Hardt responds to responses

[Peter Kilander]

Hardt says:
>I think the analysis of the Kosovo war in terms of
>competition between the US and Europe is fundamentally correct and
>important.  It is probably no coincidence that the war comes not long
>after the establishment of the Euro and the (real or imagined? Doug is the
>one to ask) threat of a united European currency to the supremacy of the
>dollar.  The reassertion of Nato keeps the US and Britain the central
>players in European affairs and prevents any possible expansion to unity
>with the East.  So both in this war and in the world order in general,
>the US does seem to have a privileged role.

(This is for LBO, not Hardt)
The Euro is in trouble, no? I think it has sank more than 10% versus the
dollar since its creation. Some of the reasons for this sagging I've read in
the press are the "concessions" made to the Italians on budgetary matters
and the failure of the ECB to find a single voice. I don't know about  there
being no coincidence with the war and the Euro. I think its more about
"maintaining the credibility of NATO," even thought the U.S. military
doesn't seem to have its heart in this one. And as far as U.S. imperialism,
Treasury Secretary Summers (bleck) and Greenspan are against dollarization
for Latin America. So, the architects aren't as hawkish as they could be.
Right?