By Michael Brendan Dougherty
Wednesday, May 31, 2017
Stop me if you’ve heard this one before. A German leader
in a beer tent announces a new indifference to the United Kingdom and America
and a new determination to lead Europe into a glorious future, possibly
delighting the expansionist strongman leading Russia. The result, a little over
seventy years ago, was a calamity for civilization, before Germany was brought
to repent of its ambition. In 2017, the replay was far less threatening, and
the German leader in question began issuing comedowns and take-backs in about
72 hours. The only casualties were the excited opinion columns about Europe
stepping forward to lead the world Trump’s America had abandoned.
But it was a mysterious statement. “The times in which we
can fully count on others are somewhat over, as I have experienced in the past
few days,” Merkel lamented. “We Europeans must really take our destiny in our
own hands. Of course we need to have friendly relations with the U.S. and with
the U.K. and with other neighbors, including Russia. But we have to fight for
our own future ourselves” Of course, she had electoral politics on mind. But
something deeper is at work.
In poker, a player who has lost control of her emotions
and the realistic assessment of the stakes at play is said to have gone on
tilt. Donald Trump seems to put all of his opponents and some of his friends on
tilt. The Democrats, the media, and foreign leaders often have good reasons to
dislike Donald Trump’s leadership of the United States. Don’t we all? But what
so often happens is that Trump’s opponents are goaded by the passions of their
constituents, or their wounded sense of pride, or even deluded by their
conviction that others must come to realize Trump’s presidency is some kind of
cosmic mistake. And then they run out ahead of the evidence, or their own
better judgment.
In global opinion-setting press clippings, German
chancellor Angela Merkel and her new friend, French president Emmanuel Macron,
outclass everyone on planet Earth. But in the real world, the thing that keeps
cartographers sitting on their hands and reprinting the same European border
maps year after year since the dissolution of the Soviet empire is the U.S.
military, the one parked in Germany since 1945.
As one of her own party members said in an off-the-record
comment to the Financial Times, “For
Merkel, that was an unusually strong statement, Trump’s only been president for
four months.” Perhaps a strategic partnership that has endured for the better
part of a century isn’t so vulnerable to one tough speech by an American
president, or so easy to change that the aspiration of a German chancellor
remakes the world order.
But that didn’t stop the gusher of enthusiasm for
Merkel’s comments. The Europhilic Irish
Times purred that Merkel was stating the obvious: “Faced with an erratic
and unpredictable White House, with its purely transactional view of global
alliances, and a United Kingdom rapidly turning inward, the EU can only achieve
its goals by pulling closer together.” American opinion writers were not much
more sober, declaring it the practical end of Atlantic alliance.
How many aircraft carriers, nuclear subs, and fighter
jets has Germany christened in these four months? How much closer has Germany
come to military parity with Russia? What do you think Poland or Latvia thinks
of trusting Germany for political and military protection, absent the United
States? C’mon, everyone. Get a grip.
European leaders, contemplating the last 15 years of
American leadership, are asking themselves if the problem is one with the
American public, who keep electing unserious presidents who make foreign-policy
mistakes. Are Europeans immune from bad foreign-policy leadership? Ask the
French about Mali or Libya. Ask Germans on the street about Merkel’s open
migration policy, or the deal with Turkey meant to stanch the flow. Does the
American public sometimes question the utility of NATO? Of course. But European
publics are less
committed to NATO’s mutual-defense pact than Americans.
Germany is hardly more prepared to lead Europe away from
the United States than Spain or Bulgaria would be. Germany’s overt leadership
would divide Europe even more into competing Western and Eastern blocs. It was
the non-idealistic leadership of European institutions heavily tilted toward
German bondholders that led to further disaffection in the currency union. It
was the idealistic leadership of Germany in the refugee crisis that led to
Brexit. Questioning the Atlantic alliance in a fit of pique could look stupidly
short-sighted. Donald Trump’s presidency could be over before Germany or any
other European country could even rouse its public for the massive public
spending that being a real-world power would require.
“Europe is a union of peace and freedom and it is worth
fighting for,” Merkel said, to a great surge of applause. Who could argue
otherwise? But the rejoinder suggests itself: Is it worth 2 percent of GDP?
Someone, maybe even an oafish American president, might ask. And when he does,
it’s best to try not to lose the run of yourself.
No comments:
Post a Comment