Europe Looks West: A Resurgence of Pro-Atlanticism Within the EU?

Paper ID:

Last updated: 31/01/2012 09:08:31

Criteria:

Impact:

Likelihood:

Controversy:

Where: Global

When: 0-2yrs

How Fast: Years

0 people thought this paper expanded their thinking bullet

Keywords:

Government, security, international relations, Europe, United States

Summary

Driven by the election of new pro-Atlanticist leaders in Europe, continued American economic and military hegemony and cultural conflicts over “Western” values, the European Union (EU) may adopt a more pro-United States (US) stance in trade and foreign policy. This could reinforce the influence and role of NATO and the US as the most powerful agents of Western foreign policy objectives. Relationships between nations depend both on alignment of long term policy and on the alignment of shorter-term political objectives. Atlanticism in Europe seems to be strongly correlated with political leadership, and the same is true for the US. Generally, there seems to be a recent trend-break with the anti-US sentiments in recent years. In the longer term, Atlantic relations will be shaped by forces within the EU (for example, the cohesion of the EU) as well as external forces, such as energy security, terrorism by non-state actors and the behaviour of China as a superpower on the world stage.

Discussion

The EU and the US have been close allies for decades. The EU has accepted US input on a wide range of domestic and international policies [1], particularly in areas such as counterterrorism and foreign policy. However, power structures, values and leadership within the EU and global politics could result in a shift in the EU towards the adoption of a stronger pro-US stance in a broader range of policy areas.

In the past decade, different countries throughout Europe have had relatively stronger or weaker relationships with the US. For example, the historic roots of the relationships between the US and Central and Eastern European (CEE) countries are based on the role the US played in overcoming the communist era and in helping CEE countries out of socialism and into free-market economies. A close relationship between the United Kingdom and the US is based on a shared cultural, political, economical and, more recently, military goals.

On the other hand, there has been some diplomatic tension between the US and a number of Western European countries following the 2000 US elections and the invasion of Iraq. A lack of support for the 2003 invasion of Iraq, specifically by France and Germany, led the then-US Secretary of Defence, Donald Rumsfeld, to refer to these countries as “Old Europe” in January 2003. [2] The results of recent elections on both sides on the Atlantic have re-shaped US-European liaisons. The elections of Angela Merkel as German chancellor; of Nicolas Sarkozy as French president; and of Barack Obama as the US president have strengthened EU-US relationships in a number of areas. For example, approval ratings for Obama are considerably higher in Europe than in his home country. [3]

However, particularly in light of the 2008 South Ossetia war between Russian and Georgia, [4] the US and European countries still have different views on a number of issues. Although there is general agreement on the need to engage in Afghanistan, the Iraq war caused fissures between certain Western as well as Eastern European states and the US. The rumours of secret CIA prisons from 2003-2005 in Romania and Poland, for example, also strained relations. [5] In addition, there are differences in views on foreign policy towards Iran, with European countries trying to solve the issue diplomatically, while the US favours a more firm approach and has not ruled out the use of force against the Iranian nuclear weapons programme. [6] There are also some disagreements between the EU countries and the US over climate change (for example, the EU called on the US to play a bigger role in combating climate change), genetically modified food, the International Criminal Court and approach towards the Arab-Israeli conflict. [7] [8] [9]

Although some of these issues remain unresolved, the US and EU are still close allies. The approval of the need for widespread international economic and domestic social reforms, as well as discussion about the future of NATO’s political and security objectives has given rise to pro-American sympathies and fostered closer cooperation with the US. [10] This collaboration was further strengthened by France fully rejoining the NATO alliance showing its commitment to promote international security objectives, [11] which was also evidenced by the tone of French Livre Blanc on defence and foreign policy issues. Europe and America are also working together on stabilisation programmes in Afghanistan. While the Iraq war divided the EU and the US, missions in Afghanistan are helping to mend this relationship for many European countries and EU troops are part of the NATO and ISAF coalition in Afghanistan.

Paradoxically, as the relationship between the US and Western European countries improves, some of the long-term allies of the US in CEE countries feel that Obama’s foreign policy is ‘enemy-centric’. [12] Some argue that the Obama administration, driven by US domestic needs and US priorities, especially nuclear disarmament and Iran and Afghanistan, rewards its rivals with promises – notably Russia and China. This, in turn, they argue, neglects the priorities of US’s allies in CEE countries as it can be seen as a move towards an increase of Russian influence in this region. [12]

Recent developments in successfully advancing the ‘European project’ as well as closer collaboration between the EU states in time of the economic crisis have brought EU countries together into closer economic and budgetary integration. [13] [14] Developments in a common defence programme for Europe could also become a basis for further integration between European countries. Adoption of the Lisbon Treaty and the establishment of the institutions of the European President and the European External Action Service to manage EU foreign relations are likely to lead to further developments in the area of a common EU foreign policy [15]. In this way, it might allow Europe to play a more prominent role on the global stage. On the other hand, for some, this loss of national economic sovereignty may put the idea of a common EU foreign policy even further beyond reach, leaving the US in an unrivalled position to lead an informal coalition of western democracies on global foreign policy decisions [16], [17]. The emergence of China as an economic superpower, and its increasing influence in Asia, Africa and Latin America, may draw attention to a new bipolar state of global affairs with the US on one side and China on the other.

The role of the UK, once a leading proponent of ties with the US, could be crucial in any resurgence of pro-Atlanticism in Europe. Together with a new generation of leaders in other member states, the UK may act as a major driver towards increased identification of European interests with the US.

Implications

The status of the EU as a world player could become more limited if it focuses more on 'internal' matters (though US input remains strong even here) and trade. However, creation of the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy post helps in managing of EU foreign relations and in that way can strengthen EU’s position in the world.

Economic ties and interdependency are major factors influencing the nature, likelihood and continuation of a relationship between the EU and the US. [18]

The identification of European states with American values and policy goals could lead to increased tension with the Middle East and, internally, with the rising proportion of migrant populations within Europe who look eastwards for their cultural and political identities.

NATO may find itself greatly revived and reinvented to cope with new global realities. Analysis of NATO has defined it in the contemporary world as an organisation that now defends values more than it does territories [19] [10], and this value-based definition of western identity could become reference point for a growing fusion of EU and US interests.

Early indicators

Large scale and increasingly frequent prominent lobbying by the US government on internal EU political matters - for example over Turkish membership. [20]
Financial support and cooperation with new members in Eastern Europe.
Withdrawal of public declarations of opposition to US stances.
Adoption, cooperation and financial support for long term US military strategic plans.
Increased interoperation on military operations (Afghanistan).

Drivers & Inhibitors

Drivers:
The emergence of other global superpowers.
Emergence of a common political or military rival, or increasing security threats in to EU and the US from an existing one.
The recovery of Wall Street after the financial crisis, recapturing its position as the world’s dominant financial centre.
Instability of the Euro zone and economic implosion of one or more of its Member States.
The EU and US consolidating economic interests on a large scale. [18]
US innovative capacity and global economic competitiveness.
Failure to develop coordinated European Security and Defence Policy (ESDP).
Cultural and political ties between EU member states and the US, e.g. over areas of 'western ethics'.
European popular culture integrating further with that of the US.

Inhibitors:
The US' continued opposition to taking a leading role in combating climate change.
Popularity of the “Tea party” movement in the US and subsequent corresponding election results.
Adoption of Lisbon Treaty and a revival of the European project under a new generation of leaders.
A double dip of the US economy and the collapse of Wall Street as the world’s dominant financial centre.
Substantial divergences in cultural and political traditions, and anti-American cultural-political trends of nations. [21] [22]
The development of the European Security and Defence Policy (ESDP), including the proposed European Rapid Reaction force (it could be potentially seen as competing with NATO). [19]

Parallels & Precedents

US lobbying over Turkish membership. [20]
US traditional support for and levels of interaction with EU institutions. [1]
The importance to the US of the EU as a stabilising factor politically and economically. [1]
US policy document for a global agenda towards security and the suitable political systems around the world ('The National Security Strategy of the United States of America'- published 17 September 2002). [23]
Leadership of the western world in the bipolar cold war period.
Large important European banks buying heavily into a consolidating US banking economy, thereby linking economies and institutions further. [18]
US-UK 'special relationship'.

Social Bookmarking

Comments

Date/Time

User

People who viewed this paper also viewed

Headline

Sources

Ref.	Publisher	Date	Title	Category
1	Other		[1] Centre for Strategic and International Studies (2005) 'Debating the Constitutional Treaty and Questioning the EU: What next?' 6th June.	Pol
2	BBC	23/01/2003	Outrage at ‘Old Europe’ remarks.	Pol
3	Pew Research Center	17/06/2010	Obama More Popular Abroad Than At Home, Global Image of U.S. Continues to Benefit	Pol
4	BBC	07/08/2009	Georgia marks anniversary of war (2009)	Econ
5	The Guardian	07/07/2007	Stephen Grey (2007) Secret CIA prisons confirmed by Polish and Romanian officials	Econ
6	Open Democracy		[9] Tehrani, Ardashir (2005) 'Iran's Presidential Coup', Opendemocracy.net, 21st April	Pol
7	Time	24/07/2001	Tony Karon (2001) When it Comes to Kyoto, the U.S. is the "Rogue Nation", Time, 24/07/2001	Econ
8	BBC	07/02/2006	BBC (2006) Europe 'stopped GM food imports'	Econ
9	Reuters	22/12/2009	EU calls for more U.S. involvement in climate works.	Pol
10	Atlantic Review	20/05/2010	Andrew Zvirzdin (2010) NATO's Niche, 20/05/2010.	Econ
11	The Guardian	11/03/2009	Angelique Chrisafis (2009) Sarkozy to end France's 40-year Nato feud, The Guardian, 11/03/2009.	Econ
12	The Washington Post	25/05/2010	Fred Hiatt (2010) Is Obama's foreign policy 'enemy-centric'?, The Washington Post, 25/05/2010	Econ
13	NRC	10/05/2010	No author (2010) Crisis coerces EU members into ever closer union	Econ
14	The Times	11/05/2010	No author (2010) The True Costs of the Euro	Econ
15	BBC	07/04/2010	no author (2010) Q&A: EU External Action Service, BBC, 07/04/2010.	Econ
16	Allen Lane	2004	Garton-Ash, Timothy (2004) Free World: Why a Crisis of the West Reveals the Opportunity of Our Time ' London: Allan Lane	Pol
17	Atlantic Books		Kagan, Robert (2004) 'Paradise and Power: America and Europe in the New World Order' London: Atlantic Books	Pol
18	The Economist	06/05/2004	''Westward, ho"	Pol
19	Other	2004	Centre for Strategic and International Studies (2004) 'The US-UK Special Relationship: Past, Present and Future'	Pol
20	The Guardian	13/12/2002	Black, Ian and White, Michael (2002) 'EU dashes Anglo-US hopes for early talks on Turkish entry'	Pol
21	Other	12/09/2006	Palmer, John (2006) ‘Europe’s foreign policy: Saying ‘no’ to the US?	Pol
22	Other	2003	[16] Albright, M. K. and Campbell, K (eds.) (2003) ‘Crossing the Atlantic: A Report from the Aspen Atlantic Group	Pol
23	The Institute of Liberal Values	2002	Ebeling, Richard (2002) 'The Dangers and Costs of Pax Americana'	Pol

Other Sources

Link	User
Council on Foreign Relations	StijnHoorens
Delegation of the European Commission to the USA	JT
EU-US Relations overview	JT
The EU online	JT
US Chamber of Commerce	JT
US Mission to the EU	StijnHoorens

The contents of this paper were provided by the Outsights-Ipsos MORI Partnership. Any views expressed are independent of government and do not constitute government policy.