Don't be fooled by the image of happy unity portrayed by the EU's 25 leaders clinking champagne glasses over a historic Constitution deal.
Behind the scenes there is a ferocious struggle for supremacy.
The leaders' deadlock at last week's summit over who to select as next president of the European Commission underlined just how far the Franco-German "locomotive" that used to drive the bloc has become detached from most of its carriages.
ILLUSTRATION MOUNTAIN PEOPLE
British Prime Minister Tony Blair reminded Paris and Berlin of just that as he and other states thwarted the duo's choice of candidate to head the EU executive, Belgium's Euro-federalist prime minister, Guy Verhofstadt.
"We are operating in a Europe of 25 ... not six or two or one," Blair's official spokesman said.
The comment was a riposte to French President Jacques Chirac's insistence that the successful contender for the top EU job should come from a country with long EU experience that was in all the main European policy initiatives, notably the euro single currency and Schengen open-border area.
That would bar anyone from Britain, Ireland, Denmark, Sweden and the 10 mainly East European states which joined on May 1.
The EU's enlargement looks set to bring more of a free-market, low-tax, lightly-regulated, English-speaking and pro-American bloc than either France or Germany would like.
The EU's newcomers do not, in general, share France's federalist vision of EU integration, and unlike France they do not see Europe as a counterweight to US power.
Indeed, the EU's defining moment of last year may well have been when Chirac chided the east European newcomers for siding with the US over the Iraq war, saying they had "missed a good opportunity to shut up."
A tense summit dinner last Thursday night revived the continent's splits over the war, a spectacle that would have confirmed US Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld in his view of an "old Europe" and a "new Europe."
Diplomats said there were three coordination meetings at the summit between the leaders of Austria, Britain, Italy and Portugal, three of whom supported Washington over Iraq.
"A new Europe is taking shape -- a Europe where Britain can build alliances and feel at home," Blair said on Friday.
The blocs within the bloc are not fixed.
Spain, for instance, has switched back to what had long been considered the "European mainstream" since the Socialists won elections in March with a vow to pull troops out of Iraq. And Italy could see the pendulum swing the same way if Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi were to lose elections due in 2006.
But Britain and France are set in opposing camps despite the effusive celebrations just 11 weeks ago to mark the 100th anniversary of the Entente Cordiale ending colonial rivalry.
Irish Prime Minister Bertie Ahern, the current EU president, declared the new constitution a "fundamental advance" for the EU.
It may be a more complex and hybrid beast than the US equivalent with lots of row-backs in favor of the nation state, but a constitution shared by 25 nations is indeed a big symbol.
Nevertheless, the left-leaning French daily Liberation panned the treaty on Saturday as potentially the "swan song for a Grand Europe" because it had been watered down by Britain's successful bid to preserve national vetoes on key policy areas.
Furthermore, under the constitution a Franco-German duo will find it difficult to impose its will on other states.
The initial text had said most decisions should be taken by a "double majority" of over half of the bloc's member states representing over 60 percent of its population.
Fearing this would make it too difficult for medium-sized and small states to block proposals from heavyweights, Spain and Poland pressed for higher thresholds to pass decisions.
The final version defines a qualified majority as at least 55 percent of member states representing at least 65 percent of the population.
There have been attempts to bridge divides: France, Germany and Britain have joined forces since the Iraq War in initiatives to boost European defense integration and persuade Iran to accept tougher inspections of its nuclear program.
Analysts say this stems partly from a realization in Paris and Berlin that they cannot drive a credible EU foreign and security policy without Britain.
But Chirac, welcoming the Constitution on Saturday, made it clear that euroskeptic states like Britain would not be allowed to hold France and others back from forging even closer ties.
"We have ensured ... that there are mechanisms which will prevent states that want to make progress more quickly from being blocked by those who need more time," he said.
That smacked of previous threats by France and Germany to lead "pioneer groups" of like-minded states towards closer integration, which raised the prospect of a two-speed Europe.
During the US-India Strategic Partnership Forum’s third leadership summit on Aug. 31, US Deputy Secretary of State Stephen Biegun said that the US wants to partner with the other members of the Quadrilaterial Security Dialogue — Australia, India and Japan — to establish an organization similar to NATO, to “respond to ... any potential challenge from China.” He said that the US’ purpose is to work with these nations and other countries in the Indo-Pacific region to “create a critical mass around the shared values and interest of those parties,” and possibly attract more countries to establish an alliance comparable to
On August 24, 2020, the US Secretary of Defense, Mark Esper, made an important statement: “The Pentagon is Prepared for China.” Going forward, how might the Department of Defense team up with Taiwan to make itself even more prepared? No American wants to deter the next war by a paper-thin margin, and no one appreciates the value of strategic overmatch more than the war planners at the Pentagon. When the stakes are this high, you can bet they want to be super ready. In recent months, we have witnessed a veritable flood of high-level statements from US government leaders on
China has long sought shortcuts to developing semiconductor technologies and local supply chains by poaching engineers and experts from Taiwan and other nations. It is also suspected of stealing trade secrets from Taiwanese and US firms to fulfill its ambition of becoming a major player in the global semiconductor industry in the next decade. However, it takes more than just money and talent to build a semiconductor supply chain like the one which Taiwan and the US started to cultivate more than 30 years ago. Amid rising trade and technology tensions between the world’s two biggest economies, Beijing has become
With a new White House document in May — the “Strategic Approach to the People’s Republic of China” — the administration of US President Donald Trump has firmly set its hyper-competitive line to tackle geoeconomic and geostrategic rivalry, followed by several reinforcing speeches by Trump and other Cabinet-level officials. By identifying China as a near-equal rival, the strategy resonates well with the bipartisan consensus on China in today’s severely divided US. In the face of China’s rapidly growing aggression, the move is long overdue, yet relevant for the maintenance of the international “status quo.” The strategy seems to herald a new