What America Can Do for Europe

From the June 20, 2005 issue: Now is time for a much needed reflection in Washington about the transatlantic relationship. by Gerard Baker, for the Editors 06/20/2005, Volume 010, Issue 38

AS THE DUST SETTLES after the explosive referenda at the heart of the European Union, interested parties from all sides are peering nervously into the crater, trying to figure out what remains of the European "project." E.U. heads of government will meet next weekend to map an immediate route out of the debris. In the Brussels bunker, of course, the familiar instinct has kicked in--pretend nothing has happened. Incredibly, the official plan is that the other E.U. countries should simply carry on ratifying the constitutional treaty that was essentially detonated by the French and Dutch voters.

In the real world, whose characteristics are not readily recognizable to the inhabitants of the bureaucratic fantasy theme park that is the European Commission, serious reconstruction work must now begin. The "No" votes should in fact provide a real opportunity for Europe to revisit the very purpose and meaning of its union. Whatever else they have shown, the popular rejections ought surely to prompt a serious effort both to devolve power from an overweening Brussels and to reconnect the E.U. with the voters of Europe. All that is a question for the Europeans themselves to decide.

The United States, however, has always had a vital national interest in the direction Europe takes, and the events of the last month provide an opportunity for much needed reflection in Washington about the transatlantic relationship. Many of the countries of Europe have been reliable allies over the last 50 years or more. A healthy functioning relationship with this other pole

of Western civilization, with its similar values and objectives, remains important to the United States. But it is time for Washington to reevaluate the best way of bringing that about.

First, the Bush administration should take a vow of silence when it comes to specific discussions of how Europe should develop. Though some may be tempted to indulge in a little schadenfreude at the sight of Jacques Chirac and Gerhard Schröder contemplating the fragments of their superpower ambitions, they should resist it. Even the merest hint in Europe that Washington is actively seeking to undermine European unity would be enough to strengthen it.

But this silence must, at long last, be genuinely symmetrical. The administration should stop forthwith insisting that it believes ever deeper and closer European integration is in America's best interest. This was true in the Cold War, when Western European fragmentation would have been a real problem in the fight against communism. But in the more complex post-9/11 world, in which threat perceptions and strategies differ across the Atlantic and within Europe, it is no longer self-evidently in U.S. interests that the E.U. try to eliminate national policies.

It is hysterical nonsense to suggest that without closer E.U. integration the European nations will fall back into internecine strife. In fact most E.U. members are mature democracies capable of making rational decisions. It is much more likely that top-down efforts to force separate nations into the straitjacket of one sprawling, remote supernation will only heighten national tensions.

Washington, then, should resist the usual attempts of Europe's political elites to enlist it as an enabler in their efforts to bypass the popular will and pursue their own grand visions. Studied neutrality, with a bias towards supporting the will of the peoples of Europe, should now guide the institutional U.S. approach towards the E.U.

Second, Washington should take this opportunity to reassert the primacy of NATO. A not very well hidden aspect of the E.U. integrationists' agenda has long been the supplanting of NATO (a transatlantic alliance that incidentally already includes Turkey) with a specific E.U. defense identity. Despite protestations to the contrary, it was always clear that the prime movers behind this--the French--intended it to become an alternative locus for European nations to pursue their own foreign policy goals. Over time, that would have meant downgrading and eventually destroying the transatlantic institution in which America retains the strongest voice, NATO.

Third, the United States should do more to encourage its friends in Europe. The Bush administration has repeatedly missed opportunities to improve its standing in those countries whose governments remain actively committed to supporting the administration's main foreign policy goals. That may mean giving more concessions than it might otherwise wish to allies such as Tony Blair, in his efforts to produce more generous debt relief for Africa. It may mean a bit more generosity with defense contracts to companies from friendly European nations, or less onerous visa requirements for those countries' students and workers. The United States should actively encourage broader economic cooperation with any European countries that want it--promoting greater flexibility of labor and goods.

Finally, and perhaps most important, the United States should gently urge the Europeans now to address the real challenge they face. Washington has a powerful interest in seeing a strong Europe in the world as a vigorous partner for

American foreign policy objectives. But creating an ever more rococo panoply of bureaucracy and superstatehood is not the way to achieve that.

What the bulk of the E.U. desperately needs is economic growth. Instead of creating hundreds more jobs for Eurocrats, Euro-diplomats, and Euro-politicians with global pretensions, it should be creating millions of real jobs for the growing army of unemployed that truly threatens economic vitality and political stability.

That means real economic reform, including deregulation and more flexible labor markets. There may not be much the United States can do directly to assist in that process except offer encouragement. But making European economic recovery, rather than European integration, a central plank of U.S. foreign policy would be more likely to help produce the kind of Europe that would really be in American interests.

An economically healthy, politically vibrant, wholeheartedly democratic Europe is a vital partner for the United States in the world. The way to achieve such a Europe is not to facilitate the superpower fantasies of its remote and unaccountable political elites, but to empower the European people themselves with free markets and a real voice in the direction of their continent.

My initial reaction is to let them go straight to Hades. On the other hand, it may be in our strategic interest to have a strong Europe in the coming century. One thing the article doesn't address is the effect of continuing Muslim immigration to Europe. It's about as large a phnomenon as the Gothis migrations of the Roman era.

Fine with me. Let's disband NATO and get our troops out of Europe. Eastern Europe would be delighted to give us bases at a fraction of the cost.

Oh, I'm sorry. Did you say that would cause quite a dent in many European economies ? Too bad, can't have it both ways. And while you're at it, how about repaying your WW II loans and Marshall Plan debts - you know, where we saved your bacon the second time while you were beginning your flirtation with socialism ?

OK if i understood correctly the article opening this thread
I am french and i voted "NO" against french and german leadership in EU which is today a socialist leadership(since WW2 those to countries are sick with socialism and pacifism and it's easy to understand why).
The failure of Chirac and Schroder will allow a british,polish...(new Europe)leadership and so less socialism and a stronger alliance with USA for the progress
of freedom and civilization!
Hope!

duplicate:

What America Can Do for Europe
The Weekly Standard | June 20, 2005 | Gerard Baker for the editors
Posted on 06/10/2005 1:42:23 PM PDT by quidnunc
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1420548/posts

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.