Posted on 04/20/2003 10:36:42 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach
n November 1956, at the height of the Suez crisis, Prime Minister Anthony Eden of Britain telephoned his French counterpart, Guy Mollet. Under intense pressure from Washington, he explained, Britain was withdrawing from the British-French force that had just invaded Egypt. France would have to do likewise.
Mollet was stunned; the decision by the Americans and the British had been taken without his knowledge and would be especially humiliating for France, already facing an armed revolt in its Algerian colony.
But Konrad Adenauer, the German chancellor, who was visiting him at the time, sought to lift his spirits by pointing to the prospects for a future European community of nations. Don't worry, he assured him, "Europe will be your revenge."
Forty-seven years later, after another Middle Eastern war, Europe has just signed a treaty in Athens celebrating the formal accession of 10 countries and 75 million new citizens. The European Union now comprises 25 member states reaching from Portugal to Estonia. It is the largest and richest bloc of nation-states in the world, collaborating closely on an extensive range of economic, social and legal practices.
Europe's influence should be boundless. As Prime Minister Bertie Ahern of Ireland expressed it, paraphrasing Archimedes: "Give me a lever long enough and a firm place and I will move the world. The European Union is a firm place to stand."
What the union lacks, of course, is Archimedes' lever. Without it, Adenauer's proposed "revenge" for the French humiliation at Suez will always be incomplete. The war in Iraq has reminded Europe — France and Germany especially — of the difficulty of countering America's armed reach with so-called soft power alone.
True, the union has underlying strengths with which to offset America's imperial might. It is much closer to Africa, the Middle East and Central Asia and has a better grasp of the sensibilities of these regions: the French, like the Russians, have a large and fast-growing Muslim population. The European social model is far more appealing to most of the rest of the world than the hard-edged "American way of life," and Europe's long experience with transnational institutions makes it a model international citizen. Globalization, which has increased international apprehension about American motives, is in some ways working to Europe's advantage. And while it is true that Europeans today abhor war, only in contemporary Washington is this widely viewed as a cultural shortcoming.
Nevertheless, from the beginning, most politicians regarded European unity not as an end in itself, but rather as a means to other, more parochial ends. At every stage in the 50-year history of European cooperation, the priority has been the protection and advancement of members' separate national interests.
Generally, this has worked well, particularly for the earliest participants in the club (France, West Germany, Italy and the Benelux countries). But as the club expanded, from 6 countries to 9, then 12, then 15 and now 25, it has become an unwieldy bureaucratic organization with a geometrically expanding range of conflicting regional priorities. For a single country like the United States, power increases with size. But for Europe, growth may be a source of weakness.
Thus many European citizens regard the arrival of new members from the former Soviet bloc with ambivalence: the eastern regions are poor, and they will draw scarce resources away from erstwhile beneficiaries in the west. Their commitment to Europe appears soft: in a recent referendum in traditionally pro-European Hungary, the proposal to join the union secured 84 percent of the votes — but on a turnout of well under half the electorate. And thanks to the United States, the "new" Europeans are now at odds with their future partners.
The United States has leaned heavily on Latvia and Malta, as well as on Romania, Bulgaria and others, to break with the European Union's support for the International Criminal Court. Washington also successfully urged Eastern Europeans to adopt a sympathetic position on the war in Iraq.
In the long run, these American maneuvers are likely to have little impact: no amount of flattery from Donald Rumsfeld can compete with European Union subsidies and access to European markets. In the meantime, however, Eastern Europe's excited forays into international affairs have done little to dispel Western European doubts about their new partners.
And the fact remains that America has the guns and Europe doesn't. Russia and Britain are Europe's only two significant military powers, but for different reasons they add little to the continent's collective strength.
Britain was and is America's only military ally in Europe (of Spain and Italy, the less said the better), but not even Tony Blair will be able to keep the British in America's camp if George Bush does not move swiftly and convincingly to address the Israel-Palestine imbroglio. Few think he will, despite modest pressure last week on Israel to respond more positively to the prospect of peace talks.
So Britain's future undoubtedly lies in Europe. But the British have always opposed precisely the sort of close-knit European unity that would be required for European "soft" power to speak with one voice. Like Russia, another country on Europe's edge with military ambitions and extra-European interests, Britain will always have trouble being wholeheartedly "European."
To anyone familiar with Europe's history, the European Union is a miracle. But it is what it is: a variable geometry of old and new states held together by enlightened self-interest. It is also very different from America, and the Atlantic separates two markedly contrasting "Wests." Europeans cannot alter United States policy; only American voters can do that. And, paradoxically, Europe's greatest weakness lies in the very source of its achievement. The European Union is the product of nothing more than a treaty, and treaties can be undone. As Charles de Gaulle observed 40 years ago, "Treaties, you see, are like girls and roses: they last while they last."
Yes, Marxism is so appealing. That's why nobody tries to get into the US.
The NY Slimes has a one-track mind: appeasing the Arabs.
LOL!!! Yes, doesn't that line just jump off the page for comic relief?! That must be why nobody ever tries to get into this country, and everyone in the world is trying to get into Europe. (guffaw ache!)
This article wasn't written by a commie, nooooo...
Yes, there is so much economic opportunity and wealth there in Africa, Central Asia and the Middle East (with the exception of oil of course)
and has a better grasp of the sensibilities of these regions: the French, like the Russians, have a large and fast-growing Muslim population.
And this is a positive?
The European social model is far more appealing to most of the rest of the world than the hard-edged "American way of life," and Europe's long experience with transnational institutions makes it a model international citizen. Globalization, which has increased international apprehension about American motives, is in some ways working to Europe's advantage. And while it is true that Europeans today abhor war, only in contemporary Washington is this widely viewed as a cultural shortcoming.
Hmmmm, Europe’s long history of anti-Semitism, still true to this day, fits into this view how exactly?
Yes, and we are so aware how the Europeans abhor war…..
And of course, unemployment and economic prosperity in the EU is far ahead of the US. Just ask all those people looking for work in Berlin and Paris.
This guy is delusional.
I agree!
The European Union is the product of nothing more than a treaty, and treaties can be undone.
He supports my conclusion -- The EU can't be kept together over time!
Cute quote. But don't bet on it. As Robert E. Lee learned, sometimes these things are tough to get out of, once you agree to get in.
This is its weakness and the flaw which will doom the EU.
| This guy is delusional.
So here's a list of all the wonderful benefits of socialism, which just everyone wants to be part of. Why, any day now, this awesome collection of huge economies that range from stagnating decrepitude all the way to poor, will... well, nothing really. Never mind. I found this especially funny:
What? If they could have, France and Germany would have gone to war with the United States to protect Saddam Hussein? Well, maybe you're right... if the author thinks that, he is delusional. This is an especially stupid statement:
That's true, but not for the reason the author thinks. One of the people who sees Europe's unwillingness to take up arms as a benefit is Osama bin Laden... or whoever has taken his place. Osama was looking for a "weak horse" with which to humiliate the West. He thought he'd found one in Bill Clinton's America. But Bill Clinton's America is no more, and Osama found out the hard way that he needs a new weak horse. Who better to humiliate next than the toothless nags of Old Europe? |
Just so you know, Tony Judt is not a staffer for the Times. He is a professor of European Studies at New York University and a prominent left-leaning commentator and writer on the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. He spent his youth on an Israeli kibbutz. As leftists go, he is one of the more hardheaded and respectable. He seldom descends all the way into la-la land, as so many of them do, but he knows how to shave his points to benefit socialist conceits, as you rightly point out in your riposte.
This is the central thesis of why the EU will fail. As an analogy, imagine a large, rusty cargo ship belching black smoke as it limps into harbor. (That is the current "Old Europe" described by Rummy in the run-up to war.) All these new, minor Nation States being added to the EU are like a bunch of Cuban refugee rafts tied off around the hull of the leaky, old ship spewing burnt diesel as it looks for safe harbor. The harbor they need is a Free Market Economy, yet the captains of the old tub know only the old failed way of socialism.
The rocky shores are ahead for this flotilla of failed ideologies for no captain aboard that group of sinking ships knows the way to reach the docks in a capitailst world. Drifting freely can be better than tying off to a sinking ship.
"...has underlying strengths with which to offset America's imperial might."
Oh? And those are?
"It is much closer to Africa, the Middle East and Central Asia"
Yeah, that's it guys. Whoever is closest to Africa wins!
"the French, like the Russians, have a large and fast-growing Muslim population"
Dang, where can we get one of those? Just what we always wanted...
"Europe's long experience with transnational institutions"
Like the Roman Empire, Napoleon, the Third Reich, etc
"makes it a model international citizen."
Model of something, anyway.
"an unwieldy bureaucratic organization with a geometrically expanding range of conflicting regional priorities"
Just the ticket!
"no amount of flattery from Donald Rumsfeld can compete with European Union subsidies"
Send 'em a check, Gerhard! Nobody can resist a check. Pay Danegeld, it always works...
"America has the guns and Europe doesn't"
How clever! They've got us outmaneuvered now! We are so doomed!
"of Spain and Italy, the less said the better"
Whoops, Europe just got cut off at the knees.
"not even Tony Blair will be able to keep the British in America's camp"
Nobody's been able to get them out, since James Madison was president.
"Russia, another country on Europe's edge with military ambitions and extra-European interests"
What an asset! And all we have is Canada. No military ambitions. No extra-North American interests. Dang. Well, both are cold anyway. Maybe that'll slow us down.
"To anyone familiar with Europe's history, the European Union is a miracle"
Well, if its a miracle its a short chamber Boxer-Henry .45 caliber miracle. If that is too obscure, US and British arms created a free and united Europe, not mutual hand holding, Gallic pride, and agricultural subsidies. If that is still too obscure or you don't get the connection, try 'the wogs begin at Calais.'
"only American voters can do that"
Checkmate! They have us right where they want us, hoping against hope that we ourselves vote for leftists like them in place of patriots like W.
And France with their Muslim population and attitudes are all set to be the weak horse!
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.
He's not delusional, he's a salesman. As a member of the staff of the New York Times, his job is to peddle socialism as a higher form of government, with its ultimate expression in global government.