Understanding the Europeans Better

Patrice de Beer
Translated by Douglas
French original: "Mieux comprendre les Européens"
(Le Monde, 2003/02/12)

No doubt the divide between Europe and the United States has never been as wide as it is today. The Europeans' opposition to American policy has doubtless never been as widespread in every country and in every circle. Surely, never has an American president been so opposed, taunted within the European Union, to the point that his caricature has reached such extremes that it strips all credibility from those who delight in it no end.

To believe the latest opinion polls, 82% of EU nationals are opposed to a war with Iraq without UN support; in the central and eastern European countries that are prospective EU members — the "new Europe" that George Bush is expecting to play off the Franco-German "old Europe" and which are supposedly so attracted by America’s sirens — the toll is barely weaker: 75% (EOS Gallup Europe). 54% of EU nationals think that US interventions in the international arena are negative.

National opinion polls confirm that, even in the eight countries the leaders of which signed the letter of support for George W. Bush, opinion is hostile to war: 84% in Great Britain, 82% in Hungary , 80% in Spain, 79% in Denmark, 72% in Italy, two thirds of the Portuguese. In France, it is 73%. Nevertheless, nearly three quarters of Europeans feel that Iraq represents a threat to peace. How can one explain this apparent contradiction between worry caused by Saddam Hussein and the opposition to American policy? Certainly it represents mistrust of the Bush administration, which has been unable or unwilling to convince its European partners.

Does anyone remember having seen more than four out of five Europeans express their opposition to the tutelary power of the West? An opposition which far outstrips the traditional anti-Americanism — long likened on the other side of the Atlantic to France and to a certain Left orphaned after the Cold War — which was so well described by Philippe Roger in L'Ennemi américain ("The American Enemy") (Le Seiul 2002). France is far from being the strongest link in this new insurrection and neither are our intellectuals its standard-bearers. The Londoners have been more numerous than the Parisians in massing in the streets to denounce war and, according to a poll conducted by the Pew Research Center in Washington and published in December 2002, France is the only country in Europe, along with Russia and Ukraine, in which the image of the United States has not deteriorated since 2001.

This opposition is not limited to its classical dividing lines of the far Left and far Right, which, for various historical reasons, are hostile to American hegemony. In addition to the traditional pacifists, there are those who dispute the American analysis of preemptive war against Baghdad.

A QUESTION PUT BADLY

This new paradigm goes beyond the antipathies of classical anti-Americanism. While they are the Americans' "usual suspects" each time the United States is opposed, the French are no longer alone. Perhaps this is only a circumstantial phenomenon tied to the coming conflict. But the causes seem clear and they respond to the question that so many Americans have repeatedly put to themselves and to us since the bloody attacks of 11 September 2001: "Why are we so hated?" Even if this question is put badly, for it is not the American population (for whom there was a near unanimous feeling of solidarity and compassion) but the policies and behavior of their government that are at issue. No doubt, Washington hoped that the "proof" offered by Colin Powell would convince European opinion of righteousness of its policies and that it would provide some governments with the arguments needed to join the Bush-Blair coalition without colliding head on with hostile voters. Nothing doing.

The hurt caused by the the White House's tactics — a combination of brutal pressure and messianic fundamentalism — is patent. Seeking to impose the theory of preventative war on Europe, which has been working diligently to prevent new conflicts from arising at its heart since 1945; threatening to bar its old allies, Paris and Berlin in particular, from the crumbs of petroleum following a victory over Saddam Hussein if they don't get in line; putting parentheses around NATO, an historic alliance in which all members have their say even if the final decision generally falls to the US, in favor of a makeshift coalition of which the composition, means and objectives are entirely dictated by the Pentagon's whims, a behavior criticized in Munich by Michèle Alliot-Marie; playing the "new" Europe off the "old" one the some of the 15 against others in order to weaken a Union the US seeks to reduce to a free-trade zone. Such methods will leave lasting marks.

At least as much as the unilateralism of the American administration, it is these new methods that are authoritarian, if not contemptuous or at least ignorant of the terrain (when, for example, they hint that Europeans may have sympathies for Baghdad) that have alienated America. For Bill Clinton, who was equally determined to protect American interests, had a way of seducing, of mollifying his interlocutors.

Providing, as early as last Fall, "proof" of Saddam Hussein's duplicity and of his attempts to arm with weapons of mass destruction would doubtless of convinced more people of the White House's good faith than repeated refusals to justify its reasons to allies treated as ancillaries at the UN Security Council, the legitimate authority in this matter.

Today, the damage is done and President Bush must row against the current. Seeking to explode the appearance of agreement among the 15 on a common foreign policy for circumstantial goal does not go over well; especially if one remembers that Geroge W. Bush had begun well before 11 September 2001 to sew discord among his European allies. In seeking to force the governments of the Old Continent to go atilt their own opinions at the risk of provoking a lasting rupture in national consensus is a risky strategy which also runs counter to the policy of democratization announced for Iraq.

In sum, how can one make the Europeans act even more warlike than American public opinion, 47% of which still wants UN approval before attacking Iraq? Can one ask them to be even less circumspect about the strategy and methods for the Second Gulf War than General Norman Schwarzkopf, head of the American expeditionary corps during the first war (Le Monde, 31 January)? Are Mssrs. Aznar, Berlusconi and Blair more convincing when they suggest that the survival of transatlantic bonds depends on European docility? Beyond the debate on the principle of preventive war, the Europeans' new incomprehension of the United States is a reaction against the behavior of its leaders.

[Posted 2003/02/13]

Copyright © Watch 2001-2006. Copyrights of quoted materials
belong to their respective owners.

 

 

"When people accept futility and the absurd as normal, the culture is decadent. The term is not a slur; it is a technical label."

Jacques Barzun

Articles of the week

"Losing the Enlightenment" (Victor Davis Hanson, OpinionJournal, 2006/11/29)

"Allah’s England?" (Daniel Johnson, Commentary. November 2006)

"'Sex in the Park': The latest doings of the Danish imams" (Henrik Bering, The Weekly Standard, 2006/11/18)

"Narcissism on Stilts" (Harold Evans, New York Sun, 2006/11/16)

"Terrorists are recruiting in our schools, says MI5 boss" (Philip Johnston, The Daily Telegraph, 2006/11/10)

› AOTW Archive



From the archives

Oriana Fallaci, R.I.P.

"The Rage, the Pride and the Doubt" (Oriana Fallaci, The Wall Street Journal, 2003/03/13)

"How the West Was Won and How It Will Be Lost" (Oriana Fallaci, The American Enterprise, from the January/February 2003 issue)

"On Jew-hatred in Europe" (Oriana Fallaci, dennisprager.com, 2002/04/13)

"Anger and Pride" (Oriana Fallaci, dennisprager.com, 2001/12/19)

Weekly archive

2006/12/04 - 2006/12/10
2006/11/27 - 2006/12/03
2006/11/20 - 2006/11/26
2006/11/13 - 2006/11/19
2006/11/06 - 2006/11/12
2006/10/30 - 2006/11/05

› From 2001/09/11 -



Monthly index

December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006

› From September 2001 -



Author index

› Ajami, Fouad - Johnson, Paul
› Kagan, Robert - Ye'or, Bat



Support Watch

Please feel free to donate if you enjoy the daily content and links Watch provides:

Contact Watch

Email:
watch-at-windsofchange.net