With the US crippled by Wall Street’s collapse, this should be Europe’s moment. Yet the EU’s role in the world is weakening. It is listened to less today than it was 15 years ago. As Singapore’s Kishore Mahbubani, a prominent Asian diplomat and academic, puts it: “Europeans are irrelevant to the world’s great issues, obsessed by internal process, culturally arrogant, craven in the face of the US and blind to the rise of Asia.”
If Europe is to gain a more important role in global leadership, it must reverse its long-term economic decline. Consider the evidence of that decline:
Ownership: After centuries in which European corporations dominated the developing world, the trend is reversing. Indian, Middle Eastern and other investors are buying up European steel mills and carmakers. In coming years, watch out for China and Russia.
Exchange rates: When the dollar slumped a year ago and eroded European competitiveness still further, both the European-led IMF and the European Central Bank proved impotent. Instead, European leaders flew cap in hand to China to ask for support. While the dollar has risen recently against the euro, Europeans did not influence this.
Banks: When US and Swiss banks hit the wall, nobody approached Europe for support. Instead, bank leaders pleaded with the Middle East, Singapore and China to throw a lifeline. Once Europe’s own banks became infected, euroskeptic British leadership was needed to overcome French and German dithering. European institutions remained on the sidelines.
Of course, Europe’s growing irrelevance is not entirely self-inflicted. Emerging-market countries have increased their share of the world economy, giving them a more important voice in international relations. But it is not others that prevent euro-zone growth from climbing above 3 percent, or that are causing the EU-15’s share of the world economy to dwindle, from 19.5 percent of global GDP in 1994 to 16 percent last year.
Despite its Lisbon agenda, EU enlargement and the coming of the euro, Europe’s overall economic performance has not improved because it has neglected many basic and everyday issues. Three examples come to mind.
First, the EU still spends far more of its resources subsidizing declining sectors than preparing for the future. Although research funding is rising, it accounts for just 4.7 percent of EU spending, compared with 31.7 percent for agriculture.
Second, Europe has failed to introduce an independent European Research Council to ensure that funding is allocated on the basis of scientific merit. Too much of the money earmarked for research goes to prestige projects with limited or no connection to science, like Galileo or the European Institute of Technology.
Third, European resources are fragmented and this hampers European competitiveness. The weak and diluted EU Takeover Directive, adopted after more than a decade of debate, fails to facilitate the cross-border mergers within Europe that are needed to build world champions. Company-based social benefits in some leading European countries weaken corporate flexibility by locking in labor.
Yet there are a number of areas of consensus where the EU can push ahead. Enlargement has made far-away countries our neighbors. They need access to our markets, and we should not turn them away. We should expand the European single market to boost growth and avoid new divisions. This means leveraging unglamorous tools like tariffs, industrial standards, market regulation and cooperation in research and education in our relations with countries like Russia and Egypt, just as we have done with Norway and Switzerland.
Many citizens believe that European cooperation benefits only the privileged and that workers and pensioners face higher taxes because cross-border integration has helped the rich find ways to avoid paying their fair share on interest and capital gains. Common rules to eliminate cross-border tax evasion — and thus erase this perception — should become a priority. Participation in a common financial market should not be allowed for free riders who refuse to share information. Cooperation with havens like Liechtenstein or Monaco should be ruled out unless they accept that within the common market, all citizens must pay taxes where they live, according to the rules of that country.
Policy coherence within the EU must also be improved. The motivation to implement further reforms of the internal market has weakened, leading to a situation in which even decisions by EU leaders at their European Council meetings can go ignored.
Too often, special interests are allowed to overrule common European interests. Europe needs to curb subsidies for old and dying industries and to invest the money saved in future-oriented sectors.
The last thing Europe needs is to reinforce unnecessary centralization. A dynamic and successful Europe is not a one-size-fits-all Europe and European integration must not become a goal in itself, but a means to create sustainable prosperity. Nor do we need cosmetic efforts to pursue EU-wide policies to combat the current crisis, when it is obvious that we have failed to act together.
This is particularly important in the area of worker protection. European nationals are unlikely to support measures to strengthen the EU if this means that working conditions can no longer be decided locally.
Yet the European Court has fueled frustrations by undercutting local labor practices in notable recent cases concerning workers employed in Sweden and in Germany. Europe, to be blunt, must devote more energy in the years ahead to addressing its micro challenges rather than to promoting grand ideas. If we stick to that principle, the EU will have a much better chance of regaining global influence.
Leif Pagrotsky is a Swedish lawmaker, vice president of Riksbank and a former minister of industry and trade and minister of education, research and culture.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
A failure by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) to respond to Israel’s brilliant 12-day (June 12-23) bombing and special operations war against Iran, topped by US President Donald Trump’s ordering the June 21 bombing of Iranian deep underground nuclear weapons fuel processing sites, has been noted by some as demonstrating a profound lack of resolve, even “impotence,” by China. However, this would be a dangerous underestimation of CCP ambitions and its broader and more profound military response to the Trump Administration — a challenge that includes an acceleration of its strategies to assist nuclear proxy states, and developing a wide array
Twenty-four Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers are facing recall votes on Saturday, prompting nearly all KMT officials and lawmakers to rally their supporters over the past weekend, urging them to vote “no” in a bid to retain their seats and preserve the KMT’s majority in the Legislative Yuan. The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), which had largely kept its distance from the civic recall campaigns, earlier this month instructed its officials and staff to support the recall groups in a final push to protect the nation. The justification for the recalls has increasingly been framed as a “resistance” movement against China and
Jaw Shaw-kong (趙少康), former chairman of Broadcasting Corp of China and leader of the “blue fighters,” recently announced that he had canned his trip to east Africa, and he would stay in Taiwan for the recall vote on Saturday. He added that he hoped “his friends in the blue camp would follow his lead.” His statement is quite interesting for a few reasons. Jaw had been criticized following media reports that he would be traveling in east Africa during the recall vote. While he decided to stay in Taiwan after drawing a lot of flak, his hesitation says it all: If
Saturday is the day of the first batch of recall votes primarily targeting lawmakers of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). The scale of the recall drive far outstrips the expectations from when the idea was mooted in January by Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) caucus whip Ker Chien-ming (柯建銘). The mass recall effort is reminiscent of the Sunflower movement protests against the then-KMT government’s non-transparent attempts to push through a controversial cross-strait service trade agreement in 2014. That movement, initiated by students, civic groups and non-governmental organizations, included student-led protesters occupying the main legislative chamber for three weeks. The two movements are linked
RSS