We had an interesting question sent in from two French students not long ago, asking whether the EU offers an alternative model to US influence in the world. The question sparked a fierce debate, and it was clear that many of you subscribe to the old Gaullist attitude that Europe should try to position itself as a counterbalance to the United States.
Relations between the two continents have certainly cooled recently, following revelations that the US and Britain were conducting mass surveillance of European citizens and spying on EU leaders. In a sign of how concerned the White House is over the relationship with Europe, Obama is making a rare trip to an EU-US summit in Brussels next month. This will be the US President’s first EU-US summit since 2011, when the once-annual events were indefinitely postponed to take place ‘only when necessary’ – Obama is said to have found the summits too dull to endure (describing them as “not as exciting as other summits”)
Additionally, there are concerns from both sides of the Atlantic that a far-reaching EU-US trade currently being negotiated could be at risk because of the NSA spying scandal. This would certainly suit many of our commenters, who view the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) with deep suspicion. For example, we had the following comment sent in by Marcel:
The TTIP should not happen… It is designed to benefit the rich and corporations. Unemployment will go up as hundreds of thousands more jobs will be shipped to low wage countries, the middle class will be further gutted and poverty will continue to go up, as it has done with every one of those ‘free trade’ deals since 1992…
We took this comment to Vital Moreira, a Portuguese MEP who sits with the Social Democrats and is the Chair of the Trade Committee in the European Parliament. As somebody involved in the TTIP negotiations, what would he say to Marcel?
This is fiction. Marcel’s comment has nothing to do with reality. All the studies that have been done show that this trade deal is about growth and jobs, not about making richer those who are already rich. Of course, you cannot have growth without investment – this is what creates jobs, so if you want growth and jobs, you have to give investors the opportunity to invest. But all the serious studies show this is about growth and jobs, not about fiction like Marcel’s point.
Next, we had a comment sent in by Marina, who cited a study from the Bertlesmann foundation that argued the US would benefit from the TTIP much more than EU countries. She wrote that:
We took Marina’s comment to Moreira to see how he would respond:
Finally, there will be no erosion via this agreement of any of the sensitive issues here in Europe, namely safety. So, this is not in question.
In general, EU governments are very enthusiastic about the impact of the TTIP on Europe’s economies. We recently spoke to the Finnish Minister for European Affairs and Foreign Trade, Alexander Stubb, whose party sits with the Centre-Right in the European Parliament. He thought the EU-US trade pact would be good for everybody:
I think the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Pact, if and when it materialises, will be great news for both the European Union and United States economies. If signed, it could boost GDP growth annually by 0.5% until 2027. It will give access to markets we haven’t been able to penetrate previously, including public procurement, and it will equally facilitate trade both ways across the Atlantic.
Finally, we put Marina’s question to Marietje Schaake, a Dutch MEP who is also the spokesperson for the Liberal Democrats group in the European Parliament on TTIP. Schaake has also been particularly active on issues of online privacy and human rights, including strongly criticising the US government for its spying activities. What did she think about the trade deal?
Most of the parties in the European Parliament are in favour of a trade deal with the US. However, the Radical Left and elements of the Greens (as well as some Social Democrats) are more hostile. Don’t forget, you can vote for the party that is closest to your own views on EU-US relations in our Debating Europe Vote 2014!
Could the European Union be a counterbalance to US influence in the world? Or should the EU work closely with its American ally? And will the US-EU trade deal under negotiation only benefit the rich? Or will TTIP encourage jobs and growth for everyone on both sides of the Atlantic? Let us know your thoughts and comments in the form below, and we’ll take them to policy-makers and experts for their reactions.
Vote 2014
Voting is closed in our Debating Europe Vote 2014! The results are now in, so come and see what our readers thought!
109 comments Post a commentcomment
Counterbalance! We can be the first economy in the world…
And we should be!
Obviously the one who asked the question things we are idiots.
that was a very constructive comment….
No doubt… counterbalance
counterbalance. If there is 1 power who has the economical and military power, it endangers status quo in the world. Not to mention a threat to the European culture and values. We passed the cold war era, now the world is multipolar, and this is how it should be
how stupid could be one responding to these questions as if someone will read the answer?
For this we would need to actually create a european union driven by its citizen. If people in Europe would feel europeans as people in america feel americans, Europe would stand a chance to have some weight in the international balance. As of today, the US can easily destabilise Europe by contributing to awakening the feeling of pride in any nation in Europe and immediately sending us backward 50 years ago. The Europe of today is way too much a political Europe and the gap between institutions and its citizen is so big that even European institutions are aware of it….
So basically you ask us if we are for counterbalancing the US influence…And you fail to tell us what would be the benefit of that?
Is there any practical benefit or are we talking about the ego of some EU officials deaming to be the big guy in some international forum?
What about a full scale neutrality, peace, business and nothing else?
I’d say, rather a counterbalance.
counterbalance, obviously.
False ally, when they have a bankruptcy to hide and have the power to control the markets, do not stop to divert attention to other countries economically weaker and even destroy them. Maybe they’re allies of Mrs Merkel, not of the rest of Europe.
Yes, far too close
Too close ?? Polite way of putting it, seeing the EU ALLOWS every single country to be SPIED on by the NSA, including Merkels own private cell phone, not tht she didnt know about it, she and Obama work for the same Bankers .. US FED/ECB .. Europes watching and its not pleased.
Far way better close to US than even a little to Russia…
my question is how? how can the EU counterbalance the USA when it has so many problems…fix the internal problems and then try to influence the world…if the EU citizens give you permission to do so.
i don’t think the question is if it should be closer to russia or china and yes, the eu is too close to the us, more likely subordonate
Yes, far too close
Too close ?? Polite way of putting it, seeing the EU ALLOWS every single country to be SPIED on by the NSA, including Merkels own private cell phone, not tht she didnt know about it, she and Obama work for the same Bankers .. US FED/ECB .. Europes watching and its not pleased.
Europe and the US should remain close. There is much more that unites us than divides us – it’s a big bad world out there and we need to know who our friends are. Of course, that doesn’t mean we should be uncritical if they do something stupid or dangerous…
Like two slices of pizza, we need to drift slowly further away and form our own independent policies.. We can still be allies but as equal partners not as their little accolades….
For the EU to be anywhere near counterbalancing the US, it would need to have a military presence on all five continents. It would need to be unified. It would need to have single language. It is not by chance that Google, Facebook, Apple, Microsoft, but also Monsanto or Coca Cola are American companies. For the. EU to counterbalance the US! It would have to go from risk adverse to an open society.
But why seek to counterbalance. The World is rough out there. Can Europe defend its values without allies? And if. Europe does not want the US as allies, which other power is close to its values? Russia? China? Iran? Saudi Arabia?
The TTIP’s chief rationale is to establish common standards with the US, just like the TPP is doing with Asia, so that China cannot dictate its own safety, sanitary and photo sanitary standards.
Marcel has his finger firmly on the button. Anyone contemplating such an agreement with a country having the US track record of lies, force, brutality and irresponsibility would have to be out of their mind. This is the kind of foolish question a beaten black and blue wife, whose ready to go back for more abuse, would ask.
Use your head and think. Why would the US want to get its grubby hands on Europe? What’s in it for them against what is in it for Europe?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eLqjb5arkws
And
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=caiMJnVCCvM
If the US wants a trade agreement with Europe you can be sure it’s a rip off akin to the Godfathers in the Mafia, who will screw the life out of you if you try to break free of them when you realise you have been done. What will Europe do when it finds it is in their clutches, unable to escape without being shot by a hundred machine guns. Remember Sonny Corleone.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uWqy6O_axsM
They didn’t know when to stop.
Not to mention the most obvious all all issues in this little pact of the greedy. Why are the people of Europe, state by state, not being given an opportunity to vote on this proposed financial take over of our democracy? Why? And again, why? All this tripe we hear of we are giving the people a hearing is total nonsense. This is a wily set up by the elite who, yes, will make more billions out of this deal but the plan is to leave the workers to pay for it out of their own pockets for eternity.
Think of it this way, the US is a very big country with millions of people Why are they unable or unwilling to grow their own economy or bring themselves back into solvency without Europe being in on the deal. I give you two guesses.
The first is, they have bled their own country and people in it dry and it is at a standstill, yet, they feel Europe is beginning to show signs of regeneration or of standing on its own feet. So, like a snake who wormed its way up our trouser legs, they are now winding themselves up the shirt sleeves and around our neck in order to choke the breath out of us. And they want to do this before we prove we can make it without tearing the heart out of the European welfare system they despise. Look what they did and are still doing to Cuba and others who will not toe their slavish line of rampant Capitalism. Do you think they will care more about the Europeans? If you think that you’ve got to be kidding. The only Europeans they cling to are those who sell out to them like the Blair creature, who is now a multi millionaire, being paid by his benefactors to continue to screw us all. Remember him. And the British have and are still covering this all up so he doesn’t take a hit and squeal on the lot of them. .
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LVHA0m4DvLo
Are those in Brussels ready to sell their Granny into abject poverty the way these politicians today can’t wait to do? Watch who you vote for in these next elections. Be very careful indeed.
..and how far would Germany have it go?
That question is indeed connected to the whole genetic of the EU, assuming that the american influence was strikly decisive to the emergence of the european structure. Now, it’s important to accept that from the 50’s until nowadays there have been changes in society, particularly the ideological compound, that slowly throw us away from the value matrix of the USA (like welfare state vs liberalism).
Being that, a close tie is always perpetual to the transatlantic relations. Now, undoubtley, counterbalance. We don’t need to act as american puppies when we are the biggest economy of the world. The final piece to the UE to becomes a global player that undermines the USA influence is indeed the military union and the collective acknowledgment that we, europeans, should work together instead of being in permanent querrels (which threats our legitimacy in the global level).
You have to laugh at yet another arrogant EU politicians reply
“This is fiction. Marcel’s comment has nothing to do with reality. All the studies that have been done show that this trade deal is about growth and jobs, not about making richer those who are already rich”
You can’t accuse someone of “fiction” on the basis of some pathetic study, It is FACTS you need before you start making accusations like that
Studies are wholly dependent upon who does the study and what they are studying, and as is the norm in the EU they will be very selective about both
They have their ‘paid for’ studies by socalled ‘independent’ parties which of course aren’t independent at all. Just like all those ‘think tanks’ that keep recommending ‘more EU’ and when you look at the funding, they list the EU or some related EU funded institution as (one of the) source(s) of their funding. They’re about as independent as Pravda was in the old Soviet Union.
As for facts, mr Moreira has none. We have plenty, just point at the results of NAFTA and similar trade/free trade treaties: the utter destruction of the industrial base of the western world, the ‘race to the bottom’ regarding workers rights and environmental protection and of course the declining middle class and increasing wealth gap.
Maybe mr Moreira can ask one of his friends to write a report in which these facts don’t exist.
…it goes without saying…sadly.
SLAVELANDIA, the billionaires will become trillionaires.
Need to ask???
Before we even start having dreams of grandeur we should focus on actually fixing the immediate problems in our backyard , such as unemployment amongst youth , the rise in eurosceptisism , the insane amount of bureaucracy and the serious lack of a united front in foreign affairs.
Why is euroscepticism a “problem”?
It is not a problem, it is a symptom of a problem which is the EU itself
When the EU becomes more accountable, less profligate and actually starts to provide real benefits (at value for money) to the people of Europe instead of the self important, arrogant, political elite, then you will begin to see a reduction in euroscepticism
But I wouldn’t hold your breath…….
EU should definitely position itself as counter balance to the United States of America and stop treating America’s reputation as something prestige and divine. The EU should grow a backbone and firmly stand against the United States, which would lead to better deals to profit EU, not just the United States. Thus, I think this TT should not be conducted, at least not now, especially not now due to the recent spying affairs. Also, despite what studies may claim, it will definitely have some negative effects on some parts of the economy. I think this TT agreement should be very much based on the public views of USA and EU citizens, rather than the interests of a minor group of officials.
Not particularly…if we see how the European Union reacted to the war in Iraq and several other incidents…but that is also an example of how divided the EU is…half the countries supported the war and even send troops. The EU in general is not close to the US. some countries within the EU are very close to the US…
NO.
The EU & USA combined comprise c15% of the world population. IF they don’t combine/cooperate/coalesce they will both dwindle.
Also, the gap between average EU citizens and USA average citizens in terms of quality of life and the changing USA demographic will hopefully make the USA a more caring less gung-ho capitalistic nation.
Eu defendo parceria Transatlântica e também devem eliminar as barreiras do comercio Sim a UE esta muito perto dos EUA
Either mr Moreira lives in utter denial of reality and is totally clueless, or it is the other option, namely he knows people like me are right and doesn’t care.
Gerald Francois here seems to believe that the idea is to have common trade standards. To a degree, he’s right. This is about allowing corporations to find the country with the lowest standard in environmental protection or workers rights and move production there. Also, this is about exporting draconian US trademark and copyright and patent legislation to the rest of the world, to the detriment of consumers.
Now does the EU really want to make a difference and show how they ‘care’? Then block the TTIP from ever happening, there isn’t a single thing in there that is even remotely acceptable.
Furthermore, the TTIP’s worst part is where it will set up shadowy arbitrage courts where corporations can sue countries for having legislation protecting consumers, workers or the environment. And get compensated for loss of revenue because you had to comply with the legislation. Sure enough, this isn’t how they spell it out literally, but what it comes down to eventually.
By the way, countries couldn’t reverse-sue corporations under the TTIP, because that obviously would be ‘interfering with the free market’. And to add insult to injury, corporate executives have permanent access to an up to date draft version, whereas most elected parliamentarians do not. Gee I wonder why.
Maybe mr Moreira would reply again and deny the last bit.
As for the question whether the EU is too close to the US? You better believe it. Clown Barroso and his ilk would do anything for a photo op with Obama, including flushing a million industrial jobs down the toilet which is exactly what TTIP will do (if indeed not a higher number).
The problem is that the UN, EU, IMF, World Bank, WTO and you name it are filled to the rafters with ‘economists’ and ‘analysts’ who believe in the absolute ‘free for all/everyone for himself market’ and ‘no regulations’ and ‘no protectionism’ and ‘free trade ueber alles’. The very same ideology that has destroyed the industrial base in most ‘first world’ countries and is chiefly responsible for the ‘crisis’.
Well done, Marcel. You are right on the button.
YEs, but it goes both ways in the sense that america learns from Europa, and Europa learns from america. So to be fair this is a 50/50 situation. ;)
As the worlds largest (double the size of number 2 China) economy, one could never be too close to the US in that sense. Increased cooperation and contact with the US opens up the worlds largest national economy to the worlds largest economic trading bloc. The benefits of such a deal, as we are negotiating through TTIP would prove to be a tremendous boom in my opinion.
Further, like it or not the US is still the worlds hegemon.They control the high seas and are the only nation to have a global diplomatic and military reach. The Russians cant act much outside the old Soviet borders, China is easily hemmed in and still has a long way to travel before it becomes a competitor to the US and unfortunately the EU squandered the better part of the 20 year peace we saw following the fall of the Soviet Union and Warsaw Pact. Most members of the EU arent able to get their own houses in order, much less help contribute to play a global role for our organization. And since Greece, Spain and the rest of the troubled nation are in such awful condition that even if the rest of the EU chimed into help (which they havent) we’d be only covering our losses and not making ground.
For the EU to be a major and credible global politics power player we have to get our institutions straight (the venerable Wikipedia states: no sane person would have ever had so many contradicting and feuding institutions), marshal our resources, form a coherent strategy and shore up our member states. Plus it’d be a good bonus to reform the accession process and to deal with our own diplomatic troubles like tensions in Bosnia, ongoing trouble with Kosovo, Serbia, Greece and Macedonia and most importantly in my opinion, bring Ukraine into our orbit.
Your posts, Paleryder, always remind me of Marion Chigwell, the CIA man covering as a journalist in Robert Redford’s, Havana. Still working I see. No lay offs there then.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ojuquGS2aSo
Paleryder, where are all these millions of people with their incomes that are going to magically start buying tons of stuff they are not buying now just because X signed a treaty with Y? If I buy something, it means I cannot buy something else. The net economic effect of TTIP is at best zero.
However the non-economic bits about TTIP should scare you. TTIP is guaranteed to undermine consumer protection, environmental protection and workers rights. This, along with exporting draconian US style patent and copyright legislation is the primary reason for it.
There are no benefits to TTIP if you are not a huge greedy corporation. They will benefit and the middle class will pay the price.
The problem with rose tinted glasses people like you is that you seem to lack the capacity to critically assess anything, always blindly accepting whatever propaganda some government or corporation puts out about it.
And another point, people like me, we do NOT want a global role for the EU. We want the undemocratic Eurosoviet Union to be disbanded, to the dustheap of history alongside the Soviet Union. And you cannot enrich one country in the EU without taking it from another first.
Unless you have some magic money tree that I don’t know about, your delusions are a pipe dream at best, and grossly naive.
the EU should stop especially the free trade agreement (TTIP), because we dont need gen maize and hormone meat. why should we actually vote, when, by the TTIP, the EU parliament and comission will anyway have no power anymore? the EU is ruled in washington, not in brussels. would be better to have closer ties with russia than with this bankrupt war-criminal.
Not at all, USA should be an even closer ally, its president should be a good friend to our friend and we should collaborate on even more basic matters as commerce and investments.
EU should be an alternative method to the same goal….
The US has its flaws [capitalism before everything] but the relatively recently created EU is just as bad particularly in terms of lack of DEMOCRACY.
Trying to counter the US as a bloc reminds me of the Nazis who knowing that defeat was pending towards the end of WW2 set about creating a German-dominated bloc to continue war by non-militaristic means – strangely much like the EU of today perhaps?
When the EU starts talking about distancing itself from the US and acting as a counter-bloc to the US it worries me that the EU will slowly morph into an anti-US bloc.
The world has enough actual and potential blocs as-is, splitting the West into the US and the GERMAN/France inspired/dominated/controlled EU will only add to the uncertainty of the future.
If one tries to compare Europe and the European countries with the United States of America, then one may as a rule of thumb describe America as “homogeneous heterogeneity” while Europe can be seen as “heterogeneous homogeneity”.
The american states all have populations with diverse cultural backgrounds, since people have come there from many different European countries as well as from Asia and Africa.
You may find people with English, French, Spanish and German ancestry in all the states, although they may be found in different proportions. The European countries on the other hand each represent a specific culture, and people generally speak different languages in different European countries.
For most Europeans – myself included – English will only be a second language, whereas Americans generally see it as their first language.
The colonization of the areas connected with the Mississippi-valley can in many respects seem similar to the roman colonization of the Po-valley after the Second Punic War, where all the Italian allies participated in the colonization project.
The result of this may bee seen as two different but familiar civilizations, and it will be very important both to understand and respect their differences and to develop a form of interaction that can benefit both parts.
The European cultures may possibly be compared to different sections of a larger organization, where each section is evolving the means to perform a specific kind of duty.
Europe may thus be seen as an organization, where different processes are being developed in different areas, and the internal European challenge will be to have these developments and their practical application coordinated without destroying their relative independence.
The USA may on the other hand be seen primarily as a large scale project organization, that can accomplish various immediate tasks by inducing many different people with different means to come together at a place, where a project is being undertaken that can involve both planning and competition.
Europe and the civilization area connected with the Mississippi-valley may thus be seen as complementary civilizations, that can gain a lot by working together.
This however will require that the differences are being respected for instance in connection with the current TTIP negotiations, and one can worry that this may not be the case.
The general idea behind the free trade negotiations seems to be much closer to the premises of the American project and may thus threaten to reduce independent european cultures.
Generally speaking development of a common uniform European culture should only be encouraged to the extent that may be needed to assist coordination between subcultures.
If this is not understood then one may further a paradoxical policy and imitate America through dissolving relatively independent European cultures in order to counterbalance American influence on the world, although this may at the same time destroy just those cultural conditions that will be needed for maintaining a properly European influence on the world order.
These considerations however also point towards the need for a possible reconstruction of the European Union in order to develop a form of coordination, that can neither be represented by liberal market conditions nor by centralized decision making and planning.
The attempted solutions that has been made to deal with the current economic and financial crisis do indeed look like a set of compromises, that neither represent pure market logic nor pure centralization, but there also seem to be missing a clear and well thought out strategy for a negotiated form of coordination that can be used instead to guide continuing efforts.
Now why should the EU morph into an anti US bloc? And if it does so, why is that such a detriment to the EU and those who support it? You are not making yourself clear.
I hope this read will clarify some of he issues we are discussing here.
http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/03/06/ukraine-through-the-fog-of-the-presstitutes/
@Catherine Benning
Please READ my post carefully.
If the WEST is split into 2 blocks BOTH blocks will be too small to make an impact on the world stage.
If one tries to compare Europe and the European countries with the United States of America, then one may as a rule of thumb describe America as “homogeneous heterogeneity” while Europe can be seen as “heterogeneous homogeneity”.
The american states all have populations with diverse cultural backgrounds, since people have come there from many different European countries as well as from Asia and Africa.
You may find people with English, French, Spanish, Italian and German ancestry in all the states, although they may be found in different proportions. The European countries on the other hand each represent a specific culture, and people generally speak different languages in different European countries.
For most Europeans – myself included – English will only be a second language, whereas Americans generally see it as their first language.
The colonization of the areas connected with the Mississippi-valley can in many respects seem similar to the roman colonization of the Po-valley after the Second Punic War, where all the Italian allies participated in the colonization project.
The result of this may bee seen as two different but familiar civilizations, and it will be very important both to understand and respect their differences and to develop a form of interaction that can benefit both parts.
The European cultures may possibly be compared to different sections of a larger organization, where each section is evolving the means to perform a specific kind of duty.
Europe may thus be seen as an organization, where different processes are being developed in different areas, and the internal European challenge will be to have these developments and their practical application coordinated without destroying their relative independence.
The USA may on the other hand be seen primarily as a large scale project organization, that can accomplish various immediate tasks by inducing many different people with different means to come together at a place, where a project is being undertaken that can involve both planning and competition.
Europe and the civilization area connected with the Mississippi-valley may thus be seen as complementary civilizations, that can gain a lot by working together.
This however will require that the differences are being respected for instance in connection with the current TTIP negotiations, and one can worry that this may not be the case.
The general idea behind the free trade negotiations seems to be much closer to the premises of the American project and may thus threaten to reduce independent european cultures.
Generally speaking development of a common uniform European culture should only be encouraged to the extent that may be needed to assist coordination between subcultures.
If this is not understood then one may further a paradoxical policy and imitate America through dissolving relatively independent European cultures in order to counterbalance American influence on the world, although this may at the same time destroy just those cultural conditions that will be needed for maintaining a properly European influence on the world order.
These considerations however also point towards the need for a possible reconstruction of the European Union in order to develop a form of coordination, that can neither be represented by liberal market conditions nor by centralized decision making and planning.
The attempted solutions that has been made to deal with the current economic and financial crisis do indeed look like a set of compromises, that neither represent pure market logic nor pure centralization, but there also seem to be missing a clear and well thought out strategy for a negotiated form of coordination that can be used instead to guide continuing efforts.
@Catherine RACIST Benning
I have made myself perfectly clear for people of average intelligence and beyond.
The EU and USA must join forces, the USA can teach a thing or 2 to the EU AND vice-versa. Both have strengths and both have weaknesses if they can BOTH get their acts together then the WEST will do the world proud.
Is the European Union too close to its US ally?
If it’s allowed I would like to answer with a question. Would you rather like to join Russian Federation ?
I’d rather the UK become an American state than be in the European Union. So please do by all means work closely with them.
The EU and the US can be equal partners… but the EU has to stop being a colony of the US! ANd that the UK is rather a part of the US than the EU, it is obvious!!
Yes . EU should be closer to US and Israel to face Russia and China .
Russia is in Europe, but what USA has to do with Europe???????????????
Europe should rule, for the first time after centuries should try to give the world a new deal, going away from all those american culture.. The only good thing eu can do is to fight against Americanisation with an Europeanisation, exporting all good models of civil and advanced society, as northern eu countries.. From people to people, for a better world
Globalization calling….WE rule the World!
Unfortunately, yes. The EU should be independent from american interests and has to orientate its policy towards provind a balance of power instead of dragging itself in predicaments, which benefit only non-european powers.
your eu could not counter balance a snow flake.
The EU is … well… in shambles?
Ana, if you’ll consult the map, I think you’ll find most of Russia is in Asia.
Actually most of Denmark is technically in America because Greenland is a Danish possession, and that makes most of Denmark technically a North American state, likewise the entire historic Russia is in Europe although because of its possession in Siberia Russia is also an Asian power as it also used to be an America power when it had Alaska and parts of Oregon in its possession. However Russia, as a European nation, is of course a part of Europe while the US has nothing to do with the continent – either in terms of history, culture or civilization.
Counter balance US influence.. We can still be allies but not their underdog.. Equal partnership yes.. American hegemony over Europe hell NO.. We have more potential than them if we get our act together…
We should be more close ones to each other in all the world, stop with wars and find a consense to save the Planet.
EU should become a counterbalance!
We can debate about it but what will it change in reality? Yes Europe is clearly under the political influence of the US, and we are kindly required to help them achieve their goals in order for some kind of support, mainly financial support where this is not against their interest. Now once this is said, what can we do about it? Use the force to counter balanced the US influence in the world has little interest and will not improve the situation overall, isn’t it? Therefore what we can, and should focus on is more on how to create more unity in europe, and increase social and economical innovation first of all. This is something we can do, and we should do more.
yes… to UK too
We need to compete as a currency zone, and so the trade negotiations in course are important, but lopsided, as the British, and the Scandinavians and other non-EUR countries have other concerns. World Economic Hegemony is in the balance, and the US knows, but I am wondering about the Europeans. Imperialism is an ingrained part of the European political psyche, but it appears ancient, archaic, territorial, and not demonstrably in line with financial criteria for Economic Hegemony.
@ ????? ??? ??????? …. NO
yes
The problem is that it is not close enough!
complete your currency zone yourself.
Well seeing how the EU has backed and embraced NAZIS in Ukraine on behalf of its slave master Washington, I think its a dumb question, America is in total disaray drowning in debt and social devides, they should simply mind their own business, I dont need or want Obongo deciding my future, nor do most Europeans, so yes enough of being Washingtons SLAVE and toilet paper.
the problem is that it is too close! should work closer with russia, which has compared to the US almost no debts but vast amounts of resources (what can the US offer? nothing).
American “ally” supports sanctions against Russia which will destroy E.U. whithout any other reason.E.U. must collaborate with Russian true ally and will benefit very much.
Europe has to accentuate is own profile and start promoting and defending is own interest, above all, in subjects as economics and international relations. That is absolutely necessary if Europe wants to survive this multi-polar and globalized world where we live.
Make EU a power the world will never forget!
EU vs USA or Russia Federation ? LOL
Just impossible since EU is not a federation or state (even the parliament according to Constitutional Court of Germany is not a Governmental body).
Additionally EU institution is a babel , European Union and Eurozone two quiet different entities (sometimes with high level of contradiction)
Many eurozone( EZ) member state are on fire due to Memorandum and the expensive Euro. Thus we face the results of a faulty policy by ECB and European Commission that caused cohesion problem (even racism) within EZ/EU …. Not to mention the dramatic decline of democracy within EU and EZ member states
On what ground Brussels believe that they may form a strong Political Union ?
They wanna rule us so…
John Dahlburg, and if you consult the map you will see that WHOLE USA is in the continent called America.
Too close of course, let them solve their own shit. I would love to see the EU as a counterbalance to the US’s disgusting imperialism and warmongering.
EU should work closely with every country.
EU and its masters USA and Britain are for the rest of the world like having unhappy marrige but do not have the right to divorse because you will be punished by the Inquisition of the Roman Catholic Church.
As democracies, there is no doubt that the EU should maintain a close relationship with the US. Outside of this sphere, apart from Israel and a handful of others, there is no guarantee of freedom of expression or protection of human rights with any credibility. The rest simply pay lip service with dictators storing money stolen from their gullible citizens or hoarding foreign donations meant for the needy in tax havens like Gibraltar, the Virgin Islands or London. People forget too easily the contribution of the US towards the defense of freedom during WW2, without which it is improbable that the EU would even exist today. No system is perfect, nor any democratic country and the friendship and co-operation which took so many years to consolidate between both democratic blocks should be valued for what it is, not rejected out of hand by a few disgruntled anti-system activists who have not bothered to look more deeply into their own history; although they are understandably indignant about some of the wild foreign policy decisions made in the recent past. Erroneous decisions between the allies is a serious subject and if any continuing partnership between the US and the EU is to be respected by all its citizens on both sides of the Atlantic, there should be legalities and accountability systems put in place to avoid such outrageous decisions ever being made again especially against the will of the majority. This should be a priority subject for The Hague and should be at the top of any agenda which hopes to strengthen EU and US ties. With reference to the proposed trade agreement, that is quite another matter and is not without serious risks towards the survival of democracy as a concept for future generations. In the first place, the arrival of cheaper, mass produced food from the US is likely to destroy the amazing agriculture of the EU, with produce and gastronomy which is second to none throughout the whole world, particularly in the Mediterranean zone. EU farmers will simply not be able to compete with the low-cost massive US factory farming procedures something which would change the life and character of European style probably forever. Europe can produce practically anything in the food line! It is already a threat to farmers on a local level that fruits and vegetables are flooding into Europe from distant exotic shores when people have always been self sufficient in providing their own. It is worth noting the complete absence of flavor concerning transported farmed fruit! It is usually tasteless, lost all its natural aroma and vitamins, picked far too green for storage purposes. That is one of the reasons that people have less appetite for these days! In addition, if the US is serious about climate change, it is 100% unproductive to further contaminate the atmosphere by transporting food across the world especially to destinations where hunger is not the main issue. It would be better for the EU and the US to investigate the sense of this proposed all-embracing trade agreement where profit is the only goal as only the top 6 multinationals will finally benefit out of it which is the last thing an increasingly impoverished Europe needs right now.
EU and USA together BUT Equal!!!Europeans we dont want to be there “puppy”.
The EU is NOT really a union. It is a group of 28 fractious states. Apart from certain domains , agriculture, customs, fisheries or transport, it does not constitute an entity. Eastern European countries do not trust Western Europe to come to their rescue. The. EU needs allies. What is their choice? China? Africa? Or Mr Putin’s Russia? I think the EU and the US are natural allies given their History and sharing of values. But do not wait, because the demographic shift in the US will soon make Americans of European origin a minority. Then, who cares about a sluggish Europe when the. US can trade with dynamic Asia. The new majority of Americans, made up of blacks, Hispanics and Asians has no attachment towards Europe……..
The only thing EU seems to do, is to execute precisely US orders. Tell me when exactly in its recent history the EU protected its own interests? All it does, is to protect US interests.
should be closer to…Russia? what kind of question is that Sir/Madame….
a joke circulate among Easterns…NATO=No Action Talking Only…seems to be realistic….
f*** america
f*** the eu.
The EU-US block is definetely going to be the counterbalance against Russia-China block! ;) And of course by EU-US i mean all of its friends/allie, that are represented by this block s what ever you whant to call it! ;)
The EU-US block is definetely going to be the counterbalance against Russia-China block! And of course by EU-US i mean all of its friends/allies, that are represented by this block s what ever you whant to call it.
Being the EU a Friendly counterbalance to the US influence in the world, although the EU is still going to have close ties with US and keep working on joint decisions with it! ;)
World and Europe is on the brink of war and the need to act quickly to wean the nation from the resources of a single state. Maybe finally Europe and the world to understand that we live on one planet Earth.
Yes! Really too close, we need independence. From Russia, from US, from all.
EU is a blague as a power ; no political or military relevance, only much talk about everything and throwing money over the problems without real commitment…, a fantasy allways calling for american initiatives
One plausible point of the evidence that needs to be presented in the discussion sections of the Relations between the two continents specialy in the case of TTIP is that the dynamics of economic globalization have paralleled each other in different types of markets. Mostmeasures of the international integration of markets have increaseddramatically in recent decades, with afew shattering previous records, typically set in the late 19th or early 20th century. Yet the absolute level of cross-border integration of such markets remained seriously incomplete, or semiglobalized.
This last conclusion seems to apply to regional and even local borders as well as national ones, although this note focused, for brevity, on nation-states rather than regions or cities as the unit of analysis.
The obvious rejoinder to the previous conclusion is that if the world isn’t completely globalized.
Yet, it soon will be. But the fact that nearly all of the metrics of cross-border integration presented here fall below 30% indicates, in a very rough way, that today’s semiglobalized world is very far from a state of complete globalization, so far that it is hard to envision a scenario in which it would reach that state
within the any reasonable business planning horizon. Conversely, some observers have seen in the recent declines in trade and FDI flows signs of de-globalization, also very unlikely to lead to the extreme case in
which cross-border integration can be ignored. Thus, semiglobalized is not only an appropriate description of the world today, but one may reasonably assume it will also be the right description for the foreseeable future.
Culture, the first element of the CAGE framework presented in the TTIP Agreement “Distance Still Matters,” refers to the attributes of a society that are sustained by interactions among people, whereas the Administrative element of CAGE refers to aspects that are sustained by state authority: governmental
policies (and practices), laws and public institutions. As noted in that article, administrative attributes such as colonial-era ties, preferential trading arrangements, a common currency, political amity, policies of openness, and strong public institutions significantly boost trade. Similar influences also seem to apply to foreign direct investment and other cross-border flows of capital, of people and of information.
And while Administrative similarities account for most of these influences, selected administrative differences can also generate cross-border activity, e.g., through the exploitation of tax or regulatory differences.
The conclusion that the world is semiglobalized may or may not strike the average reader as very definite, but it is worth pointing out that it does have very definite, and favorable, implications for the added value of thinking explicitly about globalization and strategy. With either totally segmented or
totally integrated country markets, we would effectively be back to the single-country base case that is implicit in much of strategic thinking, negating the value of adding the globalization angle to strategic analysis. Semiglobalization, with partial integration across country markets, is the state of the world in which it can pay to work with a more complex model than the single-country one.
The proportion of world merchandise trade that occurs within regions increased from 44% in 1960 to 60% in 2003 before declining back to 54% by 2012 as emerging economies in less deeply integrated regions grew their share of world trade. In 2012, intra-regional merchandise exports accounted for 73% of merchandise exports in Europe, 54% in East Asia & Pacific, and 49% in North America. This reflects both intentional efforts to build up regional trade blocs such as the EU and NAFTA, as well as the more general effects of distance (broadly construed) as an inhibitor to trade. Thus, regionalization is not a poor
man’s version of globalization. In fact, policymakers in the regions with low proportions of intra-regional trade, Middle East & North Africa (9%), Sub-Saharan Africa (13%), and South & Central Asia (13%) see regional integration as an important development tool and are working to build up regional trade
networks. The phenomenon of regionalization is examined further in the note on the geographic dimension of the CAGE framework. All these Factor needs to be taken into account.
From a purely economic standpoint, the US and the entire
EU will profit from a dismantling of tariffs and non-tariff
trade barriers between both regions. The real gross domestic
product per capita would increase in the US and in all 27 EU
member countries. Also when one looks at labor markets,
the positive effects on employment predominate: Two million
additional jobs could be created in the Organization for
Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) zone over
the long run. The public welfare gains of these economies
admittedly do stand in contrast with real losses in income
and employment in the rest of the world. On balance, however,
the beneficial effects on public welfare prevail.
EU shall work on being counterbalance of USA!
Other EU countries that profit from this treaty well above average are little economies
such as the Baltic States. Small countries tend to export and import a
larger proportion of their gross domestic product than large economies, because the
latter have a large domestic market and are therefore less strongly tied to the international
division of labour. Since they are more strongly integrated in foreign
trade, small economies also profit to a greater degree from declining trade costs.
Most of the southern European countries in crisis derive a greater-than-average
benefit from the free trade agreement. In that regard, Spain shows the greatest gain
in income because it can replace the relatively expensive imports from European
countries with cheaper imports from the US. The related surge in purchasing power
increases the real gross domestic product per capita. Thus, a transatlantic free trade
agreement would not widen the gap between the crisis-ridden southern Europe. From a purely economic standpoint, the US and the entire EU will profit from a dismantling of tariffs and non-tariff trade barriers between both regions. The real gross domestic product per capita would increase in the US and in all 27 EU member countries. Also when one looks at labour market the positive effects on employment predominate: Two million additional jobs could be created in the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) zone over the long run. The public welfare gains of these economies
admittedly do stand in contrast with real losses in income and employment in the rest of the world. On balance, however, the beneficial effects on public welfare prevail.
Along with the US and Great Britain, crisis-ridden Spain would also be a big winner from a comprehensive free trade agreement. On the other hand, the countries that are not part of this free trade agreement would have to expect losses in real earnings, which could be substantial in some cases. But free trade agreement between the EU and the US will also affect the rest of the world (called third-country effects). The study here is limited and only considers economic issues. More far-reaching aspects such as questions of data protection, consumer protection and protection of intellectual property are expressly not addressed here. Removal of trade barriers between the EU and US makes imports less expensive on both sides. Declining trade costs lead to an increase in trade activities between the two regions. At the same time, pre existing trade agreements—in other words, the North American Free Trade Agreement, for example, and/or the trade between member states of the EU—lose value because the preferred status of the respective trading partner is less relevant. Thus, the price for intensifying trade relationships between the US and EU is a reduction of trade activities within the EU and a decrease in foreign trade relationships with most third countries. These effects are illustrated by the example of Germany and a few selected trading partners Since the tariffs in transatlantic foreign trade are already very low, dismantling the tariff barriers to trade (tariff scenario) has only a very minor effect on trade flows. By contrast, a comprehensive free trade agreement that also removes the non-tariff trade barriers (liberalization scenario) would have considerably stronger impacts.
Since the tariffs in transatlantic foreign trade are already very low, dismantling
the tariff barriers to trade (tariff scenario) has only a very minor effect on
trade flows. By contrast, a comprehensive free trade agreement that also removes the non-tariff trade barriers (liberalization scenario) would have considerably stronger impacts.
In regard to people´s material living conditions, trade flows are less relevant than
the trend in the real gross domestic product per capita. This figure – hereafter referred to as “real per capita income” – is an indicator of the gains or losses in social welfare, which are related to a transatlantic free trade agreement. Because a tariff scenario alone has only minor effects on Trade
How close is NOT the point: the problem is how under.
Due to the turbulent european history, to the Russian and German totalitarian XX century regimes, yes it is ! The USA are one of the few big democracies, with rule of law unalienable constitutional rights of its citizens . Its foreign policy is full of irresponsibilities but its political system offers better opportunities to its citizens than Russia or China, two big autocracies…
We should not copy America. We shall find our own way. But we must find also, and first our Vision. Vision for Economy AND Humanity. This can convince also others for a way into the 3rd millenium. http://www.WWSEEP.com – Partnership is not so easy as mastery, but more inteligent. ;) We have so many potentials, caused by our cultures. Grow them.
Too close? We are just satellites of them!!!
I think the EU should work closely with its American ally.
There are friends and foes. US of A is a friend regarding what other might say. They fought and die shoulder to shoulder along europeans far away from their homes just for ideas and principles. Their power of destruction is hard to imagine for a peace loving hippie and their war effort is unmatched yet. In the other hand we have Russia like a rock in a shoe. They are the only Europe’s natural enemy, Merkel and others might disagree but I highly recommend to disregard their arguments, dangerous and ruthless, armed with the most destructive weapons humanity ever created (H Bomb), they will be allways against everything Europe stood and stand for. I am afraid that Europe by itself cannot oppose Russia.
OC Sisley (26.3.2014) seems to be saying, that Spain and other European countries will be able to prosper by substituting trade with the U.S. for trade with each other.
Such arguments will generally be based on the assumption that “other things are being equal” and will not account for changes, that may occur together with a possible reorientation of European trading patterns.
One might instead assume, that evolution of European productive capacity so far has been stimulated by trade among European countries due to similarity and complementarity between the various cultures, and that future development of European productive resources can be disturbed by a decline in internal European trading.
European countries and companies obviously will also have a chance to learn from America by adopting some American methods, but if these are not compatible with European cultures then they may also make much European experience obsolete and be in the way of learning to get over the weak spots in these experiences.
Thus it seems quite important to reach a TTIP settlement, that allows for European legislation to eventually counter domination of European markets by large American companies and to some extent favour internal European development of productive culture.
To reach a good balance between internal European trade and trade with America may further require negotiation of various forms of coordination between industrial policies in the European countries.
Such coordination should involve compensations to countries and companies, that may have to abandon some productive areas and turn to others in order for the overall coordination to succeed.
Such negotiations may have to go on, while the outcome of previous rounds of negotiation are already being carried out.
Continued negotiations may thus partly serve as feed-back for previous decisions, but it will obviously be an advantage, if negotiations follow some rules and principles, that make it possible to some extent to calculate their probable outcome.
These principles of negotiated coordination, which still remains to be formulated, should both allow for some concentration of production as well as for decentralized expansion of productive diversity in correspondence with market conditions.
These issues may perhaps be compared to arranging a large garden party or a festival, where the attention of the visitors may be attracted by other things than what the organizers had envisioned, so that there will have to be enacted various modifications of programs throughout the session. Moreover such modifications should be managed without depreciating cultural standards.
Since coordination of this sort must be going on more or less continuously, it will have to be supported by elaborate dynamic models, that can help to make predictions to guide decentralized decisions as well as to deliver information for adjustment of policies.
Such models can also be helpful in bringing shape and order to all the diverse “big data” that are available on electronic media.
The choice may be whether to let American companies run the race and let Europe turn into a bunch of interrelated satellite markets or to increase internal European coordination.
A better coordination of European industrial policies may also make Europe less vulnerable in case of Russian restrictions against export of European industrial and agricultural products or against European import of Russian energy or raw materials.
European coordinative policies so far have been given a centralized form, that tend to allow market forces to drive European states, citizens and companies towards conformity or even uniformity. It is a bit like removing barriers that keep water running in somewhat stable riverbeds and allow the weather to alter the landscape.
If such policies of European coordination are continued, then it may after all not make too much difference, whether American or European companies are allowed to dominate.
It seems instead to be important to develop a form of coordination that can use and develop the difference between European cultures and countries instead of watering them down.