Reading Paper 2: “Misunderstanding Europe”

Reading Paper 2: “Misunderstanding Europe” Authors: William Wallace — Education includes King’s College Cambridge, Cambridge, Cornell, and Oxford. Wallace has an extensive background with academia serving in various teaching positions and on advisory boards. Later, Wallace would become associated with the London School of Economics in international relations researching and as a reader. He served as Lord-inwaiting Government Whip from 2010-2015 under Prime Minister David Cameron. Wallace is tied with the Liberal Party and has served as a council member of the Royal Institute of International Affairs. Jan Zielonka — Zielonka has published various books and is the principal researcher of a large international project on the relationship between media and democracy in Europe, sponsored by the European Research Council. Currently, Zielonka teaches European Politics and Society at the University of Oxford, he lists that his main research interests include European integration/disintegration and politics ideologies, with a focus on liberalism. He also serves as a senior policy fellow on the European Council on Foreign Relations and has written various articles about the current state of Europe and how COVID-19 is impacting European integration. Published: In the scholarly journal Foreign Affairs, published by the Council on Foreign Relations. The journal claims to be “...the leading forum for serious discussion of American foreign policy” (Foreign Affairs). The Council on Foreign Relations is a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization. Since its creation in 1922, the journal has been considered one of the United States’ most influential public news sources on American foreign policy. Date: Published in November/December of 1998, the article was written before the events of 9/11, which would drastically alter and arguably even justify American military intervention. In 1998, NATO faced the crisis in Kosovo, with Serbs facing ethnic Albanians, which was settled with Serbian President, Slobodan Milosevic. The Good Friday Accord was reached in Northern Ireland with the Irish parliament backing the peace agreement. Turning to the EU, the body agreed on a single currency, the Euro, that would be put into place later at the start of 2002. Thesis: Europe has been resigned to serve as a sort of “quasi-autonomous protectorate” of the United States and Europe has been failing intervene in the ways that the US has expected but hasn’t accepted the US’s leadership unconditionally, which has led to American frustration with Europe’s lack of unconditional trust and a fear that the EU/European states will turn away from the US and develop in a way that differs from America’s expectations, and create an equal, even rival, global power. Gist: “Eurobashing”, anti-European sentiments, and “Euroscepticism” albeit not new, are all on the rise in the United States. Wallace/Zielonka touch on some American’s views of Europe as the “enfeebled past” and even an albatross the US has to bear for global good. The article continually argues that Americans are wary of full/complete European integration, as it could pose a global rival in power and influence as the threat of a new economic hegemony builds. Additionally, the authors touch on the US’s disregard for international law and institutions and the double standards it creates requesting that other countries abide, and make assumptions that the Europeans will follow in tow with their unilateral decisions. In order to move forward effectively and in collaboration with Europe, the US must integrate and accept that collaboration with NATO and the EU is in its best interest, instead of acting unilaterally on the world stage. Telling Examples: 1) Various economic examples of Europe’s progress — Europe is progressing in the development/sale of pharmaceuticals and countries like the Netherlands achieving a higher growth rate than the US in 1997 (4.2% to 3.7%), ultimately to build the argument that transatlantic trade has shifted towards European benefit and surplus. 2) Europe’s leading health factors / social situations — Social services in European states are better than the US, not limited to universal healthcare and employment benefits. The authors note that life expectancy is higher throughout the EU and infant mortality rates are lower. The argument prevailing that the EU focuses more funds/attention on social issues instead of military investments. 3) 1997 RAND Report — predicts that the transatlantic relationship will remain in the same Cold War style, with the US leading and calling the shots, Europe preparing to back the power financially and ask permission before carrying out their own foreign policy. The authors make the point that the situation reversed is impossible to imagine; the US having to ask Europe before acting on its own policies. Additionally, the relationship between the US and Europe cannot be taken for granted and should not be assumed. Criticism: Wallace/Zielonka’s argument is compelling, the double-standards between the US and what it expects from the rest of the world and the increasing “Eurobashing” and scepticism that is prevalent within US policy and leadership. However, I feel as though the argument is lacking in acknowledging how/why the US acts in this hypocritical way and fails to examine the role US military forces occupy within NATO and EU alliances, and their ability to act outside of sanctions/other financial means. Although yes, the point Wallace/Zielonka make about over half of the funding for international aid in the West Bank and Gaza (1994-1997) coming from Europe, and the continued increase in funding for international projects and economic development and Africa, the authors only allude to and do not make a compelling argument against the essential role the US military has played in conflicts on and off of the European continent.