For A New Political Order
Ideas
Conventional predictions lead us to fear that Europe, like other dominant civilizations from Egypt to the Roman Empire, has entered a period of decline — a decline that, at least from a statistical point of view, seems unstoppable. Europe now has, compared with its main competitors, the lowest birthrate (with the exception of Japan), the highest unemployment rate, the oldest population, the highest social expenditures, the lowest industrial-growth rate, the weakest industrial research in key sectors of information technology, the fewest new patents. Even its renowned financial markets are heading toward fragility. And though its share of the worldwide GNP remains high — above 20% — this too will drop rapidly in the future.
Thus everything is shaping up for 21st century Europe to become little more than a "Venetian Continent," visited by millions of Asians and Americans, inhabited by tourist guides, museum caretakers and hotelkeepers. In the big global bazaar, the place occupied by European companies, products, ideas, literature, music and cinema will soon be taken over by objects, services, sounds, noises, words and images from elsewhere.
This worst-case scenario — which will come true if market forces alone dictate the outcome — can be described in these terms: 20-odd European countries will be assembled into a single European Union, a unified economic space in which a dozen or so of these states will share a new common currency, the euro. This large market, entirely open to outside investment, will have no common budgetary, fiscal or social policy. It will be under the domination of the Continent's premier industrial power, Germany, which will turn the euro into a kind of supermark. Lacking financial resources of its own, this monetary union will probably not create social mechanisms capable of compensating for the devastating effects on employment caused by productivity differences between regions.
This could lead the richest regions — such as Piedmont, Catalonia and Flanders — to refuse joint liability for their less fortunate neighbors and to decide to talk directly with European Community authorities in Brussels and Frankfurt. Faced with a rapidly growing membership, the Union will no longer be able to remain a decision-making center with a coherent economic and security policy or a credible defense. Lacking a strong common will, moreover, most of the European Union countries will be unable to reduce their tax burdens. They will cease to be competitive because of high labor costs, which will move various activities toward Africa and Asia and thereby increase European unemployment. According to this scenario, only Germany will be able to get by, if it manages to maintain its social consensus, its banking resources and its lead in certain key sectors. Even then, Germany will be held back by the recessionary climate surrounding it.
At the same time, all European countries will raise military spending because of a double threat. To the east, there will be a Russia in turmoil, financially drained and gradually fragmented into more or less autonomous provinces, several of which have nuclear armies run by one or more local generals. To the south, there will be a Maghreb tested by a radical Islam, where millions of desperate inhabitants will be tempted to cross the Mediterranean, thus multiplying the risks of all kinds of destabilization. In sum, if the countries of Europe remain divided, the most probable outcome is that the market will impose a destructive every-man-for-himself approach that will make Europe, at best, a Venetian continent and, at worst, a Buenos Aires continent, which means decay with dictators.
Yet Europe still has the means to become the premier economic power of the 21st century. To do this, it will need to realize that the marketplace alone will not assure its future. What would have happened to North America if, in the 19th century, economic laws were the only ones dictating the social order? It would have become a land of anarchy and dictatorships. To build the U.S., there needed to be a political will, a view of the future and institutions that adequately reflected the aspirations of its people. In the same way, Europe will be doomed to be a Venetian continent unless it imitates the Founding Fathers of the U.S. This requires creation of a vision of Europe 50 years down the road and the judging of all actions according to how they contribute to this vision. In setting its agenda, Europe must:
Establish political institutions to complete the common currency.
Europe must create a treasury ministry, a supreme court and a senate to represent its member countries. And with these institutions it must launch, with the help of the private sector, a massive, 20-year program to install a network of communications infrastructure connected to the Internet. Once that is done, European tourism, the No. 1 industry of the 21st century, will be a strength and not a sign of decline.
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.