By Robert Knauer
This week's G-20 meetings might say more about the true state of U.S.-Europe relations than any other recent event, highlighting fissures in the post-Cold War bonds between President Obama and his European counterparts. Over the next few months, heads of state from both sides of the Atlantic will have to face their two most vexing concerns: the financial crisis and conflicts with non-state actors, especially in Afghanistan. Both of those threats require unified, international action, something the two sides are finding difficult to produce as their meetings progress.
At the top of the agenda is the financial crisis, currently the London summit's hot topic. Europeans generally acknowledge the international nature of the crisis but are nevertheless reluctant to dig into their savings to stimulate an economy imperiled by what they see as American excesses.
Perhaps more interesting is why they don't feel the need to do so. The aggregate effect of the financial crisis is more muted in Europe than in the United States. The heart-wrenching accounts of American families choosing between sending their children to college or keeping their homes do not resonate in societies in which higher education is essentially free and homeownership is relatively rare. Rates of stock market participation are also much lower, job losses have not yet begun to mount as they have in the U.S., and social services remain generous. Of course, in the longer term, Europe has every bit as much to lose from a prolonged recession; the trick for prudent policymakers, in the U.S. and Europe alike, will be overcoming short-term populist politics with unified action.
The war in Afghanistan is just as abstract in Europe, which didn't suffer directly the September 11th attacks. The U.S. seems more willing to use force in its foreign affairs, while its weaker counterpart prefers to embrace a soft-power world where multilateral institutions such as the United Nations and the European Union dominate discourse. These differences, which stem from a real gap in military capabilities as well as divergent ideologies, were amplified by the onset of America's aggressive foreign policy following 9/11. With NATO now celebrating its 60th anniversary and strained by a difficult war in Afghanistan, the member states must now adopt a single military strategy and pony up the resources required to carry it through. America strongly depends upon its NATO allies for the fight in Afghanistan and elsewhere, and it would benefit from their increased engagement.
With such differences in perspective, both sides of the Atlantic could easily adopt insular postures and go their separate ways. This would be the wrong course. Hopefully, leaders will look back to World War II, the defining moment in transatlantic relations, and adopt a more long-term strategy: one with a unified stimulus program that avoids the temptation of protectionism. That kind of strategy would require increases in troop contributions to NATO's efforts in Afghanistan and reductions in the caveats to which they are subjected. More generally, it would be marked by humble U.S. leadership matched with strong European engagement. In light of the immediacy of these twin challenges - the most demanding since the end of the Cold War - we will soon learn how close Europe and the U.S. remain in this new era.
Robert Knauer is a former active duty Marine officer and recent SAIS graduate, is currently a Robert Bosch Fellow living in Munich.
Email the Author | Email This Post | Del.icio.us | Digg | Facebook
The views expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the Johns Hopkins University.
Comments (4)
WTO agreements allow American transnational conglomerates to operate as global companies not local companies in multiple countries.
This was the Model American Corporates wanted believing they could sway Legislators to not Tax Overseas Profits ..
real Patriots.
In Post World War II Britain, in order to rebuild their Economy, should you as a British Subject spend beyond a pre determined amount of Money outside Britain , you would be Arrested and Imprisoned.
What would you believe they would do to those Outsourcing British Jobs to Cheap Foreign Labor thus seeking to Undermine the Home Economy ?
If Corporate Leadership felt uneasy with the Populous reaction to Bonuses using Taxpayer Monies of Businesses otherwise Bankrupt - let them threaten to pull out of America entirely based upon a Nation_Less mind set.
We as a Nation have a Nation to run - if the Benedict Arnold School wishes to move out of America rather than
support America and American Workers - let them take their Families with them.
April 14, 2009 10:50 PM | Report Offensive Comment
Posted on April 14, 2009 22:50
Lots Of Love But No Money or Troops for Obama In Europe
www.dailyexception.com
If measured in atmospherics, President Obama is having an excellent trip. America is engaging with Europe again. For its part, the Europeans love the new President, and his glamorous wife. But measured in substance, Obama will return home empty handed. In London, he learnt that there is no more European money to stimulate the global economy. And in Baden Baden, he is learning that there are no more European troops to provide for our common defense in Afghanistan.
http://dailyexception.com/2009/04/03/lots-of-love-but-no-money-or-troops-for-obama-in-europe/
April 10, 2009 10:59 PM | Report Offensive Comment
Posted on April 10, 2009 22:59
You may forget it, there will be no "strong European engagement" in Afghanistan, and European citizens will continue to make sure their democratic governments and the European Union put the interests of Europeans first (nothing to do with what you call arrogantly and quite mistakenly "short-term populist politics").
This is an exclusively US generated crisis due, essentially, to US mismanagement and greed, and following a mistaken military adventure in Afghanistan quickly becoming a regional conflict reminiscent of Vietnam and South East Asia.
In that context, it will take a long time before the world only begins to believe there can be such a thing as "humble U.S. leadership". Eight years of utter nonsense have a cost. We can see that just listening at (to say the least) a less than triumphant Obama answering questions, right now, at the close of a less than satisfactory G-20 summit. Let's be clear: that summit was an unmitigated failure for the Anglo-American block, given its widely publicized agenda. It was therefore Obama's failure. One can feel how much that hurts just by listening to him, right now.
The way uphill is rough, has begun to be particularly painful, and this is only the beginning. We need, sooner than later, be part of the solution demanded by poor and emerging countries, as well as by a good part of Europe, i.e. a new financial, economic and political world order. There is no way around that... unless of course we be prepared to accept feeling more and more isolated in today's world.
April 2, 2009 2:24 PM | Report Offensive Comment
Posted on April 2, 2009 14:24
From a European perspective: Afghanistan represents a wasted opportunity. If the war there was to be won effectively, then the time to do it was when the troops went in originally. This invasion had European backing at the time. the opportunity was lost with the decision to go to war in Iraq: not only did this divert troops from the important battlefront, it also completely dissippated the sympathy for the US after 9/11. A round of insults to those nations who thought is was a catstrophe didn't help that.
Changing the president may change policy, but it doesn't change history. Nor does it change the fact that the Taleban in Afghanistan have had years to regroup and develop new funding and new sources of equipment. Hostorically the area (country is a stretch of definition) has a very successful history of resisting external control. No European in their right mind wants to get stuck in the quagmire that destroyed large chunks of the Soviet army. Europe is firmly post-colonial (Tony Blair excepted).
April 2, 2009 7:59 AM | Report Offensive Comment
Posted on April 2, 2009 07:59