The chasm between Europeans and Americans is deepening. A series of violent demonstrations that greeted President George W. Bush’s recent European visit starting from Madrid to his last station Gotennburg in Sweden, evidently, signified the unbridgeable gulf between the two sides of the Atlantic. The demonstrations also were reminiscent of the protest marches in the wake of former President Bill Clinton’s world tours.
A novice in the intricate world of international politics may wonder why, after all, this clash of interests between two homogenous groups who share an identical political mindset and cultural heritage.
Europeans have been accusing the US of forcing its will on the world since the break-up of the Soviet bloc. The Europeans are worried the US is promoting its own interests with scant regard for the allies and friends.
The thrust of the public anger over Bush’s European tour was, basically, on three counts — the capital punishment still in force in the US, Washington’s decision to go ahead with the national missile defense program and the stand on the Kyoto Protocol to limit the environmentally disastrous gas emissions.
These are not the only issues put strains US-European relations. Europeans were never happy at the high-handed manner in which the US intervened in such regional conflicts as Bosnia or Washington’s policies on Iraq and Iran. Europeans, in fact, never agreed to the US plan to punish Iran while the continental reaction to the US-initiated hunt for Iraqi weapons was lukewarm. The Europeans are also not willing to toe the US line in their relations with Cuba while they have their own independent stand on the deteriorating Middle Eastern situation.
US had to go it alone on several international issues such as the environmental agreements and international ban on land mines. It was the only country that opposed the establishment of an international court to try human rights violators.
The bullying style of the US diplomacy mostly produced a negative effect. The G-8 meetings mostly ended up with no conclusive decisions taken while the unilateral US moves sent a message to Europeans that they need to play only a minor role on international stage.
Europe’s fitting reply to the provocative posture by US is the current attempt to set up a rapid deployment force as a first step toward independence in matters of self-defense.
The Europeans in NATO have unequivocally expressed their unwillingness to support the NMD. They ask why there should be a defense scheme costing millions of dollars when war threats are minimal. US has, obviously, no answer to this question. However, the US tends to forget the simple fact that no military alliance can hold together without serious external threats.
In fact it was the fear of the Soviet power that drove the Europeans to seek the US help in the first place. Once the Soviet power vanished from the scene, the conflict of interests among NATO members emerged as a threat to the very existence of the Atlantic alliance. Now the political analysts wonder whether the US will pull out of the NATO if the Europeans appear too defiant.
