FAZ has an important reputation to keep up for objectivity (within the terms of its own constituency) and relations between Europe and the USA are extremely important for its readership. The article seems to me to be soundly based.
>The United States, buoyed by enviable
>economic growth (until recently, at any rate) and reinforced by the
>self-asurance of being the only superpower, is increasingly acting in
>accordance with the way it sees the world.
>
>European states, by contrast, are increasingly placing their hopes for the
>future in a growing network of international institutions and agreements.
This is certainly the different tradition and experience of Europe which may become amplified in the decentred post modern world.
From outside Europe, as the English so often think they are, the story of European integration has been heard as endless arguments, without any sense that persistent discussion is the process whereby the leading powers of continental Europe have increasingly integrated their objectives.
It is striking now how Europe is stepping forward with intiatives that presuppose a similar global framework of dialogue. Only today I see that France and Germany have made an appeal to Kofi Annan for a convention on human cloning.
Although Europe has many problems still of achieving really competitive capitalist integration of its economies, (and may need a two speed Europe), nevertheless this political approach is essentially more democratic for a multi-centred world.
In turn, as the FAZ article suggests, it may further amplify those tendencies to a multi-centred world.
>Important decisions on global isues are often only reached once Europe and
>the United States have adopted common positions. When there is discord,
>other powers such as Rusia or China gain more room to maneuver and many
>smaller, developing countries also begin to go their own way.
Without requiring any declaration of war, in fact partly by the subtlety of the approach, and the caution with which it is being discussed in articles like this, and parallel articles I read in the International Herald Tribune, a challenge is emerging for global leadership.
There is a battle between two styles of leadership: the authoritarian and the consensual.
Bush's blundering approach can only accelerate the process. Already his boldness, coupled with his prolonged holidays, are looking in fact like a sign of weakness. The US economy had better stay good for him.
Chris Burford
London