Europe
must learn to say "no"
to the U.S.
By
Jonathan
Power
August 2, 2002
LONDON - What Europe finds difficult to realize is
that it is already a superpower and is able on most of
the things that count to say "no" to America if it
chooses. There does not have to be a "United States of
Europe" for a powerful Europe to exist - the common
market culminating in the final step towards the creation
of the Eurocurrency on January1st has seen to that. It
may not, and will not ever, have the hardware to compete
in the military stakes, but its economic and political
muscle already give it the power to determine what goes
on in large parts of the world, even if it means flying
in the face of Washington. Yet there seems a crisis of
confidence that inhibits Europe from taking the next
steps forward. Indeed if anything it is losing
position.
Two months ago George Bush went to Moscow and seemed
able with a few deft ploys to take Moscow out of the
European arena, where it had long aspired to be, and
engage it in a bilateral meeting of the minds with
Washington. Bush's embrace of Putin will do wonders for
Russia's ongoing economic recovery and will enable Putin
to continue to deny precious government expenditures to
his military. In return Putin's embrace of Bush will do
wonders for Bush's foreign policy whether it be his
support of Ariel Sharon's government in Israel, his aim
to topple Saddam Hussein or indeed his bloody mindedness
over issues like the International Criminal Court or the
Kyoto global warming treaty, which Russia has never been
enthusiastic about.
The Europeans are finding themselves sidelined, just
when they should have been gearing themselves up to pick
up the ball that Helmut Kohl and François
Mitterand kicked up field, for welcoming a reformed
Russia into a close orbit with the European Union,
perhaps even one day as a member. So absorbed have the
Europeans been with the complexities of dealing with the
coming admission of eastern European members - which has
thrown up not just the expected economic and financial
problems but the fundamental question of the constitution
of a united Europe - that thinking about Russia has got
pushed down to the bottom of the agenda. So has thinking
about the bad world outside Europe. At last, last week
there was a glimmer of European public angst (there has
been a lot of it in private) at what Washington was
giving its backing to in the Middle East. Prime Minister
Sharon's decision to bomb the apartment complex in which
lived a Palestinian militant, killing not only him, his
family but other families with children too, was met with
the normally cautious Swedish foreign minister, Anna
Lindh's comment, "a crime against international law".
Javier Solana, the European Union's foreign policy chief,
known for his conviction that Europe must work closely
with the U.S., laid it on the line. "This extra judicial
killing", he called it.
If Europe does truly feel that Sharon, with Bush
behind him, is systematically destroying any hope of a
Middle East settlement between Jew and Arab and if it
really is convinced (Tony Blair apart) that a war with
Iraq is both unnecessary, counterproductive and deeply
destabilising, as many of its senior policy makers (even
British generals) say in private, then it should use its
strength as a superpower to try and stop these policies
in their track and to take the lead with new ones. It
does not need its own military power. It just needs its
own alternative policies.
Europe can quietly tell Washington that it will say
"no" to the U.S. if Washington requests the use of Nato
assets in an attack on Iraq. Neither will it help with
the war's enormous cost. This will hurt America but it
dare not retaliate because in a post Cold War world, when
Europe no longer has enemies to the east, Nato is vastly
more important to the U.S than to Europe. For Washington
Nato legitimises America's military presence on the
Eurasian landmass. At a minimum a European "no" would
delay an American attack for a long period; probably it
would sabotage it.
Europe likewise needs to cut across American diplomacy
in the Middle East. If America will not immediately call
an international conference to discuss a peace treaty
Europe must do so. The terms of a fair settlement were
worked out in detail by negotiators from Israel and
Palestine at the Taba conference, held a couple of months
after the breakdown of Camp David. Europe, if it chooses,
has an immense amount of leverage on Israel, as its
principal trading partner. Even if the attempt to get a
peace conference off the ground failed because of the
intransigence of Israel and the U.S. it would send a
clear signal both to Arab governments and their peoples
that a major part of the Western world is prepared to
take some important risks for a fair peace. This is
important if the present silent majority of al Qaeda
sympathisers in the Arab world are to be made to realize
that the "Christian", infidel world is not so one tracked
as it has been brainwashed to believe.
The more Europe prevaricates, refusing to grow into
its responsibilities as a superpower, the more it is in
danger of losing its appeal to Russia but, even more
important, the chance history and destiny have bestowed
upon it of heading off the twin catastrophes of U.S.
policy in the most dangerous corner of our planet.
I can be reached by phone +44
7785 351172 and e-mail: JonatPower@aol.com
Copyright © 2002 By
JONATHAN POWER
Follow this
link to read about - and order - Jonathan Power's book
written for the
40th Anniversary of
Amnesty International
"Like
Water on Stone - The Story of Amnesty
International"
Tell a friend about this article
Send to:
From:
Message and your name
 
|