Readers Comments - EURSOC - News and comment from Europe

We have to ask what contradiction to America means. If it only means negative commentary on US policy, that's harmless, although it may make Europe unpopular in the US. Verbal contradiction to America remains in the realms of self-indulgence, much like the celebrated "war crimes" trials that were staged in Sweden during the VietNam war - catchy but ultimately pointless.

If it means only passive resistence to US policy - the denial of basing and overflights, for example - then that would mostly be harmless to the US and harmful to Europe. The reason for this is that if the US were to be denied the facilities for projecting its power it would nevertheless have to continue to pursue its interests, and would do so by replacing European facilities in nearby locations. If Europe 'emancipated" itself from the US, in Chirac's phrase, Europe would quickly find itself ringed by permanent US bases in North Africa, the Middle East and maybe the Baltic. Europe would exchange the status of hosting US bases for the status of being hemmed in by US bases.

The worst case is a Europe that arms itself sufficiently to be able not just to resist US policy but to counter it. To understand how this could come about - since many people will insist that it cannot - it's instructive to think about another super-power.

In the nineteenth century, not all of Britain's actions were popular. Britain was seen as hogging the lion's share of the world's riches - in those days territory was seen much as we see raw materials and energy today - but there were two distinct approaches to dealing with Britain.

France grumbled all through the century about British policy, but in the end helped set up a system for settling disputes between the two countries and eventually settled for an alliance of almost-equals.

Germany, on the other hand, began the nineteenth century as British allies and pursued a policy that went from criticism, to rivalry, to mutual suspicion, and finally to an armed clash that led to two world wars.

As long as the Germans followed the French lead in envying and

muttering against the British no great harm was done, and even when Germany built a great land army it was seen as no danger to Britain.

It was when the Kaiser decided that only a Navy could make Germany's voice heard in the world that he set Germany on a slippery slope to disaster. And it was inevitable that he should do so, since making Germany's voice heard in the world meant nothing unless it meant to make Germany an effective military counterweight to Britain, and a potential ally to which other countries could turn if they were not satisfied with the deal they were getting from Britain.

And this is the deadly choice for Europe today. It's notorious that

no-one knows who to "phone" to get Europe's support, but it's also the case that it does not matter anyway. France and Germany's commercial support for Saddam did not lead to the US being deterred from attacking him, since Germany and France could do nothing effective to stop an invasion. If Europe has the ambition to have a foreign policy that can contradict that of the US, it will not be enough to send statesmen to make speeches to the Security Council - although they dearly wish it were, hence their support for the UN. Instead it will be necessary for Europe to build task forces to stand in the way of US fleets, and missiles to deny access to US planes, in the same way that the US sent a task force to deter the French and British at Suez.

And this cannot happen overnight, nor can it be concealed. Either

Europe must remain an impotent critic of the US which might as well save its breath because no-one is going to pay attention to a Europe that cannot offer them any effective military help, or Europe is going to have to build up its force projection capabilities in a fairly public way, with accompanying alienation of US public opinion.

If the second way is chose, then one can almost predict the course of the twenty-first century. First Europe and the US will establish peaceful disagreements, then one or more third-world countries will turn to Europe for protection against the US, then Europe and the US will fight one or more proxy wars in some part of the third world, and finally they will come to blows face to face.