"Who?" was the general reaction to the selection of the European Union's first semi-permanent president of the European Council and the high representative for foreign affairs, who took office Tuesday. Although Mr. Herman Van Rompuy, formerly Belgium's prime minister, and Mrs. Catherine Ashton of Britain, holders of the respective posts, are relative unknowns on the international stage, they have long records of domestic success.

The two are capable of navigating the treacherous straits of European politics, but are unlikely "leaders" of Europe. That may satisfy the European heads of state, but it will not realize the desire that the EU play a more prominent role in global politics — at least not yet.

Mr. Van Rompuy is a Flemish Christian Democrat who became prime minister only last December after serving as deputy prime minister and budget minister. He is little known outside Belgium, where politics is a blood sport. His ability to reach the top speaks well to his political skills, most notably his ability to work out compromises.

Mrs. Ashton — Baroness Ashton of Upholland — has been EU trade commissioner for a year during which she concluded the EU-South Korea free trade agreement. A member of the House of Lords, she held a number of junior ministerial posts in Labour governments. She has never held elected office.

Creation of these two jobs was part of the larger project to modernize and streamline the EU and give it a greater impact and personality in global affairs. Yet the selection of these two individuals demonstrates that the tensions that have long dominated European politics — between left and right, between big and small countries, and between the very community itself and its members — have not been resolved.

Note, for example, the political balance between the center-right president and the left-leaning high representative. Not coincidentally, those are also the two biggest groups in the European Parliament. Note, too, the apportioning of the two slots between a small, Euro-friendly power and a larger, Euro-skeptic one. This reflects the concern of smaller countries that picking a council president from a large country would mean the eclipse of the president of the European Commission.

There were also somewhat more mundane political considerations — the usual logrolling. The selection of Mrs. Ashton is seen as the payoff for Britain's withdrawal of its support for former Prime Minister Tony Blair as president. The fact that she is a woman was another key consideration: There is a notable absence of women in top jobs within the EU bureaucracy and that has engendered considerable criticism within the European Parliament.

The most important factor influencing the selection of these two people was the desire of key EU nations to avoid creating competition for their leaders. There were several candidates who were political heavyweights and internationally recognized figures. That shortlist included such luminaries as Mr. Blair and Sweden's former prime minister, Mr. Carl Bildt. They would have projected the European presence on the global stage, as was ostensibly intended by the creation of the two jobs.

But with those names came powerful personalities, and Europe's current crop of national leaders were not prepared to give their predecessors — like Mr. Blair or Mr. Bildt — such a high-profile platform. Indeed, Germany and France could have pressed their own candidates for high representative, but the EU's internal political balancing act would have required each government to put forth a candidate from the opposition — a move neither was prepared to make, especially when they would rather retain the influence to claim key economic portfolios in the European bureaucracy.

In other words, critical European foreign policy decisions will remain the province of national governments rather than the EU as a whole. This tension between national and collective interests continues to dominate European decision-making, despite the long-professed desire to create "a union" with a distinctive personality and thereby assert Europe's presence internationally. Therein lies an important lesson for supporters — and critics — of efforts to create an Asian community.

The appointment of Mr. Von Rompuy and Mrs. Ashton represents Europe's recognition that its future depends on political competence rather than vision, and on the ability to paint on a broad canvas. EU leaders must craft a consensus on their identity before they can hope to express themselves on a bigger stage. Europe must be able to speak with one voice if it is to be credible. Appearances — and egos — are no substitute for substance.

Internal political dynamics remain the most important component of European decision-making, no matter how high the post, or how important the issue. That is a fact of life that Europe's new leaders will need to always keep in mind.