It was not all that long ago — just a few years, as hard as that is to believe — that Europe appeared to be the part of the world most closely resembling the end-of-history idyll depicted by Francis Fukuyama at the end of the Cold War. Democracy, prosperity and peace all seemed firmly entrenched.
Not anymore. Parts of Paris are literally burning. The UK is consumed and divided by Brexit. Italy is led by an unwieldy left-right coalition that is resisting EU budget rules. Germany is contending with a political realignment and in the early phases of a transition to a new leader. Hungary and Poland have embraced the illiberalism seen across much of the world. Spain is confronting Catalan nationalism and Russia is committing new acts of aggression against Ukraine.
In what by historical standards constitutes an instant, the future of democracy, prosperity and peace in Europe has become uncertain. Much of what had been widely assumed to be settled is not. NATO’s rapid demobilization after the Cold War looks premature and precipitous.
There is no single explanation for these developments. What we are seeing in France is populism of the left, the result of people having difficulty making ends meet and rejecting new taxes, whatever the justification for them. This is different from what has fueled the rise of the far right across Europe: cultural defensiveness amid local and global challenges, above all immigration.
The EU, for its part, has gradually lost its hold on the public imagination. It has been too remote, too bureaucratic and too elite-driven for too long.
Meanwhile, renewed Russian aggression might simply reflect Russian President Vladimir Putin’s judgement that, having realized large political returns on his previous military “investments” in Ukraine and Syria, he had little to fear or lose from further actions.
Europe’s political class deserves its share of responsibility for today’s growing disarray. The EU introduced a common currency without a fiscal or banking union, making it all but impossible to conduct a coherent economic policy. The decision to put the UK’s continued EU membership to a popular vote, while allowing a simple majority to decide the issue and failing to spell out the terms of departure, was misguided.
Likewise, opening Germany’s borders to a flood of refugees, however pure German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s motives, was sure to trigger a backlash.
Most recently, French President Emmanuel Macron did himself no favors by backing down to the “yellow vest” protesters, and offering compromises more likely to fuel additional demonstrations and exacerbate his country’s budget predicament.
We should not assume things will get better. It is only a matter of time before France’s far-right National Rally (formerly the National Front) and political parties across Europe figure out how to combine economic and cultural populism and threaten the post-World War II political order. Italy’s hybrid populist government is a version of just that.
The UK would remain torn over its relationship (or lack thereof) with the EU no matter what comes of Brexit; and it is entirely possible that a post-Brexit UK might come under serious strain itself, given renewed calls for Irish unity and Scottish independence.
There is no formula for dividing power between Brussels and capitals that would be acceptable to both the EU and national governments.
Meanwhile, it is far from certain that Putin is content or done with his aggression against Ukraine or conceivably others.
Moreover, in a world of increasing inequality, violence within and between countries, and climate change, the pressures posed by immigration are more likely to worsen than fade away. Economic dislocation is bound to intensify in a world of global competition and new technologies that would eliminate millions of jobs.
Why this matters should be obvious. Europe still represents a quarter of the world’s economy. It is the largest constellation of democratic countries. The past century demonstrated more than once the cost of a breakdown of order on the continent.
Alas, just as there is no single cause that explains Europe’s increasing disarray, there is no single solution either. To be precise, there is no solution of any sort.
However, there is a set of policies that, if adopted, would help leaders manage the challenges.
A comprehensive immigration strategy that balances security, human rights and economic competitiveness is one such policy. A defense effort that focuses more on how money is spent than on how much is needed would go a considerable way to buttressing Europe’s security.
Moreover, deterrence should be strengthened by bolstering NATO and further arming Ukraine.
Weaning Europe from Russian natural gas makes sense as well, which implies halting the Nord Stream II pipeline that is meant to bring gas directly from Russia to Germany, bypassing Ukraine.
Additional retraining programs are needed for workers whose jobs would disappear as a result of globalization and automation.
Much of this agenda would benefit from Washington’s involvement and support. It would help if the US stopped viewing the EU as an enemy and NATO allies as free-riders.
Europe includes the countries most prepared to work with the US to deter Russian aggression; integrate China into global trade and investment frameworks on terms consistent with Western interests; mitigate and, where necessary, adapt to climate change; and set rules of the road for cyberspace.
Alas, such an approach is unlikely to be forthcoming from US President Donald Trump any time soon. That leaves Europe with no choice but to confront its disarray mostly on its own.
Richard Haass is president of the US-based Council on Foreign Relations think tank. He served as former US president George W. Bush’s director of policy planning for the US Department of State, special envoy to Northern Ireland and coordinator for the future of Afghanistan.
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
The past few months have seen tremendous strides in India’s journey to develop a vibrant semiconductor and electronics ecosystem. The nation’s established prowess in information technology (IT) has earned it much-needed revenue and prestige across the globe. Now, through the convergence of engineering talent, supportive government policies, an expanding market and technologically adaptive entrepreneurship, India is striving to become part of global electronics and semiconductor supply chains. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Vision of “Make in India” and “Design in India” has been the guiding force behind the government’s incentive schemes that span skilling, design, fabrication, assembly, testing and packaging, and
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.