A Eurocrat Dreams of a Superpower

Peter Brownfeld

Peter Brownfeld works in the AEI communications department and his articles have appeared in a wide range of publications.

Britain's close relationship with the United States is hard to understand, and damaging to European integration. The fact that she is such a junior partner in the Atlantic partnership means she reaps little benefit. It is time for her to adjust to the geopolitical reality and recognize that her most important partners are in Europe, not America. Britain is sapping European power and is making it harder for the E.U. to negotiate with the U.S. This strange relationship "is a source of fascination, perplexity, and sometimes frustration" to Britain's European partners. This is what we learned last month from European Commission President Romano Prodi.

The advocate of wide E.U. expansion and more centralized control over foreign policy slammed Britain in an April 29 speech at Oxford University. Prodi said:

I wonder what makes this great nation so confident when dealing with a vastly more powerful nation over three thousand miles away, but afraid to play a full part in shaping the future of the continent to which it belongs. . . . The answer lies deep within yourselves. It is your democratic choice, but it often puzzles your friends and allies, me included . . . [D]eep down it is a matter of deciding where one's future lies.

After attacking Britain for her ties to America, Prodi tried to reassure the audience:

Please do not think our work in this field is somehow directed against the U.S.A. across the Channel, we value our American friends as much as you do. Our friendship must develop-and it is developing-into a partnership of equals.

And this was the toned down version of the speech. In the original he said:

Even if a European state could pedal fast enough to keep up with the U.S. superpower, on a tandem it is the front rider who decides the direction and speed. And if you pardon another cycling image: doesn't the special relationship look more like a penny-farthing?

Prodi seems to view Anglo-American ties as treason against Europe. Prodi has offered a strange vision of us vs. them-with a wide gulf between Europe and America. Telling Britain she has to choose makes little sense from a historical perspective. She fought the Cold War with allies on both sides of the ocean. With the same allies she is currently fighting to suppress terrorism.

Europe and America come from the same roots, and Britain fails to see the need to choose between them. Yet Prodi has drawn a line in the sand. He has erected a division and has criticized the British for negotiating outside the E.U.

This fall Prodi made this stance all too clear when he attacked British Prime Minister Tony Blair for meeting with European partners outside the umbrella of the E.U. He accused Blair of "breaking the rules of the game" by inviting the leaders of several key states to come to Downing Street to discuss the war on terrorism.

Blair and Britain have been "breaking the rules of the game" by pledging British support for America after the terrorist attacks, by fighting alongside America in Afghanistan, and by following a policy independent of the one Prodi has tried to dictate in Brussels.

Needless to say, Prodi's speech was not applauded in Britain except by a few Europhiles. The Prime Minister's spokesman said:

We have always said it is a false choice, this idea that we have to choose between Europe and the U.S.

Jack Straw, Britain's foreign secretary said:

There is no contradiction between being pro-American and pro-European. I do not share the view of Romano Prodi that Britain's relationship with America somehow gets in the way of playing a full part in Europe. I reject the idea that relations with the United States and E.U. involve a zero sum-that an individual has to prove his "pro-European" credentials by being anti-American.

Prodi dreams of a European superstate and wants the E.U.-U.S. relationship to be one of "equals." He believes that by pooling European sovereignty, Europe will be able to compete with the U.S. Prodi is focused on trying to bring power to the diplomatic table. He believes that with Britain under the European umbrella, Europe will be able to talk tougher to the Americans. However, because of Britain's intransigence, Europe cannot stand together. Prodi sees a competition, while Britain sees a partnership. As Prodi hopes to dissolve the "special relationship," he offers the specter of a combative E.U.-U.S. relationship.

Prodi may be frustrated as he sees Anglo-American cooperation work better than E.U.-U.S. cooperation. Because of cultural bonds, this will probably always be the case. Instead of deriding Britain for backing her ally, Prodi should be looking for ways to improve E.U.-U.S. cooperation. Western Europe and America have worked closely since World War II. With significant security threats and diplomatic challenges, cooperation is as important now as ever. The transatlantic relationship needs to be bolstered, and Prodi's unhelpful rhetoric does not achieve this goal. After all, when petty differences are set aside, Europeans and Americans have the same history, ideals, and future.

With President Bush visiting Europe this summer there has been a great deal of attention paid to the transatlantic relationship. It is showing strains with anti-American demonstrations in France and Germany, and a seemingly growing divide on important issues. During such a time, it is a pity that Prodi focuses his foreign policy aims on counterbalancing the United States instead of trying to tackle the real problems that desperately need transatlantic cooperation, such as terrorism, third world poverty and disease, and the environment.

We would like to thank the following people who have generously contributed to the publication of this journal: Beverly H. Adams, Gary Ashcraft, Gordon S. Auchincloss, John G. Barrett, Frank J. Bartz, Robert Bierbaum, Georgia Buchta, James R. Cavanaugh, Robert Day, Eugene H. Donovan, James R. Gaines, Daniel J. Haley, Weston N. Hammel, Frederick Harris, Clark Harvey, Thomas E. Humphreys, O. Walter Johnson, Robert R. Johnson, Mark S. Laboe, Daniel Maher, Francis P. Markoe, Thomas J. McGreevy, Leonard McGuire, Eugene F. Meenagh, Aubrey A. Melton, David Murphey, Wendell L. Nelson, Daniel D. Payne, W. E. Saunders, Michael Stiennon, Frank T. Street, Patrick M. Sullivan, Robert D. Wells, Paul A. West.