The
Euro changes
the chemistry of Europe
By JONATHAN
POWER
December 27, 2001
LONDON - The age of Euro-pessimism is dead. From January
1st on every child in the countries of European Union,
bar those in Britain, Sweden, and Denmark, will hold in
their hands the first coins of their future - a Europe
without borders, barriers and, most important, wars. Of
course, it can all be undone, but not in a moment.
The common currency binds in a most extraordinary way
the destiny of the peoples of this peninsular protruding
from the landmass of Asia. If culturally it is a potage
of languages, peoples and traditions (and long may it be
so!), politically it is no longer a moveable feast of
sovereign states whose borders are battered and changed
by continuous argument and warfare.
I've spent my Christmas in a small out of the way
Spanish village where I once briefly lived whilst writing
a book. Over coffee the headmaster of the village school
reflected on the equanimity with which Spaniards were
accepting the end of the peseta, one of the older
currencies of Europe and the arrival of the Euro.
"Antagonism, violent competition, war - there is no
future for Spain in that. All our recent wars have ended
in defeat for Spain. Our civil war tore us horribly
apart. We have to be bound closely with the rest of
Europe".
"Perhaps this is one of the reasons Britain has stayed
out," I ventured in reply. "We have won all our wars in
the last century. And when at the end of the Second World
War Britain was more or less offered the leadership of a
united Europe we refused the offer, and still does. But
the British too will now feel the irresistible pull of
the Euro."
In his profound book of a decade ago, "Barbarian
Sentiments", my fellow columnist William Pfaff wrote:
"For four hundred years European civilization has
dominated the world - for better or for worse. It is
convenient and flattering for Americans to assume that
this is all over, but it is very rash to do so".
"Americans", he wrote, "tend to think of Europe as a
'used-up civilization'".
It was a prescient remark written at a time when the
European economy was not at its best, when America seemed
to be at the pinnacle of influence with its victory in
the Cold War followed by its swift defeat of Saddam
Hussein and its promise by its Secretary of State James
Baker to quickly find an end to the Israeli-Palestinian
dispute, at that time the only serious blot on the
geo-political landscape.
But, a decade on, it is Europe that appears resurgent,
more controlled in its political passions, more wisely
aware of what can and cannot be done in the world
outside. While individually the West European countries
have long been major economic powers, now collectively
they are an industrial giant, equal to the United States
and double that of Japan. Militarily, they have chosen to
play second fiddle to the U.S., which is no bad thing,
although the growth of a separate European defence
identity and a distinct foreign policy, if slow to
mature, are all but inevitable.
Indeed in foreign policy, if one leaves out Britain,
there is already a common identity, most clearly seen
when the policies are compared with Washington's. Most
important, for the first time since World War 2, Europe
feels confident to be with or apart from America,
depending on the issues. The coming of the Euro can only
drive this process forward even faster.
Much of the European debate on a day-to-day basis is
an argument among specialists. But not this one. The Euro
is tangible unity and tangible momentum. And the next
historic step that will be felt by the man in the street
is already foreseen- the entry of the former communist
countries of Eastern Europe in four or five years'
time.
Yet there will be a piece missing - Russia. And this,
more than Islamic fundamentalism, is the issue that
fascinates and absorbs contemporary European thinkers and
policy makers. Indeed, absorbing Russian into the
European Union is more important than creating a "united
states of Europe", which according to the older
generation of Europeans (and still the Germans) is the
ultimate goal.
These two goals are clearly now in conflict. There is
no way that Russia could be a member of Europe that was
united politically, as well as economically and
financially, without creating a sovereign single
territory which would be too large to be governable by a
single regime.
Russia belongs in Europe - its artistic and
philosophical traditions point it that way, and its
intellectual talent would be a precious contribution. To
keep it out would be to leave a dangerous loose canon on
the deck. As with Germany, it needs to be tied down in a
wider body. Yet it is sufficient if it is part of what
Europe is now, a loose political coalition (with a loose
security consciousness) but with strong economic,
financial and environmental integration.
There does not have to be a "united states" of Europe
for a powerful "Europe" to exist. The Euro has seen to
that.
I can be reached by phone +44
7785 351172 and e-mail: JonatPower@aol.com
Copyright © 2001 By
JONATHAN POWER
Tell a friend about this article
Send to:
From:
Message and your name
 
|