25
   

FOLLOWING THE EUROPEAN UNION

 
 
Lash
 
  1  
Mon 13 Dec, 2004 05:51 pm

Another guy who sees France as the #1 choreographer of the EU.


Its long, but interesting on the impact of the EU, and current wrangling.

http://www.andrewsullivan.com/main_article.php?artnum=20030614

OK, link fixed.
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  1  
Mon 13 Dec, 2004 05:59 pm
Lash, can't open the link.
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Mon 13 Dec, 2004 06:02 pm
Well damn. I'll see if its something I did. Thanks.
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Mon 13 Dec, 2004 06:23 pm
An excerpt--

Under a future USE (United States of Europe), the British government would nominally still control its foreign policy. But London's ability to go it alone against the weight of the other USE member states could be severely compromised. If the EU foreign minister declares European opposition to a future war by America, the political costs of siding with the United States could be huge for a British prime minister. Even during the buildup to the Iraq war, Blair came close to losing his job by balking at the European consensus. Such foreign policy intransigence could possibly lead to marginalization within the European Union, with all the costs that could entail.

Look at the example of Poland. The Poles' decision not only to support the United States but to send troops and now peacekeepers to Iraq has clearly rankled the French and German governments. The Polish invitation to the Germans to join them in Iraq under the auspices of NATO was brusquely rejected. Prodi lectured Poland in April that "one cannot entrust his purse to Europe and his security to America." A German diplomat described the Poles to The Wall Street Journal as "mercenaries." There have been hints that the EU major powers may try to make sure that Poland bears a cost for being a "bad" European. How likely is it that, within the next decade, if a USE actually emerges and Poland is subsumed within its economic, social, and political fabric, the United States will be able to appeal to Warsaw over the heads of Paris and Berlin? Or that Warsaw will be in any position to respond? The mere threat of reducing agricultural or industrial subsidies could bring an independent Polish government to its knees.

The same can be said even for Britain, Spain, and Italy. Could these European states outvote the Franco-German axis in a new, enlarged Europe? It's possible, but unlikely. The center of gravity in the European Union will always be the Paris-Berlin axis, together with the Benelux countries (Belgium, the Netherlands, and Luxembourg). ...
----------
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Mon 13 Dec, 2004 06:38 pm
Lash, I see so many complications to this union simply on the basis of 'control' issues by Berlin and Paris, that it makes one wonder how much more those countries interested in joining the EU will sacrafice?
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Mon 13 Dec, 2004 06:58 pm
Lash wrote:
If the EU foreign minister declares European opposition to a future war by America, the political costs of siding with the United States could be huge for a British prime minister. Even during the buildup to the Iraq war, Blair came close to losing his job by balking at the European consensus.

If Blair came close to losing his job through his obedience to the US line, it had preciously little to do with Chirac or the EU - and a whole deal more with the simple fact that the war he was supporting came to be tremendously impopular among his own British electorate and Labour Party. That simple.

Quote:
Such foreign policy intransigence could possibly lead to marginalization within the European Union, with all the costs that could entail.

Look at the example of Poland. The Poles' decision not only to support the United States but to send troops and now peacekeepers to Iraq has clearly rankled the French and German governments. The Polish invitation to the Germans to join them in Iraq under the auspices of NATO was brusquely rejected. [..] There have been hints that the EU major powers may try to make sure that Poland bears a cost for being a "bad" European.

"May try", may try .. but I've seen no evidence of any concrete way Poland has indeed suffered for its foreign policy choices on Iraq - has indeed in any way been marginalised. In fact, Poland's actually credited with negotiating a better deal out of its accession process than its neighbouring new member states - which should come as no surprise considering Poland's population size-based weight in the new EU. It will be one of the bigger players.

Now Poland's stance may have "rankled" this or that national government, for sure - and why shouldn't it, that's no different from how German intransigence on the issue has in turn "rankled" the American government, after all. Every government has its right to feel "rankled" about whatever. But noone was forced to "toe" anyone's line, as you originally stated in the posts you're continuing on in this thread. That Germany itself refused to join Poland in its sending of troops to Iraq can hardly count as evidence that Germany made Poland toe its line - at most it shows that it itself refused to toe America's line (or Poland's, if you wish) on the matter.

Quote:
The same can be said even for Britain, Spain, and Italy. Could these European states outvote the Franco-German axis in a new, enlarged Europe? It's possible, but unlikely. The center of gravity in the European Union will always be the Paris-Berlin axis, together with the Benelux countries (Belgium, the Netherlands, and Luxembourg).

If anything (alas), that center of gravity has already lost a significant measure of its dominance with the entry of 10 new member states, and more acceding countries are to come. This will shift the center eastwards, which will make Germany more powerful and France less.

In any case, however understandable it is from an American point of view, it is striking that the article makes so much of the supposed foreign policy diktats of the EU upon its member states. If there is one policy area in which the EU has thus far been underdeveloped, it's that of a co-ordinated foreign policy. Even just appointing a kind of EU minister of foreign affairs (sorry, "High Representative for the Common Foreign and Security Policy" - thats Javier Solana, former NATO chief) was something that could be realised only a few years ago, and if there's one EU functionary's position thats vigilantly delineated by the Member States in terms of primacy, its his.

Not that I personally wouldnt want a stronger EU foreign policy, mind you - and Bush Jr's reelection happily makes it all the more likely. But it's an odd focus to choose, since foreign policy has basically been the weakest link in EU development thus far - as the total dividedness of the EU states in the Iraq crisis underlined once more.

A philosophical question is whether, if and when a common EU foreign policy does shape up, there is anything scandalous left about, say, Prodi's sucessor's pressure on a Member State to conform to it. I wholeheartedly agreed with you, Lash, that Chirac's remarks about the East European countries' support to the US in the Iraq crisis were scandalous. It was none of his business, none of his say, and he was being grotesquely rude and condescending. But Prodi/Barroso's position was/would be a different matter. It is not up to any large member state to prescribe to the smaller ones what to do. But if and when the EU Member States collectively do agree on a common line (and thus far, unanimity was required), the European Commission (with its members appointed from all Member States) does imho have a 'normal' right to apply some pressure to dissenting states - just like it should be allowed to pressure individual Member States who don't stick to the agreed upon budget deficit rules, say.

What Chirac did, telling Poland c.s. that they had missed a good chance to shut up (or what was it), was scandalous imho, but then again it was no different from the pressure the US was applying to its allies, for example in Latin America, at the time, with Rumsfeld warning unspecified waverers about the "consequences" that would naturally follow their choice. Both of that falls in the category big-state-bullying. But suppose that the EU Member States do all agree to further empower a budding common foreign policy , then yes, of course that means that they then henceforth wont be able anymore to dissent at will. Its their choice.
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Mon 13 Dec, 2004 06:59 pm
Hi, CI.

I know what you mean. The possibility of being a part of a 'nation' experiencing the kind of financial and influential success that the US has experienced would certainly cause some to give over some autonomy...but your point is quite on target.

Do so many countries, some who have not long ago achieved real self-determination, really want someone so far away to make their decisions for them?

It is getting interesting.
0 Replies
 
australia
 
  1  
Mon 13 Dec, 2004 08:31 pm
Whats the odds of Albania joining the EU within 20 years? People laugh when I say that, but the same people laughed when I predicted 5 years ago that Turkey would come in at some stage.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Mon 13 Dec, 2004 09:12 pm
Here's an abstrat on Balkan applicant countries to the EU. http://www.efpu.hr/fet/dokumenti/conference/Bonfiglio-Bussoletti.pdf#search='BALKAN%20COUNTRIES%20APPLYING%20TO%20THE%20EU'
0 Replies
 
australia
 
  1  
Mon 13 Dec, 2004 09:19 pm
i couldn't get the link to open
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Mon 13 Dec, 2004 10:15 pm
If France and Germany wants to play the politcal and economic power game, the US can always get Cananda, Japan, China, Australia, India, New Zeland, Philippines, and some of South America to join a Union that the EU could never compete against.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Mon 13 Dec, 2004 10:16 pm
With a picture of Mao on our currency. LOL
0 Replies
 
australia
 
  1  
Mon 13 Dec, 2004 10:45 pm
Australia can join the South Pacific Union with some of the real economic heavyweights such as fiji, tonga and samoa.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Mon 13 Dec, 2004 11:18 pm
"Heavyweights." ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ...
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Tue 14 Dec, 2004 01:12 am
Obviously most here can follow the EU better than I can.
0 Replies
 
australia
 
  1  
Tue 14 Dec, 2004 01:32 am
why is that walter?
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Tue 14 Dec, 2004 01:52 am
cicerone imposter wrote:
If France and Germany wants to play the politcal and economic power game, the US can always get Cananda, Japan, China, Australia, India, New Zeland, Philippines, and some of South America to join a Union that the EU could never compete against.

In what was a bit of a milestone of cross-continental co-operation, the two South American unions of states last week merged into one, comprising almost every South-American country. They pledged to in the future co-operate ever more closely, following the example of the EU. Looks like in the long term, the US will have more than one competing bloc of states to learn to live with.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Tue 14 Dec, 2004 01:57 am
australia wrote:
why is that walter?


Seems, others have a deeper knowledge of what is going on the EU, might well be by better sources, btter education etc.
0 Replies
 
australia
 
  1  
Tue 14 Dec, 2004 01:59 am
There is no real economic powers in South America. Most of the countries rely on USA to roll over their foreign debt. Bush refused the large time for Argentina and the banks shut.

If Asia ever gets its act together, it could be a power. Imagine the economy's of Japan, China, India and Singapore combining.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Tue 14 Dec, 2004 02:03 am
Brazil is doing a pretty good job in its ambition to become an upper-middle-tier player in world politics.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

THE BRITISH THREAD II - Discussion by jespah
The United Kingdom's bye bye to Europe - Discussion by Walter Hinteler
Sinti and Roma: History repeating - Discussion by Walter Hinteler
[B]THE RED ROSE COUNTY[/B] - Discussion by Mathos
Leaving today for Europe - Discussion by cicerone imposter
So you think you know Europe? - Discussion by nimh
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 07/10/2025 at 12:14:14