Despite the long-standing success of the transatlantic relationship, bilateral ties have waxed and waned over the years. The Iraq war left the relationship bleeding. The new Democrat administration and Europe’s positive welcome of President Obama promise to heal its wounds and help it flourish. The convergence in the positions and interests of the US and Europe suggest that the time is ripe to tighten bilateral ties.
Please choose three policy areas which you think should be prioritized. Should you have other suggestions not covered in the poll, please discuss them in the comments section.
1. Strengthen counter-proliferation efforts.
During the Cold War, the existence of nuclear arsenals was rationalized through the threat of war. Currently, stocks of such weapons are seen as a threat to international security as they give rise to antagonism, thus creating an unnecessary nuclear race and risking dreadful accidents. The US and Europe need to lead by example: if they are going to make disarmament demands, they should be prepared to play by the rules of their own game and reduce their nuclear arsenals. The 2010 review of the Nuclear Proliferation Treaty means that 2009 provides a 12-month timeframe in which to decide upon a coherent disarmament strategy. Greater multilateralism between the transatlantic partners and the further strengthening of international institutions like the IAEA are appropriate methods through which to promote disarmament.
2. End Iran’s nuclear program.
The possibility of Iran becoming a nuclear power is drawing ever closer. Europe and the United States should coordinate their positions to end Iran’s nuclear ambitions. The current disappointment over the economic policy of President Ahmadinejad suggests that in the upcoming election of June 2009, voting results will leave the Iranian political scene dominated by more moderate leaders. In a tit for tat game, offering Iran the possibility of enhancing economic links to the West or offering US security guarantees may result in effective diplomacy on disarmament. However, anybody who is familiar with Iranian politics is well aware that the last word lies with the supreme leader of Iran - and in this case the motor force behind nuclear aspirations. Thus, the US and Europe may have to be prepared to go as far as inviting Ayatollah Khamenei to the negotiating table.
3. Modernize the international trade order.
In the midst of the financial crisis, protectionist measures - and their byproducts such as an upsurge in nationalism - seem to gain popularity. However, protectionism should be resisted and the transatlantic partners should prioritize the stabilization and modernization of the international trade regime and reform global financial institutions. To this end, the further development of the Transatlantic Economic Council in 2009 will be instrumental. The TEC aims to encourage further economic integration between Europe and the US by harmonizing regulation. Further, in 2009, upcoming EU-US summits - as well as the G8 and G20 summits - could provide the platform to develop a more honest and genuinely “free” trade position between the US, Europe, and the rest of the industrializing and the industrialized countries. This could be seen as a mutually beneficial offer to all WTO members and would give everyone a fair stake in a modernized international order.
4. Reduce carbon-emissions.
Current lifestyles and emission levels are no longer sustainable. President Obama acknowledges the gravity of this issue in his statements that the US will attempt to reduce greenhouse emissions by 50% by the year 2050. EU policy runs along the same lines: the current ambition is to reduce greenhouse emissions by 20% by 2020 and ensure that 20% of energy consumption is from renewable resources. This converging interest should translate into closer cooperation. As the Kyoto Protocol is due to expire in 2012, Europe and the US ought to work together over the next three years to agree on the successor plan of Kyoto. The Copenhagen Summit (November - December 2009) provides the opportunity to outline the possible options.
5. Turn Russia into a strategic partner.
Russia can be a strategic asset for both Europe and the US. Energy security may provide a window of opportunity which the EU could utilize to create firm links to Russia: economic cooperation can ease security anxieties. For the US, improving relations with Russia could have a positive spillover on the Iran issue, as Russia currently opposes stricter international sanctions against Iran. The NATO-Russia partnership and the NATO-Russia Council can provide the forums in which strategic links can be pursued. Currently, thoughts to revitalize the Council - it has been suspended due to the war in Georgia - suggest that the transatlantic partners should prioritize bilateral relations to Russia on their foreign policy agenda.
6. Define NATO’s security role for the 21st century.
NATO has defied predictions that the end of the Cold War would abolish its raison d'être. However, pending issues remain: NATO needs to define its role in the European security architecture given the development of the European Security and Defense Policy, and it must determine how to address Russia, the decision on further enlargement and energy politics. Most importantly, the issue of troop deployment remains outstanding, especially as public opinion in Europe is becoming increasingly skeptical about committing more troops to Afghanistan. The upcoming NATO summit in April 2009, which aims to decide upon the drafting of a new strategic concept for NATO adds another reason why the future role of NATO as one of the pillars of the transatlantic relationship should be prioritized on the transatlantic agenda.
7. Improve “burden-sharing” in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The EU should “upgrade” itself to become a more “equal” partner to the US by increasing the resources it invests in stabilization projects in the two countries. The EU can be a significant force in civilian based approaches and post-reconstruction initiatives given its long experience of stabilizing transition countries. The latest election in Iraq gives room for optimism but at the same time suggests that it should be a priority on the transatlantic agenda; stabilization efforts should persist to allow Iraq to continue on its new-born democracy trail.
8. Integrate China into the international order.
China is one of most powerful and influential players at the international level. Europe and the United States should acknowledge the realities of today’s interdependent and globalized world and coordinate their policies towards China. In the midst of the financial crisis and calls for protectionism, the international trade order can only survive if players like the US, Europe and China choose to uphold it and stay away from policies which advocate the adoption of higher tariffs, for example. In the same way, if the US and Europe want to make concrete policy out of their environment “rhetoric,” China is one of the states which needs to be taken on board.
Photo © European Communities, 1995-2009
Prepared and written by Christia Flourentzou
- 14
February 9, 2009
Lawrence Efana
However, the reason for singling out the three above, is partly because when one really looks into the modes of the problems confronting, it is easy to come to a conclusion that absence of trust is very dominating. It is possible that prioritizing all simultaneously helps as well, but then as we can guess so long as priority is the issue some have to be rated over the others.
Modernizing international trade if done wholeheartedly, preferably on the basis of sustainable consensus, that would mean a significant step towards setting the frame or agenda for trust. Similarly any sustainable consensus on how to deal with carbon emission problems, I venture to believe might have a the same effect: increase trust and prove readiness for some common action against a serious problem. The third: defining NATO's security for the 21st century, might have to be seen in terms of a more integrated effort to promote peace in the world, in which case one would be thinking about the United Nations Organization on the subject of who should lead and give the necessary norms.
We might not remove all problems in our world but it is time to earnestly begin finding ways and doing so by developing the grounds for trust - the stepping-stone lacking as of present.