, however? That the biggest problem of our day, what to do about Iraq, we still, Europeans do not speak with one voice?

CHRIS PATTEN:
Yes, it is a problem. I am not sure that it's very surprising, because I think that Iraq went right to the heart of some of the biggest issues on the international stage. Now, the French and the Germans, and many people in this country, think that the intervention in Iraq was a war of choice rather than a war of necessity. They now recognise that, whether or not we agreed with the intervention, we all have a stake in seeing a stable and democratic Iraq emerging. They may not be very confident about the way that process is being handled, but I hope - I hope - that we have all learned from this terrible divisive row that we do make more of a difference, that we are partners who are listened to more when we speak as one.

GAVIN ESLER:
Just a final thought. As an educated observer in these matters, what do you make of what's going on in the Conservative Party?

CHRIS PATTEN:
Ah! The Conservative Party! Well, I have been watching from a distance and I just feel deeply saddened by the present situation. The Conservative Party in the '90s got into the habit of tearing itself apart and it seems to have some difficulty in shaking that habit. It's still high on it. So long as that's the situation, it's going to find it very difficult to be a credible opposition.

GAVIN ESLER:
Do you think Mr Duncan Smith should go?

CHRIS PATTEN:
I don't think anybody - I don't think a combination of Disraeli and Churchill could run the Conservative Party effectively in the present circumstances! Thank you very much.

This transcript was produced from the teletext subtitles that are generated live for Newsnight. It has been checked against the programme as broadcast, however Newsnight can accept no responsibility for any factual inaccuracies. We will be happy to correct serious errors.