Author Mark Leonard makes an optimistic and methinks persuasive case for the ascendancy of the European Union over the next century. (Hat tip.) While the article doesn’t deal explicitly with the recent French "non" toward the EU constitutional treaty, its May 27 dating makes it an obvious rejoinder.
Why EU ascendancy? The EU’s power is understated and much desired (precisely the opposite of the US). Countries willingly transform themselves to receive EU assistance and, possibly, even membership.
Aside from the post-WWII transformations of Germany and Japan, the US model for the last half century has been "love ’em and leave ’em." Contrast that to the EU’s involvement in the former Yugoslavia. Those countries are rapidly improving themselves to curry favor with the EU. Afghanistan and Iraq are not nearly so enthusiastic nor, I suspect, so permanent in their transformations.
Leonard notes that Europe’s sphere of influence covers 1.5 billion people and 80 nations linked intimately to the EU for their trade viability. That’s about a third of the planet. And I’d bet most of those nations would join up if given the opportunity. Meanwhile, the US hasn’t admitted any more states to the Union since Alaska and Hawaii immediately following WWII. And no one wants to join, not even Puerto Rico. And certainly not Canada.
The EU has its imitators. The recently formed African Union is a clear copy cat. The Arab League and China both look to the EU for reform and peaceful expansion ideas. And who is trying to imitate the US these days? (Besides those forced to at gun point.)
The "non" vote is a set back, to be sure. But now Europe might write a Constiution worth approving, instead of a pale imitation of the Articles of Confederation. If it can adopt a model that gives Europeans control over the Eurocrats, political integration and expansion can only accelerate. In the meantime, nothing is lost and nothing is gained. The EU continues as it did before the vote.
Imagine, then, that a new Constution is written and approved. The remaining Balkan nations join, soon followed by the Maghreb nations, the rest of the former Soviet territories, and even Turkey and Lebanon. The Mediterranean and Black Seas look more and more to be European lakes, with EU membership standing at around 45 nations. The Middle East, the Caucases, and Russia begin to lust after EU membership, beginning the necessary transformations in order to even apply. Even Israel begins to wonder if joining the Eurosphere would be more beneficial than US alignment and Palestinian confrontation.
Meanwhile, the African Union develops apace, take two steps forward for every one step back. The Arab League become the Arab Union, even as its leading states move closer to European integration. Both are quickly out paced by the newly formed Latin American Union, whose member countries were so much further developed to begin with. Nations bordering French Guiana make preparations for applications.
And then what if the oil economy collapses (for good)? Everyone, EU included, will suffer greatly. But US’ oil-based dominance will quickly recede, whether in a blaze or glory or a peaceful decline. China’s economic ascendency is also checked because of its oil reliance. Because of its renewable energy efforts, its lack of reliance on a military-industrial complex, and general global goodwill, Europe emerges the leading player. The complete collapse of OPEC economies makes those nations even more dependent on Europe. (Should Russia, Israel, Iran, Pakistan, India, China and/or North Korea trade nukes, Europe may well be the only player in the Eastern Hemisphere.)
Canada’s maritime provinces begin making explicit overtures to the EU. Ontario and Quebec soon follow. At that point New England will start to get the EU itch, and the US will have some tough decisions to make—all while Africa, Dar al Islam and Latin America integrate closer and closer with peaceful Europe. The birth of the "Earth Union" will not be far away.
