Beneath the strained bonhomie of the G7 summit lurks a visceral fear: that US President Joe Biden’s bid to build a democratic alliance to stem the authoritarian tide led by China and Russia would split the world in two, leaving Europe, betrayed by Prime Boris Johnson’s turncoat Britain, to play piggy-in-the-middle.
Despite public applause for Biden’s key message — that the US is “back” after the xenophobic hypernationalism of former US president Donald Trump — European leaders seem far from convinced. They worry the EU might be sucked into a second, limitless cold war, and that Biden, who will be 82 in 2024, could be unseated by a hawkish Trump or Trump clone.
The message to Europe in Johnson’s fawning weekend embrace of Biden and the US, symbolized by a reworked Atlantic Charter and much Cornish corniness, was clear. Like a whipped bulldog craving favor, Brexit Britain would be Washington’s obedient, needy pet. Johnson is no Winston Churchill — but like Churchill in 1941, he is desperate for US backing.
Illustration: Mountain People
Biden will strive to hold the transatlantic alliance together, which for him means all the European democracies, including the UK. However, the Johnson government’s anti-EU trajectory, seen in the latest row with Brussels over Northern Ireland, threatens his vision.
Last week’s forceful pre-
emptive intervention by senior US officials suggests that London would eventually be forced to compromise, if only because Johnson dare not jeopardize the wider US relationship. Yet UK-EU antagonism looks set to deepen. Biden will have to tighten the leash again in future.
Europe’s concerns about strategic isolation as a newly divisive, bipolar world order takes shape are well founded. To its east lies China, Russia and like-minded regimes in India, Turkey, Iran and Saudi Arabia — autocratic, aggressive and contemptuous of Western-defined international norms.
To its west lies the US, a damaged power, divided against itself, whose political stability and consistency can no longer be depended upon. Biden’s efforts to restore normalcy to international relations are assured of European support for as long as he lasts, as this week’s EU-US and NATO “reunion” summits demonstrate.
However, if Trump or his followers regain power, a permanent US rupture with Europe and its liberal, multilateralist principles might become unavoidable. This in turn could wreck the EU if, say, copycat populists in Poland or Hungary were to definitively break with Brussels. For his part, Johnson would be happy to see Trump return and the EU split asunder.
Fears about Europe’s future in a hostile world are reflected in a comprehensive new survey of EU states by the European Council on Foreign Relations. It reveals what its authors call “a widespread lack of confidence in the US ability to come back as leader of the West.” Most Europeans believe the US’ political system is broken.
This disillusionment is not wholly due to Trump.
“More than a year after the start of the [COVID-19] pandemic, the feeling has taken root among Europeans that they cannot rely on the US, Russia or China, and that they must move towards greater self-reliance,” the survey said.
Europe would be squeezed like an unripe lemon between rival global forces that share neither its values nor its interests
In short, Europeans do not trust anyone any more. Instead, majorities believe Europe should develop unified responses to global threats. They prefer pragmatic partnerships to permanent alliances. Many want the EU to be a “beacon of democracy and human rights,” and a great power capable of defending itself.
At a time when the EU faces an extraordinary 21st-century agenda — the climate crisis, the COVID-19 pandemic, economic recovery, migration, digitization, cyberthreats and right-wing populism — such ambition should, in theory, be welcome.
And yet Europe’s politicians and bureaucrats seem unprepared. While the public wants the EU to do more, confidence is low that it will — not least due to its COVID-19 missteps.
“Disappointment with EU institutions has now come out of the periphery and gone mainstream,” the European council said.
This reflects a broader problem: a dearth of effective national leaders. Few are committed to building the independent, self-sufficient Europe voters want. Solidarity is lacking when it comes to standing up to China over Xinjiang and Hong Kong, to Russia over Ukraine, Belarus and Kremlin critic Alexei Navalny, or to the US over Israel-Palestine and trade.
In Germany, to which many Europeans look for leadership that never quite arrives, German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s imminent departure has created a sort of funk. Despite talk of a Green revolution, voters seem likely to opt (as usual) for the safe, inward-looking, center-right choice — namely Armin Laschet, Merkel’s Christian Democratic Union successor.
In Paris, French President Emmanuel Macron, who has no illusions about Johnson or US altruism, regularly calls for a fiscally, economically and militarily integrated Europe. Yet his eloquence has not helped him at home, where he was quite literally slapped down last week. In any event, he is increasingly distracted by a tough re-election battle next year.
In Italy, the rise and rise of far-right parties, such as the Brothers of Italy, feeding off immigration fears, inspires ultranationalists, xenophobes and bigots everywhere. Brothers leader Giorgia Meloni’s ideas about identity and globalist conspiracies make her a natural ally of Trump, not of Biden or Brussels.
Meanwhile, those who look for strong EU leadership look in vain. If the union were a true democracy, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen would have been voted out over her vaccine fiasco. However, the EU does not work that way, which is part of the problem.
For EU leaders, the G7 perpetuated a fantasy of power and purpose. Unless they urgently take ownership of its destiny, Europe would be squeezed like an unripe lemon between rival global forces that share neither its values nor its interests.
Europe’s choice: be a standup player on the world stage — or risk becoming a quirky cultural museum for Chinese tourists, and the butt of Trump’s and Johnson’s jokes.
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
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
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
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) wrapped up his visit to the People’s Republic of China, he received his share of attention. Certainly, the trip must be seen within the full context of Ma’s life, that is, his eight-year presidency, the Sunflower movement and his failed Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, as well as his eight years as Taipei mayor with its posturing, accusations of money laundering, and ups and downs. Through all that, basic questions stand out: “What drives Ma? What is his end game?” Having observed and commented on Ma for decades, it is all ironically reminiscent of former US president Harry