| |
 |
Resurgent Europe unleashes discordant voices
|
David Lee
BUSH'S first overseas trip last week offers him a crash course on an uncertain Europe, in which he has found a different Europe from the one his father dealt with, even a different one from the early Clinton years.
The European allies are criticizing Bush and his agenda with striking candor: Bush's missile defence is "an incredible invitation to nuclear proliferation"; Bush's disregard for the Kyoto protocol on global warming is like "commissioning a study on fire while your house burns down"; Bush's moves to restrict steel imports "smells of protectionism" and so on.
Bush's policies, in particular his trashing of the Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) treaty to establish the large, vague and untested, missile defence scheme is not seen by Europe as an effective way to enhance world security and peace. On the contrary, it may help to produce the threats that they are designed to deter.
The Europeans clearly know the missile defence's potential threat to their security. If they are drawn into the planning on the missile defence shield, they will have to face a totally new security environment in which they must take precautions against a direct confrontation with Moscow, which shows strong opposition to the missile defence plan and threatens to strengthen its nuclear arsenal.
Bush's environmental policy has poisoned the atmosphere of transatlantic relations. The Europeans favour the international Kyoto pact, while Bush has abandoned it as scientifically unrealistic. The EU has been developing a relatively comprehensive sustainable development strategy intended to integrate ecological, economic and social issues in European policymaking to promote sustainable development.
The greatest threat to transatlantic relations comes from both American unilateralism and European resentment. US policy has always been somewhat unilateral. The Bush administration has been extremely provocative. The Europeans are increasingly wary of US inclination for the unilateral use of its military and economic power. Meanwhile, Bush's foreign policy seems to be ambiguous and somewhat misleading. While proclaiming that he values transatlantic relations, Bush has been espousing a go-it-alone unilateralism since he came into office. Bush's missile defence plan and environment policy symbolize an increasingly unilateralist and isolated America.
Devoid of a common enemy after the Cold War, Europe and the USA are further apart today than ever. Their rifts go deep, the Europeans and Americans have increasingly different attitudes on many international issues, from globalization to the environment to technology. Besides the US's missile defence and environmental policy, Europe is also aghast at the following issues: Bush's dismissive and disengaged attitude toward the Korean Peninsula rapprochement and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict; repeated expressions of a desire to extricate US troops from the war-torn Balkans, and the punitive tough talk regarding Russia and China.
Europe has discovered a new confidence and sense of independence with the development of its euro-currency and, hard on its heels, the European defence initiative. Over the past decade Europe has been coming together in union. This process, important and heroic, has been a disaster for its relations with the USA. On issue after issue it seems to search for a way that it can differentiate itself from Washington.
Clearly the Bush administration has been taken aback by the strength of European resistance to its policy making efforts. Bush's hopes for healing transatlantic rifts go beyond specific issues such as trade, environment and missile defense. The Europeans want to promote transatlantic co-operation on several fields -- the Middle East, the Korean Peninsula and the fight against AIDS and other diseases in the world's poorest nations. The EU wants to realize its dream of strengthening its forces and establishing a new all-European Rapid Reaction Force. It has been undertaking diplomatic intermediary initiative in the Democratic peoples' Republic of Korea and in the Middle East without consultation with Washington.
European opposition is not going to melt away; if anything, it is going to become more severe and more independently minded as time goes on. It may be true that common security and other interests will maintain the alliance despite the differences in the short run. However, if the USA consistently pursues its narrow interests without paying regard to European desires, the transatlantic gap may enlarge in the long run. The next decade is likely to see considerable sparring between the world's remaining superpower and its European allies.
International suspicion and condemnation regarding US arrogance have important implications. Recent votes in the United Nations cost the USA its traditional seats on the Commission on Human Rights and on the International Narcotics Control Board. America's international isolation is growing.
A decent respect for the opinions of mankind is definitely a virtue. If there is one thing more dangerous than American unilateralism, it is an America that believes itself unconcerned by, and impervious from, the problems of the rest of the world.
|
|
|
|
