Europe: The Invisible Superpower

Just a little while ago, it was fashionable to talk about the world as if there was only one superpower. However, it's become increasingly clear that there are in fact two superpowers: The United States and the European Union.

(Excerpt)

Source: http://www.cer.org.uk/articles/leonard_irish_times_18feb05.html

If the United States is unable to shoulder the burdens of superpowerdom, therefore, it need not worry: The EU eventually will assert its strength. Not only is the internationalism of most Europeans more palatable to the world, but American failures for years have shown U.S. leadership to be weak and unavailing. There is no reason for the world to follow a leader so feckless, so incompetent, and so discredited. And it will not.

Say good-bye to American unilateralism and hello to a multilateral world in which America must contend with a newly confident and emergent superpower in Europe. For much of the world, it's long past due.

Actually Russia is resurging right now. Within the next decade or so they will be fullly back on form.

European Superpower? Talk about oxymorons.

If the EU ever decided to field an army, they'd have to have 47 conventions involving 3,000 bureaucrats just to decide what color the uniform would be. Then, when France didn't get its way, it'd threaten to quit and the whole process would start all over again.

And Europe's lack of a "single leader" is hardly a benefit. It's difficult to imagine a single international strategy that would satisfy all the EU member states. And since there's no real overarching EU leadership causing everyone to get on the same page, Europe's influence will be dilluted and, sometimes, at cross purposes.

Posted by Midnight Funeral:

In that case, there will be a tripolar world -- the U.S., Europe, and Russia.

Or, it's conceivable (though not likely) that Europe and Russia will enter into an alliance of convenience, in which case they would collectively significantly outweigh the United States in most matters important to the industrialized world.

Posted by Paladin:

It's not all about armies anymore. America has the best army in the world, but look where we are with both Afghanistan and Iraq.

The fact is that by many measures, Europe is already a superpower and indeed it leads the world in quality of life. Its crime rates are much lower than those in the United States. It is well-regarded in many areas of the world. The euro has been stronger than the dollar almost since its inception, and has recently reached unheard-of peaks. Europe is forging ahead in space and technology and is deliberating on a continental constitution acceptable to all. Its ideology of consensus and development is attractive to countries who disdain American moralism.

Europe is also well-placed to develop ties with China, destined to remain a major power (and not a superpower) for the next three decades. The United States, on the other hand, is simultaneously committed to Taiwan, a traditional thorn in ties with that Communist giant.

Britain has had a traditional role in India, the other major non-Occidental power. Despite India's historical dynamic in seeking independence from Britain, the British are in a good position to understand and develop friendly relations with that massive democracy -- more so than the United States, which backs Pakistan far too much for India's liking.

Make no mistake: There is much more to power than who has the largest army. Right now, Europe has an abundance of the only type of power that really matters: The kind that actually works.

I'll not worry about the European Union as a superpower...their invisibility is wholly self-inflicted.

Good point. It's much better to act as the power behind the throne than to be exposed to the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune -- or assassins.

Hah! A compliment!

You're slipping.

This would be the same EU that couldn't even deal with Bosnia on its own, that kowtowed to Islam when the Dutch dared print cartoons of Mohammed, and is comprised of 27 nations that can't agree on anything, right?

It's a fact that America has the best army in the world. What's to dispute? This is not to say that its army is the best in every way, but by overall absolute power, it's the best.

More relevantly, however, Europe is becoming more powerful where it really counts. Here's an excerpt from a review of one of Mark Leonard's books (he's the author of the essay I initially cited):

See: http://markleonard.net/whyeurope/Bloomberg/

The days when only America can claim that it has the "ideal society" or the "shining city on a hill" are long past.

Posted by Wilbury:

None of these things affects the quality of life for 450 million citizens of the European Union. It's all pie-in-the-sky stuff that America-firsters love to cite, but to no good end.

Fat lotta good that welfare state is gonna do as the average age in Europe gets older and the birthrate continues to drop. When that comes crashing down, the whole house of cards comes with it.

'Course, the same thing could happen over here with Social Security and Medicare, but we'll be a couple or three decades behind Europe.

So their government is powerful because their government is ineffectual?

another oxymoron

Precious

What are you, an idiot?

Iraq is an occupational mop-up, and Afghanistan won't invade Cambodia. Apples and oranges to a knock-down fight.

Super.

Eh? The Chinese are building more third-world ties than Europe (who currently denies any such place as "Sudan" exists). Superpower is an idiotic term anyway; we're going to see the return of world powers as existed during the late 19th/early 20th centuries. Except less colonies, and very real world war threat in the next few decades.

The Indians never have and never will be in anyone's corner. They're far to interested in playing off people to get the best possible advantage.

You make no mistake. Europe is an organizational nightmare waiting for a real international crisis to knock down it's house of cards.

They can't work together on anything that could ever really threaten anybody because everyone's invested in everywhere. Hell, I'm amazed NATO approved the missile shield, what with the Bear threatening to turn off the gas.

Probably fantasy. But even if that were to happen, what other emerging superpower would be driven into stronger ties with the U.S.?

Exerting influence in an important region? Had 9/11 happened in Paris instead of New York, do you think the French would've been able to topple the Taliban? Could Italy or Germany or even the U.K. have brought down Saddam Hussein? Not likely. Europe is unable to project power. And that's important in the 21st century because war is no longer going to happen between civilized nations---it's going to be a matter of stamping out the violent rejectionists of modernity wherever they rear their ugly heads.

If the EU sets itself up as a competitor to the U.S., the EU's lack of armed forces would be either (a) terminally stupid or (b) a situation that would soon be rectified--the EU's taxpayers would have to cough up 3-4% of their GDP for defense, just like other nations do.

The Europeans benefit from globalization every bit as much as the U.S. does. Overturning this order is unlikely to benefit Europeans in any way--they may shrug off today's one superpower, but they'll have to contend with tomorrow's emerging (and possibly re-emerging) ones...and without the U.S. as an ally.

You lost me at "ideal society".

Some of the other stuff - yeah, you might get me to argue against all the shit going on here (OMG - that's kinda ironic: ) but that? Yah, try henryhill.

The Danish, not the Dutch...

My bad. It was the Dutch filmmaker that got his head cut off and was followed up by warning not to offend Muslims.

Posted by Paladin:

It's not necessarily military force that's effective in this regard. Mutually beneficial agreements are often far better at making friends from enemies.

The so-called "global war on terror" is an increasingly transparent facade and excuse for Americans to stomp around the world trying to find enemy installations in places from which they've long since moved. It's not working, and it'll never work -- not unless America stops exclusively supporting Israel to the detriment of other interests. For all the billions that've been poured into Afghanistan, experts say that the Taliban are resurgent there since America has diverted resources to Iraq. Iraq, itself, is a nightmare and more of a breeding ground for terrorist groups than ever before. In the meantime, the Taliban have found home territories in Pakistan, a supposed ally of the United States. Terrorism is a Hydra-headed force that no amount of military power can extirpate, and by trying to defeat it militarily, the United States has primarily hurt its friends and instilled more enmity against the West.

Let's face it: Those who cautioned against invading Iraq were and are right. Those who said that American militarism would only increase hatred of Western interests are proved correct. As we speak, Hamas has taken over important parts of Palestine -- and the United States can do nothing about it. The Fatah lost, and once again, American initiatives in the region have been shown to have backed the wrong horse.

All this chest-beating about how America can "project power" is meaningless in an age where there are virtually no countries to whose territory one can legitimately project that power. Iraq still harbors terrorist groups, and America has been at war in that country for years -- what good has this "power projection" done?

It's time to stop this glorification of American power and realize that the United States is no longer capable of global diplomatic leadership. America, for all its military prowess, simply lacks the chops to achieve what it wants and, more importantly, what the world needs.

I'll begin losing sleep over this as of tonite.

I don't really like the EU.

Posted by Marso:

You shouldn't. Europe's gain is not America's loss.

Posted by mburtonk:

Like it or not, it exists.

No it doesn't.

It's only a pigmentation of you mind boyo.

Try making one of those "mutually beneficial agreements" with Al-Qaida. Or with a resurgent, authoritarian Russia.

When the Taliban are running Afghanistan again, maybe you'll have a point. But there's a big difference between "still causing trouble" and "in control of a state."

Some good has already been accomplished by invading Iraq and the effort is not over yet. It may be premature to claim defeat.

Actually, since it looks like the Palestinians are now divided, we may have the opportunity to play one against the other. Reward Fatah for talking, penalize Hamas for violence.

You seem to view any work in progress as a failure. It's not. We were at war with Germany and Japan for four horrendous years...and then we won.

You've overplayed your hand, troll.

Every day the current system endures, America has what it wants.

So a large and powerful miltary is the only thing that makes a superpower?

What else puts the power in superpower?

The EU isn't required to compete militarily with the United States. It already competes effectively with the U.S. where it counts -- economically, and for the hearts and minds of the world at large.

Already the EU has achieved things of which previously only the U.S. could boast. The largest passenger aircraft in the world is European. The next tourist-class spaceship will be built by EADS, and it'll be an SSTO (single stage to orbit). Europe's CERN is home to the most advanced facilities by which to discover the fundamental make-up of the universe. European space probes have achieved new insights into our Solar System that previously only American and Soviet spacecraft had offered.

The myopic form of Americentrism that has led to the quagmire in Iraq and declining quality of life for many Americans also blinds America-firsters to the great human progress made by Europe and its citizens. It's time that we stop believing the propaganda pushed by the neocons and their sheep-like followers: It's time for America to develop the humility she now deserves.

Economically? Sure. Who else.
Militaryly? Hardly, but that's by choice. But I don't have any illusions that we could if we wanted. We don't want to, tho. Destroying half the continent twice within a century was enough, thank you. There is no support whatsoever to play world police/Germany 1939. We'll leave the stomping around to the Americans and go in afterwards to make some business.

Economic ability.

If we use that as the sole benchmark, we can say that Iraq under Saddam Husein was a superpower since he had the third largest army in the world.

Nope. 3-4%. I think you're thinking as a fraction of the budget (which is about 500 billion out of 2.6 trillion, or about 20%).

The U.S. spends around 4.06%* of its GDP on defense.

* = according to CIA World Fact Book, 2005

By comparison, Germany spends 1.5%, France 2.6%, and the U.K. 2.4%. [same source]

Maybe not, but what about protecting yourselves from a hostile country such as Russia? That's a big reason America is there for.

Doesn't Europe deserve to learn how to stand on it's own two feet?