• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • American Confusion, European Disunion

    President Obama’s decision to skip the annual U.S.-EU summit in Europe, May 24-25, has not endeared him to some Europeans; many of whom once again feel spurned by the man they have so greatly admired, and whose election they so ardently wished for. As reported by The New York Times, “In addition to the palpable sense of insult among European officials, there is a growing concern that Europe is being taken for granted and losing importance in American eyes compared with the rise of a newly truculent China.” The problem here is twofold: It is indeed problematic on a global scale if the transatlantic alliance has been thus downgraded by the Obama administration. Yet, Europeans bear some of the responsibility in this:  their reluctance to support the United States in Afghanistan and their creation of ineffectual and tangled EU institutions have become impediments to relations with the United States.

    Particularly aggrieved was Spanish Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero, who was to host the summit in Madrid as the head of the country holding the rotating presidency of the European Council. Like other Europeans leaders, Zapatero, who faces reelection next year, would like to enhance his stature and bask in the Obama glow, and this opportunity was denied him by the presidential non-appearance. In addition, Zapatero arrived in Washington yesterday for high level meetings that interestingly do not include a one-on-one sit down with Obama in the White House.

    With the leadership mess the European Union created with the Lisbon Treaty, one can understand the White House’s hesitance to wade into the fray. The EU right now has the opposite of a leadership vacuum – in fact it has a leadership surfeit with no fewer than four presidents in office at the same time. Europeans love institutions and bureaucracies, and they have managed to create so many within the EU that total confusion now reigns.

    There is Zapatero, who is prime minister of the country, i.e. Spain that currently holds the 6-month rotating presidency of the European Council. His closest rival is Herman von Rompuy, who is the newly minted president of the European Council, meant to be the ceremonial head of the EU. Then there is the president of the European Commission, and, finally, the president of the European Parliament. Over the past few months, a power struggle has emerged between Zapatero and Von Rompuy as to who is really at the top.

    Meanwhile, back in Washington, it seems equally difficult to coordinate the White House and the State Department. Confusingly, a few weeks back, two senior U.S. officials – Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs William Burns and Assistant Secretary of State for Europe Philip Gordon traveled to Madrid for a preparatory meeting for the summit – which the president now says he won’t be attending.

    It is perfectly understandable that President Obama has decided not to travel to Madrid. Snubbing Brussels sends an important message that Washington is less than impressed with the EU’s leadership.  He must though be careful not to undermine the broader relationship with Europe as a whole, especially the ties with European nation states. For many reasons, there is a real impression emerging in Europe that Obama does not see himself as an Atlanticist. For Russia, China, and Iran among others, a divided transatlantic alliance is music to their ears, and will only weaken American leadership in the world.

    Posted in International [slideshow_deploy]

    4 Responses to American Confusion, European Disunion

    1. High School says:

      What causes the sound of air swishing inside your head?

    2. Dim Bulb says:

      Some slightly tongue-in-cheek remarks (emphasis on slightly):

      Yet, Europeans bear some of the responsibility in this: their reluctance to support the United States in Afghanistan…

      Their reluctance pretty much matched our president's reluctance, didn't it? Shouldn't the reticence be on the EU's side?

      Like other Europeans leaders, Zapatero, who faces reelection next year, would like to enhance his stature and bask in the Obama glow, and this opportunity was denied him by the presidential non-appearance.

      Maybe the governors of Virginia, and New Jersey, along with what's-her-name in Massachusetts could correct his magic Obama theory.

      In addition, Zapatero arrived in Washington yesterday for high level meetings that interestingly do not include a one-on-one sit down with Obama in the White House.

      He should look on the bright side; 30 seconds into the meeting he'd be re-writing this Toby Keith song in his head to fit the situation.

      Europeans love institutions and bureaucracies, and they have managed to create so many within the EU that total confusion now reigns.

      Sounds Like an Obamian Utopia, or have I misinterpreted the proposed 111 bureaucracies the health care bill would have birthed?

      There is Zapatero, who is prime minister of the country, i.e. Spain that currently holds the 6-month rotating presidency of the European Council. His closest rival is Herman von Rompuy, who is the newly minted president of the European Council, meant to be the ceremonial head of the EU. Then there is the president of the European Commission, and, finally, the president of the European Parliament. Over the past few months, a power struggle has emerged between Zapatero and Von Rompuy as to who is really at the top.

      How many czars are there in Washington? How much power do they have? Who has control over whom?

      It is perfectly understandable that President Obama has decided not to travel to Madrid. Snubbing Brussels sends an important message that Washington is less than impressed with the EU’s leadership.

      The bloom on the Obama rose is quickly fading in Europe, and as Americans become less and less impressed with Obama, how important will that message Washington is sending remain?

    3. Brent, Chicago says:

      FA Hayek wrote in Road Serfdom about the Left's disingenuous claims that it just wants to move past economic quarrels and focus on people and hugging trees, etc. Liberals and progressives think of nothing BUT economics (most notably, other peoples' money they feel they have intrinsic claim to or power over).

      Conservatives and libertarians MUST start doing a better job of explaining and defending and promoting (tirelessly, I might add) the free market system and the inextricable links between religious, political and economics freedom.

      You gotta check out this article on that very topic:

    4. Drew Page, IL says:

      The E.U. and the U.N. costs america money. China lends America money. Who do you think should we be more concerned with?

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.

    ×