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
On May 7, 1971, Henry Kissinger planned his first, ultra-secret mission to China and pondered whether it would be better to meet his Chinese interlocutors “in Pakistan where the Pakistanis would tape the meeting — or in China where the Chinese would do the taping.” After a flicker of thought, he decided to have the Chinese do all the tape recording, translating and transcribing. Fortuitously, historians have several thousand pages of verbatim texts of Dr. Kissinger’s negotiations with his Chinese counterparts. Paradoxically, behind the scenes, Chinese stenographers prepared verbatim English language typescripts faster than they could translate and type them
More than 30 years ago when I immigrated to the US, applied for citizenship and took the 100-question civics test, the one part of the naturalization process that left the deepest impression on me was one question on the N-400 form, which asked: “Have you ever been a member of, involved in or in any way associated with any communist or totalitarian party anywhere in the world?” Answering “yes” could lead to the rejection of your application. Some people might try their luck and lie, but if exposed, the consequences could be much worse — a person could be fined,
Xiaomi Corp founder Lei Jun (雷軍) on May 22 made a high-profile announcement, giving online viewers a sneak peek at the company’s first 3-nanometer mobile processor — the Xring O1 chip — and saying it is a breakthrough in China’s chip design history. Although Xiaomi might be capable of designing chips, it lacks the ability to manufacture them. No matter how beautifully planned the blueprints are, if they cannot be mass-produced, they are nothing more than drawings on paper. The truth is that China’s chipmaking efforts are still heavily reliant on the free world — particularly on Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing
On May 13, the Legislative Yuan passed an amendment to Article 6 of the Nuclear Reactor Facilities Regulation Act (核子反應器設施管制法) that would extend the life of nuclear reactors from 40 to 60 years, thereby providing a legal basis for the extension or reactivation of nuclear power plants. On May 20, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) legislators used their numerical advantage to pass the TPP caucus’ proposal for a public referendum that would determine whether the Ma-anshan Nuclear Power Plant should resume operations, provided it is deemed safe by the authorities. The Central Election Commission (CEC) has