(2 of 2)
Integrate Turkey and Russia into the Union.
Turkey's entry would send the message that the modernization of Islam is rewarded and underscore the fact that Europe is no longer a Christian Club. That would assure all the Muslims in the world that they have a viable future. The admission of Russia is necessary because it would be stupid to slam Europe's door in the face of a country whose rich resources, especially natural gas, may not be far in value from those of the Persian Gulf.
Create a common market with the countries of North Africa and Central Asia.
Europe should use the North American Free Trade Agreement as a model to improve the standard of living in the poor countries on the Mediterranean periphery. The aim would be self-interest: to prevent poor immigrants who flock to Europe from destabilizing the Continent by creating jobs for them at home. Reshaped along these lines into a continental union, Europe could play a new role. Its GNP would be indisputably the world's highest. It would have an original development plan to propose: while the U.S. has successfully promoted efficiency and democracy and Asia has favored efficiency and solidarity, Europe could hope to reconcile efficiency with both democracy and solidarity. It would profit fully from new technologies that will not require large investments and will thus allow the late arrivals, especially in the Far East, to become competitive without major resources.
Would a strong Europe be in the interest of the U.S.? Some feel that America's best interests lie in a weak and divided Europe that will not compete for the leadership of the planet. In my view, this is a flawed analysis. A weak Europe would saddle U.S. taxpayers with the financial burden of ensuring world security, defending the environment and fighting against economic crimes. Furthermore, the U.S. could again find itself in a situation where, for the third time, it may have to defend liberty from threats rooted in economic depression.
Others argue that America's best interests lie in creating a strong Europe, then swallowing it up into a common entity. They explain that in 50 years, Europe's and North America's population will represent about 10% of the world's inhabitants and that the predominantly white nations should unite in defense of their social systems and their prosperity. According to this view, we must abandon the idea of an autonomous utopia based on a European political federation. Instead, it is said, we must build a viable Atlantic community, giving nato an economic dimension and uniting all the original European countries and the U.S. against the other giants of the future. But America is not limited to a European future. Its immediate aim is to foster integration with the southern hemisphere of the New World.
It is my belief that America's real interest is in the further elaboration of a powerful European Union, which would take more responsibility for dealing with the problems of Russia and Islam. The U.S. could thus share with Europe and Asia the burden of overseeing the world's affairs. The euro placed on an equal footing with the dollar in terms of its economic clout and with an Asian equivalent currency would share the task of integrating a significant part of the planet into the world economy. The three continents together would then have the means to set up the real agenda of the 21st century: communications and information networks, the battle against the criminal economy, the reduction of atmospheric pollution, and promotion of freedom and culture through a diversity of languages and ideas. What is needed for this to happen may be political vision, like that which engendered the original European Community: real European statesmen, capable of engendering dreams, replacing the current generation of politicians overly concerned with their images, limited to balancing great interests and serving as public entertainers or virtual museum caretakers. In short, a renewed United States of Europe awaits the appearance of its Jeffersons, Washingtons and Hamiltons.