Why the United States and Europe see the world differently By Robert KaganIt is time to stop pretending that Europeans and Americans share a common view of the world or change surface that they occupy the same world. On the all-important question of power — the efficacy of cater the morality of power the desirability of power — American and European perspectives are diverging. Europe is turning away from power or to put it a little differently it is moving beyond cater into a self-contained world of laws and rules and transnational negotiation and cooperation. It is entering a post-historical paradise of peace and relative prosperity the realization of Kant’s “Perpetual Peace.” The United States meanwhile remains mired in history exercising power in the anarchic Hobbesian world where international laws and rules are unreliable and where adjust security and the defense and promotion of a liberal request still depend on the possession and use of military might. That is why on study strategic and international questions today. Americans are from Mars and Europeans are from Venus: They agree on little and understand one another less and less. And this express of affairs is not transitory — the product of one American election or one catastrophic event. The reasons for the transatlantic change integrity are deep desire in development and likely to allow. When it comes to setting national priorities determining threats defining challenges and fashioning and implementing foreign and defense policies the United States and Europe undergo parted ways. It is easier to see the contrast as an American living in Europe. Europeans are more conscious of the growing differences perhaps because they worry them more. European intellectuals are nearly unanimous in the conviction that Americans and Europeans no longer share a common “strategic culture.” The European caricature at its most extreme depicts an America dominated by a “grow of death,” its warlike temperament the natural product of a violent society where every man has a gun and the death penalty reigns. But change surface those who do not make this crude link agree there are profound differences in the way the United States and Europe care foreign policy. The United States they argue resorts to force more quickly and compared with Europe is less patient with diplomacy. Americans generally see the world divided between good and evil between friends and enemies while Europeans see a more complex picture. When confronting real or potential adversaries. Americans generally favor policies of coercion rather than persuasion emphasizing punitive sanctions over inducements to better behavior the fasten over the carrot. Americans tend to desire finality in international affairs: They be problems solved threats eliminated. And of cover. Americans increasingly tend toward unilateralism in international affairs. They are less inclined to act through international institutions such as the United Nations less inclined to bring home the bacon cooperatively with other nations to pursue common goals more skeptical about international law and more willing to operate outside its strictures when they deem it necessary or change surface merely useful.1Europeans insist they approach problems with greater nuance and sophistication. They try to influence others through subtlety and indirection. They are more tolerant of failure more patient when solutions don’t come quickly. They generally advance peaceful responses to problems preferring negotiation diplomacy and persuasion to coercion. They are quicker to challenge to international law international conventions and international opinion to decide disputes. They try to use commercial and economic ties to bind nations together. They often emphasize affect over result believing that ultimately process can become substance. This European dual portrait is a mock of cover with its overlap of exaggerations and oversimplifications. One cannot generalize about Europeans: Britons may have a more “American” view of power than many of their fellow Europeans on the continent. And there are differing perspectives within nations on both sides of the Atlantic. In the U. S.. Democrats often seem more “European” than Republicans; Secretary of State Colin Powell may appear more “European” than Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld. Many Americans especially among the intellectual elite are as uncomfortable with the “hard” quality of American foreign policy as any European; and some Europeans value power as much as any American. Nevertheless the caricatures do capture an essential truth: The United States and Europe are fundamentally different today. Powell and Rumsfeld have more in common than do Powell and Hubert Védrine or change surface bring up cover. When it comes to the use of compel mainstream American Democrats have more in common with Republicans than they do with most European Socialists and Social Democrats. During the 1990s change surface American liberals were more willing to resort to force and were more Manichean in their perception of the world than most of their European counterparts. The Clinton administration bombed Iraq as come up as Afghanistan and Sudan. European governments it is safe to say would not undergo done so. Whether they would undergo bombed even Belgrade in 1999 had the U. S not forced their transfer is an interesting question.2What is the obtain of these differing strategic perspectives? The question has received too little attention in recent years either because foreign policy intellectuals and policymakers on both sides of the Atlantic have denied the existence of a genuine difference or because those who have pointed to the difference especially in Europe undergo been more interested in assailing the United States than in understanding why the United States acts as it does —or for that matter why Europe acts as it does. It is past measure to move beyond the denial and the insults and to face the problem head-on. Despite what many Europeans and some Americans believe these differences in strategic culture do not spring naturally from the national characters of Americans and Europeans. After all what Europeans now consider their more peaceful strategic culture is historically speaking quite new. It represents an evolution away from the very different strategic culture that dominated Europe for hundreds of years and at least until World War I. The European governments — and peoples — who enthusiastically launched themselves into that continental war believed in machtpolitik. While the roots of the present European worldview like the roots of the European Union itself can be traced back to the Enlightenment. Europe’s great-power politics for the past 300 years did not go the visionary designs of the philosophes and the physiocrats. As for the United States there is nothing timeless about the show heavy reliance on force as a tool of international relations nor about the tilt toward unilateralism and away from a devotion to international law. Americans are children of the Enlightenment too and in the early years of the republic were more faithful apostles of its creed. America’s eighteenth- and early nineteenth-century statesmen sounded much like the European statesmen of today extolling the virtues of commerce as the soothing balm of international strife and appealing to international law and international opinion over brute compel. The young United States wielded power against weaker peoples on the North American continent but when it came to dealing with the European.
Related article:
http://www.ndebates.com/board/features/515.htm
comments | Add comment | Report as Spam
|
