Why the European Union will fail ...

..and a new trade alliance might succeed.

Joseph L. Kibitlewski, Ph.D.

We have seen the fledgling European Union start .. stop ..and start again over the past several years. Their attempt at a modern type United States of Europe brings to the table all the old histories and mistrusts built up over the past two thousand years. The Germany’s and Frances’ of years ago hover like unwanted guests at a marriage. Old hatreds and hurts rarely die. They smolder. And it is this smoldering that is now witness to the events in Europe wherein Germany and France are each in turn posturing, striving for supremacy in the European Union each desirous of being the new leader of such an alliance. Both Germany and France are eager to show that they can be independent from Washington and in so doing attempt to outdo one another in the fight for dominance within the EU.

This is in stark contrast to the old Soviet eastern bloc countries who are aligning themselves with the United States in the Iraq conflict. These eastern countries harbor no distrust of the United States. There is no history of the United States ever invading them for personal gain. These same countries have known mostly benevolence by the United States where they are concerned. No bad history. No old wounds to lick only a promise of better things to come from a country that has repeatedly demonstrated good will on an international scale. The European Union has not brought everyone into the monetary fold either. England maintains its pound sterling. And it should. It is their very being as a nation. And their reluctance of submission to an alien currency is to be commended. There has been no time in recent history when England was a subject of another country. Their’s is a proud history and the pound sterling is the very soul of England.

The Scandinavian countries also are showed impatience with France and Germany’s implacable position of impeding the United Nations actions against Iraq last year. Iraq is convenient at this time to underline how fragile uneasy alliances are. And the European Union is fragile indeed. France and Germany have isolated themselves. They did this by frustrating the embargo against Iraq in order for each to feather their own economical nest. Perhaps it is the over 60 billion dollars in oil contracts with Iraq that sustained the French position.

France and Germany, continue to fail to realize that their time as bedmates has not yet arrived. Perhaps later, after a longer period of wooing, the situation may allow for an accommodation to be created. But France’s leaders still smart from the defeats of past wars and their frustration of dominance over Germany, is always at or near the surface. France wants desperately to be a world leader. They have not yet learned how to do this. Leadership is by example. France is a poor mentor when leadership is a required ingredient.

With the old Soviet system Germany was ever mindful of the need for protection supplied by the United States. Germany would like to resume a place of preeminence in Europe but is unsure how to accomplish this in view of their aggressive history with their neighbors.

France opted out of NATO whenever the impulse struck them. The French have never demonstrated that they can be counted upon until the outcome was a forgone conclusion.

So, that leaves us with the eastern bloc of newly admitted NATO nations. Their economic future depends a great deal on new markets. The European Union was designed to provide for that. However, access to these markets is at the price of political turmoil caused by France and Germany’s refusal to support the realities of the international scene as a whole. Further, the eastern bloc old guard will not soon welcome a militarily strong Germany. These newly democratized nations are struggling with the capitalistic system of the West. To have free elections, free market exposure, both within and without the nation, is a far departure from what they have ever been exposed to for centuries.

The most recent item of interest directs ones attention to article 10, which states, "The constitution and law adopted by the union's institutions in exercising competences conferred on it shall have primacy over the law of the member states.”

This portion of the EU Constitution assumes supremacy over Parliament . This undermines the province of the House of Commons to supercede decisions made by the EU.

Additionally, recent developments show a collaboration of authority between Schroeder and Chirac, one standing in for the other when one is absent. This has not gone unnoticed by the various political observers within the EU and on the British Island.

And so, what might a new trade alliance look like? At first the eastern bloc countries would join with England and the United States for purposes of trade and mutual assistance. These types of alliances work best when political agendas merge into a cohesive outlook for the future and the part each will play in that future. These countries have natural resources and manufacturing skill just now being exploited by the rest of the world. This will continue to grow. These same new countries may serve as role models to the struggling countries in the third world by bringing new markets to meet their trade requirements.

France and Germany would not be excluded but they would not be able to assert themselves as preeminent with the U.S. as a central trading partner. This may fly in the face of the present European Union philosophy but the reality is the EU is a stillborn agreement. It needs only to be expelled from the womb to make room for the next player.

Russia would keep a close watch on these types of alliances out of concern for its own well-being. But, a healthy trade with neighboring countries is in Russia’s best interests as well. The influence of Russia would be enhanced merely by being a major trade partner. The political concerns of the smaller countries would not be a threat to Russia nor would Russia be eager to jump into the seat of war with its neighbors that are aligned with the United States.

It is time to close the book on the European Union and view it for what it was. An attempt to form the United States of Europe in the manner the United States was formed. But the United States at its outset was not plagued by so many ghosts in the closet, if there was a closet at that time at all. Even in the United States there was a war of states sovereignty. The struggle to maintain supremacy in a political sphere gave way to armed conflict. The European Union can spare itself this exercise by capitulating now. 

Can anything be salvaged by the European Union concept? Perhaps. In the area of passports it makes sense to utilize a common type with each country agreeing as it has to a bare bones outline for travel. Trade should be maintained to allow for the simple exchange of goods and services but without the governmental subsidies that are now causing disruption in the world markets. The recent spate of terrorist activities must always be a consideration. The United Nations should be the natural power to deal with international terrorism but it lacks the will and determination to act quickly enough to be an effective medication to this new international disease. And so addressing this problem will be left to those countries so committed to a peaceful world that they will undertake/underwrite appropriate actions.

Whatever may ensue in the next few years the demise of the European Union is all but guaranteed? As for the Euro, it may very well soon become an item of curiosity.