A requiem for Europe

The costs and consequences of American primacy on a continent that gave birth to the modern world

THE LAST WORD | Andrew M. Mwenda | By 1900, there was no part of this planet that was not directly (or somewhat indirectly) ruled from a European capital – London, Paris, The Hague, Berlin, Rome, Brussels, Madrid and Lisbon. Yet today, we are witnessing the slow-motion death of Europe. The continent is facing an existential predicament and a creeping irrelevance. It has moved from strategic dependence on the US security umbrella to a non-strategic and self-defeating subservience to America’s agenda, even when it harms Europe. The war in Ukraine has made this tragedy evident.

As I write this article, all major European economies are suffering from negative or extremely low rates of GDP growth – Germany, -0.3%, France, 0.9%, Italy, 0.7%, UK 0.3%, Netherlands, 0.1%. The growth rate for the entire European Union is 0.3%. Inflation is high and energy prices skyrocketing, the continent is deindustrializing accompanied by a catastrophic decline the quality of life for most people. This is largely because of self-inflicted wounds resulting from the sanctions against Russia due to her invasion of Ukraine. Consequently, right-wing political parties that are hostile to liberal democracy are growing. So, while European elites claim to be fighting to defend liberal democracy in Ukraine (which never existed), they are losing it at home. How did the continent get to this?

When Soviet leader, Mikhail Gorbachev, negotiated the end of the Cold War with US presidents Ronald Reagan and his successor, George H.W. Bush, his main aim was to end the military dividing lines in Europe and create what he called “a common European home.” Europe had been torn apart by two world wars. The Second World War left the continent cut in the middle between the Americans and the Soviets. Gorbachev envisioned a demilitarized Europe living in peace and harmony. America did not share this vision.

The worst nightmare in America’s pursuit of global primacy is a powerful state (or alliance of states) on the Eurasian land mass as this would form an independent pole of power. Russia is a vital factor in such a situation. America’s strategic aim therefore is to ensure a weak and divided Europe. This makes it possible for America to manipulate Europeans and use them in her struggle to weaken Russia. Hence, American policy is to sustain the old military dividing lines in Europe. Washington’s instrument in this project is NATO – hence America’s push for its continuous expansion.

The founding aim of NATO was best articulated by the English general, Lord Ismay, in 1950: to keep the Europeans on the American side, the Russians out and the Germans down. This is the reason the US ignored calls from its leading foreign policy experts not to expand NATO. Practically every American leader and scholar on foreign policy argued in the early to mid 1990s that the expansion of NATO would destabilize Europe and redraw the military dividing lines of the Cold War. America ignored this advice because, among other reasons, the hawkish elements in Washington were determined to weaken or even break-up Russia.

As we are witnessing with America’s proxy war in Ukraine, this policy threatens nuclear Armageddon. Once wars begin, it becomes ever more difficult to control subsequent events. This is because miscalculation, miscommunication or misunderstandings can escalate the situation beyond any leader’s original intent.

American pursuit of global primacy is articulated in its national security strategy papers, in books by its scholars, in speeches by its politicians etc. Vladmir Putin has been unwilling to follow the rest of Europe in making his country a vassal state of USA. Russia seeks to be treated as a great power. Consequently, it became US policy to encircle Russia and neutralize it as a threat. This is ever more important because China has emerged as a peer competitor to the USA; then better to weaken Russia to deny Beijing an ally.

For Europe to be secure, it needs to build a security architecture that includes Russia. But this would make it an independent pole of power, exactly what America doesn’t want. American power in Europe is expressed through NATO. For America to keep Europeans subservient to her global aims, it needs them to have a threat, hence the Russian bogeyman. It has been US policy to keep provoking Russia into taking a series of actions that make it a threat to European security. NATO expansion is one such ploy. Europeans are caught in a vicious cycle: America provokes Moscow, whose reactions create an atmosphere of insecurity in Europe and thereby bind Europeans ever more deeply to Washington.

America’s proxy war in Ukraine demands European countries express political solidarity with their patron. However, this comes at the price of economic decline. As already stated, the rate of GDP growth for the EU region last year was 0.3%. In the same year, Russia grew at 3.6% and is projected to grow at 4% this year. Before the war, Germany had a trade surplus with China. Because high energy costs (due to sanctions on Russian gas) German industry has become uncompetitive. Now China has a trade surplus with Germany.

The subordination of European interests to America’s global aims is best expressed in the blowing up of Nord Stream Two. This was a joint German-Russia oil and gas pipeline meant to bring cheap Russian gas to Germany, Europe’s last manufacturing hub. Berlin had invested billions of dollars in it. It was destroyed by Germany’s ally, the USA, without a whisper from Berlin. American policy is against any Berlin-Moscow cooperation. Germany technology and Russia’s vast resources create a combination that Washington is not willing to tolerate. Which makes sense because if ever there was an alliance between Russia and Germany, it would create an independent pole of power on the Eurasian landmass.

While America’s interests are understandable, Germany’s are not. Why does Berlin continue to play sucker to American policy even to her own detriment? French president, Emmanuel Macron, has sometimes talked about Europe’s need for strategic autonomy. Many European leaders have said similar. But France has not done (and cannot do) anything to rally Europe around this idea. America does not want an independent Europe as that would create another pole of power. But why can’t the Europeans see this?

For Ukraine, the situation is worse. Every day, American, British and other European politicians talk openly and grandiloquently about how they are weakening Russia without sacrificing the lives of their own soldiers. They openly say Ukraine is a proxy war to knock Russia out of the league of great powers. In spite of these boasts, elites in Kiev are either deaf and blind to this reality or too divided that they accept their people to die, and their country destroyed, in pursuit of Washington’s agenda.

I hope that Taiwanese elites see in the Ukraine tragedy the fate of their island. America may pretend to defend their autonomy yet in fact it is using them to weaken China. America wants to use Taiwan as bait to draw China into a long, costly and stupid war just like Russia in Ukraine. The outcome of such a war, if it does not go nuclear, may weaken China but will destroy Taiwan. America has learnt to weaken her enemies without using her soldiers. Europeans are too weak, too divided and too subservient to see that America’s interests in Ukraine are detrimental to their wellbeing. A once great continent has been reduced into a vassal of America. As the economic benefits of American patronage decline, one hopes that European elite find their voice.

*****

amwenda@ugindependent.co.ug