In the past years John McCain, a self-confessed Atlanticist, was one of the only participants in the Munich Conference on Security Policy from whom one could always expect straight talk. The Senator spoke about Putin’s Russia in a critical and distanced manner that one had never before heard. On the topic of nuclear weapons and Iran, his remarks leave nothing to be desired in terms of directness: only one thing would be worse than waging a war—an Iranian regime with nuclear arms. This year McCain did not come to Munich as his campaign manager deemed that a trip would be ill-advised. After all, his rival for the Republican nomination, Huckabee, has not yet thrown in the towel; and the social-conservative wing of the party has not yet made peace with this unorthodox-conservative man. So the conference had to make do with McCain’s greetings. Greetings which candidly stated what the experts have also said over the past few days: many Europeans expect that Bush’s successor will have an healing impact on Atlantic relations and want a proverbial new beginning, or alternatively, a return to the good old times (which only look harmonious in retrospect). But the honeymoon with the 44th president of the United States, no matter who that may be, is likely to be short. This has to do with issues and strategic priorities. With a Democratic president, the new-found happiness might last a bit longer, but analogous demands on Europeans would soon be made—keyword Afghanistan.
One area where the transatlantic partners will continue to disagree, is Russia. In his greeting, McCain, who remained consistent to his previous views, asked for a united position of the West towards “revanchist” Russia. One resultant demand would be: throw Russia out of the circle of the G8; and another: hold the door to NATO open to all democracies that commit themselves to defending freedom, which would include Georgia and the Ukraine. In (West) Europe few governments would embrace such demands. Even the German government under Chancellor Merkel, which has pursued a pragmatic-realist course vis-à-vis Russia, is likely to consider it to be a bad idea to push Russia outside of the doors of the G8.
Another contentious issue is the promotion of democracy in the world and the delegitimization of authoritarian and repressive regimes. It would be a mistake to think that with the marginalisation of the so-called Neoconservatives in Washington, the fires of democratization will also be extinguished. Certainly, the Bush-method of democracy promotion has been discredited, but the issue still remains on America’s burner. McCain talks about founding a “League of Democracies.” A similar suggestion has been made by Hillary Clinton’s camp, where the focus, however, is primarily on the importance of globalizing Nato and its membership. A “League of Democracies” is naturally controversial because it identifies and excludes states based on different forms of government—countries with which Europe would like to form strategic partnerships, for example China or Russia, would consequently be excluded. Criticism of exclusion and the notion of countervailing powers would quickly emerge; idealism and realism would be positioned against one another when it came to foreign policy. Does that sound like a harmonious new beginning?
The 44th president will certainly be more open-minded about some European concerns, for example about environmental protection. A change of style will also occur. But Europeans will, perhaps more so than today, become the addressees of American demands, whether in regards to the permanent issues of Afghanistan and Iraq or new crises. Europeans might reduce the pressure of these demands by stepping forward with incentives of their own. The reality should be prepared for that the “War On Terror,” whether under its current name or not, will be continued—even by a “redeemer” called Barack Obama. After all, Americans will elect the president of a global power.
Klaus-Dieter Frankenberger is the foreign affairs editor of the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung in Germany. He is also a member of the Atlantic Initiative Advisory Board. He has been a congressional fellow at the U.S. House of Representatives and as a Marshall fellow at Harvard University. Mr. Frankenberger is a member of the Trilateral Commission and serves on the advisory board of the German Institute for European Politics.
Originally published in Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung on February 12, 2008
Republished in English by permission of the author
Translation by Crystal Oswald-Herold
Related Articles from the Atlantic Community
- Christian Andreas Morris: Obama and Clinton: Who Would be Best for Europe?
- Samantha Ferrell: Republican Candidates on Europe: Huckabee, McCain, Giuliani, and Romney
- Klaus-Dieter Frankenberger: Bush on Missile Defense, Energy and the War On Terror: “We have nothing to hide”
- 5
