The EU has been so successful that you would have thought there would be dancing in the streets at its 50th anniversary. Alas, there has been only persistent talk of failure to achieve political union, to adopt a constitution, to exercise global leadership and vision, to implement economic reforms -- and the list of laments goes on.
"The EU is on autopilot, in stalemate, in deep crisis," says Joschka Fischer, the former German foreign minister and an important voice in Europe.
But this angst and hand-wringing simply is not convincing. Consider Germany. After World War II, it was a beaten and devastated nation with a history of dysfunctional nationalism. Today, a totally rehabilitated Germany is as thoroughly European and democratic as any other EU nation. Under the leadership of Chancellor Angela Merkel, Germany has earned its place as Europe's most important country.
The EU deserves great credit for this transformation. After the War, it was a prime EU objective to moderate nationalism and promote regionalism in Germany, a feat that was accomplished to the benefit of all Europeans.
Shouldn't they -- and others -- be celebrating this major success instead of becoming bogged down in defeatist talk of crisis and stalemate?
Besides, where is the alleged crisis and stalemate? On the economic front, the euro-zone economy performed extremely well last year and most experts predict that economic growth this year will be faster in Europe than in the US, notwithstanding Germany's hefty increase in value-added tax.
Even more impressive, the lack of full political union in Europe has not stalemated the EU's adoption of the euro and the common monetary policy. On the contrary, the quick international acceptance of the euro as one of the world's premier currencies, aided by the European Central Bank's determination to keep inflation under control, indicates that the monetary project is going full steam ahead.
The euro is strengthening against the US dollar, because central banks in Asia and the Middle East are increasing the euro component of their foreign exchange reserves -- a clear vote of confidence in the new currency and the ECB. Both the success of the euro and the smooth functioning of the common monetary policy show that important "European" projects can be accomplished even without the benefit of full political union.
While the EU's member states have proved themselves capable of putting aside their differences when forging a common monetary policy, a common foreign policy has proved more elusive. On issues like the Iraq war and American plans to install missile defenses in Poland and the Czech Republic, Europeans appear to find it difficult to speak with a single voice.
The reason is clear: Europe remains too dependent on the US for its defense needs. Some EU members, such as Germany and Italy, are more dependent on the US than others, such as France, and thus more likely to support US strategic initiatives. So long as these differences remain, so will Europe's political divisions. But defense independence from the US implies a vast reallocation of resources from social welfare programs to the military, which so far has not interested Europeans.
Rather than reflecting a lack of political will to come together and speak with a single voice on strategic issues -- the conventional interpretation -- diverse voices are the result of an implicit choice that Europeans make. Many Europeans have decided that it is better to keep their robust social welfare programs and forgo a common foreign and defense policy, which would require massive changes in the European way of life.
Moreover, with the disappearance of the Soviet Union as a common threat, Europe's left-wing parties are increasingly defining themselves as anti-US. Thus, when Spanish President of the Government Jose Zapatero and the Socialists took control of Spain's government from the conservatives, the country's foreign policy changed from supporting the US in Iraq to opposing them.
But, interestingly, the switch from former prime minister Silvio Berlusconi to Prime Minister Romano Prodi in Italy is having a less dramatic effect on Italy's foreign policy because of the country's greater defense dependence on the US.
Naturally, with socialists and social democrats in power in some EU countries, and conservatives in power in others, it is difficult for Europeans to find a single voice. This may change if a new common threat to Europe emerges, or if conservative parties follow the left and become anti-US. Given US President George W. Bush's extreme unpopularity in Europe, the emergence of an anti-US right is not a remote possibility.
But with Europe enjoying an unprecedented level of economic prosperity as a result of the EU's dramatic accomplishments during its first 50 years, further political unification clearly can wait. Congratulations, not hand-wringing, should be the order of the day.
Melvyn Krauss is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with