RSS
Using PayPal
CAN THE PATHETIC STOCK VALUE OF TRANSATLANTIC RELATIONS BE IMPROVED?
Share / Recommend - Comment - Print - Sunday, Nov 28 2004, 9:59AM
I gave a talk at the Bucerius Law School in Hamburg, Germany a few days ago and was impressed with the city and the quality of thinking demonstrated by the students.
While my talk was billed as one in a series looking at transatlantic challenges and America's relationship with Europe, I focused on the foreign policy impacts of the election, blind spots of this administration -- particularly in the economic arena, and pondered whether this administration would be able to proactively avert some of the crises visible ahead -- or whether the U.S would be driven more by ad hoc responses to shocks. My comments about transatlantic relations were built around these three principle concerns.
I think that my talk was well-received, at least in the emails I have received from some as follow-ups. However, there was a yearning among some for greater commentary on the transatlantic relationship itself rather than on broader challenges that lie beyond the classic contours of EU-US relations.
I guess I'm one of those who is not overly sentimental about transatlantic relations and don't try to prop them up for the sake of doing so -- but think that strong EU-US relations make sense because of the myriad problems facing Americans and Europeans elsewhere in the world.
America's blindspot about the current account deficit and generally poor economic policy management will harm European interests; our ability or inability to proceed in a new direction in the Israeli-Palestinian standoff after Arafat's death is also of paramount European interest; Iran's acquisition of nuclear weapon systems is of major interest to both Europe and the U.S.; China's emergence as a responsible global power that works collaboratively with other nations is of consequence to Americans and Europeans. I could continue to draw a very long list of challenges that we each face -- but there is this demand frequently for navel-gazing at the health or lack thereof of transatlantic relations.
There are lots of folks out there who can provide better material on whether Europe will hold together or fragment, or whether it is in America's interests to encourage or discourage European cohesion. I'm one who believes that Charles Kupchan is probably right and that European and American interests are incrementally diverging -- and that Europe will ultimately spend time and political capital trying to constrain American power rather than to unite in common purpose with it to achieve noble ends.
This will take time though, and within the near to mid-term, Europe and the United States have far greater common problems to work on if they so choose -- but few lie within the dynamics of the transatlantic relationship itself and really lie in challenges in the Middle East, in Asia, in global financial and currency policy, with international development policy, and so on.
I refer folks back to Brzezinski's proposal on revitalizing the transatlantic relationship. He proposes three efforts that can give new purpose to the transatlantic relationship that involve establishing a Palestinian state, internationalizing (and de-Americanizing) troop presence in Iraq, and providing incentives to curb Iran's nuclear ambitions.
This is the kind of thinking that will pump up the current pathetic stock value of the US-EU relationship. Brzezinski's plan is but one that does a worthy job of finding important tasks that American and European interests can become co-entangled and converge in common interest again. This kind of effort is probably the right kind of habit to re-learn.
Thanks to the students and faculty at Bucerius Law School, the only private law school in Germany, and particularly to the school CEO, Markus Baumanns and Transatlantic Forum advisor Michael Werz for inviting me.
Thanks also to Emily and Martin for the walking tour of Hamburg.
For those of you who can read German, if you scroll down a bit on this German web magazine, ChangeX, there is an article about think tanks in America and the New America Foundation written by Joerg Hackeschmidt.
-- Steve Clemons
« Previous Article - AL QAEDA 2.O: THE CONFERENCE» Next Article - HAPPY BIRTHDAY TO TALKING POINTS MEMO
Steve, many of us grew up over-exposed to Europe, went there after high school, and just always took Europe for granted in some ways. NATO made Europe a partner and supplicant of American interests. What I really like about this piece that you have written is that it implies a respect for European competencies and interests as well as a respect for common pursuits between America and the United States. I have heard you comment on C-Span that Americans respect Europe more today than they do Japan because, as you put it, "Europe both collaborates and confronts America and that has made the stock value of Europe increase in the eyes of many Americans." I think that you said that the last thing Japan challenged America on was over whaling, and you drew a lot of laughs, but I took your point seriously and thought, as usual, you have important insights about these foreign policy matters.
Thanks for a piece that got me thinking this morning.
I can't imagine that C-Span won't cover your al Qaeda conference. It's simply the most amazing looking conference I have seen in a long time -- and for free?
You are a great public servant -- and I feel like we should be paying you.
d.
Steve, I agree with you that America's and Europe's interests are diverging, but i believe much more quickly than you might think. The latest trade agreement amongst EU members clearly takes them a step closer to being a true United States of Europe. As the value of the dollar continues to drop, look for China, Japan, and India to look much more to Europe in terms of mutual trade.
We are in the process of seeding economic superpower status to the EU. At some point, it will become clear to them that we are no longer a reliable military ally.
Mark
greatwhitebear.blogspot.com
I am certainly not qualified to speak with authority on the details of European motives and goals in foreign policy, and American foreign policy today is so apparently dysfunctional that coherent discussion seems impossible.
It does seem to me, though, that the two largest issues we will face in the coming century are scarcity of resources, particularly oil, and the rise of Chinese hegemony.
From that viewpoint, the reunification of American and European goals in foreign policy would be most advantageous to both parties. Neither alone is large enough nor strong enough to withstand what is coming and remain in any position of influence or power.
Together, we just might have the critical mass in population, industrial base, geographic expanse, economic heft and technology to hold our own and create a counter-weight to China.
I believe this is essential, because if the world chafes now under the hegemony of American superpower, it will certainly find Chinese domination of world affairs far less congenial.
Steve, you hit the nail on the head. We need less sentimentalism about what the transatlantic relationship used to be and more decent thinking about what vital tasks can be collaboratively addressed by the US and Europe. I've been to several meetings on Transatlantic Relations, and they are STALE because few are thinking beyond the tit for tat idiocy between Bush and Chirac or are failing to give Europe credit for the things it deserves. The point is, as Max says, that there is a big agenda out there for both -- driven by NEED and VITAL INTERESTS that is not just whimsical preference. We won't work together on everything -- but working together on something, anything, would be a good beginning to getting Transatlantic relations back on a reasonably good track.
The Europeans are enjoying sniping at America too much lately, me thinks - and they think we have a price to pay for our behavior. I don't think that we have much near term hope for relations across the Atlantic. Good post though.
Excellent post. I like the way you focus on vital interests that could bring the US and Europe closer together rather than focus on sentimentalism. Focusing on issues might force both sides to get real about our common interests while allowing for the changes necessary in the relationship to fit today's (not the Cold War's) issues.
I think them there Europeans had just better forget about the unnecessary, illegal, and immoral war we foisted upon the world under false pretenses, and also forget about all the innocent Iraqis we are responsible for killing. All this is in the past, water under the bridge, and why cry over spilt milk. Its done and we can't undo it. The American people for the most part have forgotten how our nation was led into war and how it quickly became a calamity. Why can't the Europeans do the same and we can both carry on together like we did before all this Iraq mess happened. Sometimes it is best just to have a short memory and move on with things that matter at present rather than harp on bloody mistakes in the recent past.
There's not much point in talking about reviving the trans-Atlantic relationship as long as the Republicans belong to the fantasy-based community.
The neocons and their fundamentalist allies do not want peace in the Middle East. Perle, Feith, and Wurmser talk of Israel "transcending" the Arabs, and see peace as appeasement.
On issues like AIDS, global warming, and weapons inpectors, evidence doesn't matter to the Republicans. And who would be stupid enough to sign a treaty with us, knowing the Republicans will unsign it the minute they get into power?
How much was Powell able to smooth over some of the ruffled feathers in Europe? What will happen when Rice delivers marching orders from Mr Bush to the Europeans?
It was less than a decade ago that President Clinton received a hero's welcome in the Balkins. The tide of refugees that threatened to overrun Italy was stemmed. N Ireland was negotiated. Progress was being made in Palestine and Israel. A progressive American President was working with Europe to try and improve the lives of all the world's inhabitants.
Today, the US is only looking out for its own limited self interests and the interests of the Bush Administration cronies. Europe has gone from having a partner in enlightened self-interest to having to deal with a ruthless, divide and conquer politician, reminiscent of JR Ewing from the TV Soap, Dallas.
Europe cannot have friendly dealings with a JR Ewing who is always out to profit at their expense. The European strategy has to be to work with other like-minded governments throughout the world and do everything possible to marginalize America, undercut its influence and deflate its power.
With Putin in Russia and Bush in America, Europe will have to find a way to insulate itself from these disruptive and divisive forces. It is no longer in the interest of Europe to work with America because America only supports its own narrow self interest. In the limited instances where American and European interests coincide, there can be cooperation. However, the Europeans are very wary about dealing with an American administration that does not share their goals.
Reader Comments (9) - post a comment