The Real War: United States Vs. European Union

Well, actually it has been France and Germany (the latter with the most borders to the new countries), who especially wanted them to be integrated.

IMO, Poles, Czechs and Bulgarians gradually get fed up with paternalism of the "Old Europe".

You know this from whom?

From their actions in the dispute of France and USA on the war issues. They preferred to express their opinion openly, and not just to please Parisian heirs of Bonaparte.

mama - Only you know the breadth of your personal sources. I'm inclined to infer from the positions you take and statements you make that they are not very broad--opinion-wise. MY INFERRENCE COULD VERY WELL BE WRONG.

As to the "value" of polls. I find it interesting how many people like to point to polls when the polling supports their own position, and to decry the questionable accuracy of polls when the polling does not. (I am not aware of you personally flip-flopping on the value of polls. I am just bringing up a tangential thought.)

I understand that Germany and France are the champions of European union -both economical and political-. I think they realized that such a union provides the best way to deterr unilateral US hegemony. And a strong, big, fully integrated EU is in their interest (I believe it is in the world's interest too).

Now. Why should the ex-satellites of the Soviet bloc be interested in such a union? On the economical-trade side, of course they are. On the political side, they have their doubts about suburdinating to what they probably see as European powers.

So, most Eastern Europeans, IMO, rather than support the US adventure, want to show the rest of Europe that they're not automatically in the French-German camp.

Well, although the EU population could rise by over 25% to 500 million with the first wave of accessions, its total GDP will grow by no more than 5%. Notwithstanding the enormous efforts undertaken by these countries, their integration into existing programmes and structures will be a very delicate task. [from the official EU-side http://europa.eu.int/scadplus/leg/en/lvb/e40001.htm ]


steissd

Foolowing your thought that would mean, the candidates want to be associated with the US better than become a member of the EU?

Mr. Hinteler, not a bad idea. I do not know whether the USA is interested to build a block of their supporters in Europe...

You know the idea behind the EU, don't you steissd?

tress - you could very well be right in your inference.

Mama - I am humbled by your willingness to consider it a possibility. I hope I am half as open to considering where my own point of view may be suspect.

Regards,
TW

An idea behind EU is building a counterbalance to the USA influence, IMO.

steissd

Walter,

Of course the European Union has had strategic objectives since the inception of the Common Market.
The Common Market, IMO, in the beginning meant that Europe could stand alone on its feet again. Meant, years later, that the almighty dollar was not king anymore. Afterwards, the creation of the European Parliament was the first meaningful political step towards unity (voters started thinking European). Europeans were key, both politically and economically, to the demise of the Soviet Union (which meant the reunification of Germany, and the potential growth of the EU). Last came the euro: true adversary of the dollar.

Now, who's been the leader in all these events, which lead to a new bipolarity? Well, you know, Germany. Both with the Christian Democrats and with the SPD.

I think Europe has the right to push for bipolarity. And it's healthy for the world, as it pushes for multilateralism.

I believe that Great Britain, in it's intent to be a bridge between Europe and the US failed miserably. Robin Cook's letter of resignation to Blair says it beautifully.

Cook's resignation letter

Agreed. (Since I'm going to the A2K meeting in London on Thursday and will a meet an UK MP and junior minister on Friday, I'm not commentating you last, fbaezer :wink: .)

Most Europeans however do not think of themselves as Europeans. Certainly not in the first place. This identity comes into play only after you leave Europe, within it it is quite meaningless. Public opinion polls across Europe show that especially the EP elections have the lowest voter turnout and the level of knowledge about the basic structure of EU and its mechanisms is alarmingly miserable. EU is too non-transparent, bureacratic and complicated, it is too 'far away'. EP, and the common market much more so, were surely steps towards some sort of unity, they were still small steps for the 'common people' though. This is just about to be more complicated by the accession of the 10 new members in 2004. Their culture and history is very different from the Western Europe and it will certainly not help the struggle for one unified Europe. The real counterbalance to the US, not only economically, but as a political superpower with the backing of its people, will thus have to wait a few decades, I'm afraid. If that. Nationalism will not just wither away and die, in most countries the radical nationalists indeed grow stronger. Common defense would certainly mean a big political step, something tangible and grasp-able by most people. And greater clarity of the EU structure, structure that would copy state institutions, and would be much more accessible by public.

The construction of Europe is on the works, and I agree, dagmaraka, that it will take long.

Certainly, the European election have the lowest turnout in the continent (much higher than in the US, though). The important thing about it is that I have heard several voters -as long ago as 1987- reason their decision in non-National terms. Like: "Heck, I would like to vote for the Greens, but I'll vote Socialist to stop the Germans".

As I gather -from the other side of the Atlantic, but with enough friends in Europe-, Europeans tend to think first locally. And that is good for grassroots democracy. The shift we're living is that they are starting to think continentally almost as much as they think nationally. Of course, the information levels vary a lot.

And who would have thunk the euro was feasible 15 years ago?

Thanks again, fbaezer! No European could have written that any better!

True. It still seemed impossible right before euro was launched, yet it became reality and it does grow on people. Although some gave up their national currencies grudgingly, claiming it undermines their national sovereignty and some such things. I would love to see true European identity (whatever that is), and it certainly is a growing matter, but it is very fragile and shy. I am however deeply worried about the upsurge of the extreme right as a response to 'europeanization'. hopefully it will decrease within a few years, when EU is more in people's bloodstream and not so new, awkward, and threatening anymore.

Agree again, dagmaraka.

Extreme right = old nationalism.
In Europe and elsewhere.