It
is easy to disparage the recent Paris-Berlin-Moscow alliance that
opposed American action in Iraq. Separately, like Dorothy's friends
in The Wizard of Oz, all of these countries lack something needed
to make them a great power: Russia, a first-world economy; Germany,
real military power; France, raw materials and a strong industrial
base.
Collectively, however, such a coalition
could prove durable and coherent over more than just Iraq;
certainly, Paris is making efforts to expand the scope of the
anti-American coalition that emerged over whether or not to go to
war with Baghdad. Taken together, the Franco-German-Russian
combination has the attributes of a great power able to balance the
United States on the global stage, with France providing the
political and ideological leadership, Germany the economic power,
and Russia the military wherewithal.
To
keep this coalition from germinating into an ongoing challenge to
America's position in the world, the Bush Administration,
particularly the Department of State and the National Security
Council (NSC), must pursue a cherry-picking strategy as the modus
operandi in Europe. Specifically, the State Department and the NSC
should identify and address issues of common interest to the United
States and its European allies, refrain from using inflammatory
rhetoric over allied disagreements, take a leading role in the
further transformation of NATO, conduct a joint strategic dialogue
to narrow transatlantic differences, and--most important--establish
a common modus operandi for politico-military international
decision-making.
The Good News from the Iraqi Diplomatic
Debacle
There are two positive aspects of the
European diplomatic scene in the wake of Iraq. First, it is clear
that in politico-military matters, "Europe" does not exist. The
British, Spanish, Italian, and most Central and Eastern European
governments sided with the United States over Iraq, belying
France's overly confident assumption that it spoke for Europe as a
whole. A Europe with many voices makes a cherry-picking
strategy--the desire to work with European states on a case-by-case
basis--the logical policy for living in a world in which the United
States steers a sensible middle course between ignoring allies and
allowing a perpetually divided Europe to scupper American
diplomatic and military initiatives.
Second, because France, Germany, and
Russia all chose to oppose the United States diplomatically for
very different reasons, it is entirely possible that a
cherry-picking strategy can fragment even this anti-American core.
For example, while working closely with France may prove difficult
in the near term, both Germany and Russia are at least as attuned
to Washington as to Paris. By working with Berlin and Moscow on a
case-by-case basis and not punishing them or forcing them to choose
between Paris and Washington, the U.S. can minimize the likelihood
that an anti-American alliance will coalesce successfully.
The Real State of Play in Europe
Germany
Thoughtful German politicians, such as Friedbert Pfluge,
the shadow Christian Democratic Union (CDU)/Christian Social Union
(CSU) spokesman for foreign affairs, have begun to criticize the
government of Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder for diverting Germany
from its long-standing adherence to the foreign policy formulated
by Konrad Adenauer--pro-French, pro-Europe, and pro-American. As
Pfluge rightly argues, by alienating America over Iraq, Germany has
lost vital influence over the world's sole remaining superpower.
Thus, it is also in Germany's interests to find ways to heal the
damaging Washington-Berlin rift.
A
cherry-picking approach allows Germany to leave the political
wilderness while assuring the U.S. that a firmly anti-American
coalition has no future, for without Germany's total adherence to
such a point of view, France's anti-American Gaullist dreams cannot
be realized.
Russia
Likewise in Russia, President Vladimir Putin has
doubtlessly reoriented Russian foreign policy in a more solidly
pro-American direction than his predecessors. However, while Putin
may have made this ideological leap, many former Soviet bureaucrats
in the Russian government have not--they maintain a traditional
hostility toward Washington.
Ever
sensitive to Russian public opinion and to the perception that
Moscow has become a lackey of the United States, Putin chose to
side with Paris and Berlin for the primary political reasons that
December parliamentary elections are looming and the U.S. did not
engage Moscow enough over Iraq. (there was no visit at the
Secretary of State level to confer with the Russians.)
But
the larger point is that, in acquiescing in the end of the
Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty, allowing U.S. basing in
Central Asia to fight the war on terrorism, accepting a significant
round of NATO expansion, and desiring to join the World Trade
Organization (WTO), Putin has moved Russia's orientation westward.
The Bush administration will find in Putin a partner open to a
cherry-picking strategy, particularly as Russia hopes to join the
WTO soon--something it cannot do without enthusiastic American
support.
Central and
Eastern Europe
The states of central and Eastern Europe have proven their
generally pro-American tilt over the issue of regime change in
Baghdad. Despite open threats from President Jacques Chirac that
they should "keep their mouths shut" about the Iraq controversy,
these countries staunchly supported America, even while their
admission process to the European Union (EU) was ongoing.
These countries will enthusiastically
accept a cherry-picking strategy as a way to enhance their freedom
of maneuver by using close ties with America as a counterweight to
feared Franco-German domination within the EU. Also, in the words
of one East European statesman:
We are a highway between Germany and
Russia; we don't care that they are nice for this minute. We will
do what it takes to be seen as good allies in Washington to make
the American security guarantee stick.
France
Even in France, traditional bastion of European efforts to
construct a pole of power to challenge the U.S., there are
opportunities to pursue a cherry-picking approach. France was the
birthplace of raison d'êtat. The last thing Paris desires is
to be seen as impotent.
Whatever one's opinion of the Iraq war,
the reality is that the U.S. ignored French objections, decisively
won the conflict, and has left France with no diplomatic role in
the post-war reconstruction process. In addition, the most
interesting diplomatic outcome of the conflict was not a case of
Europe versus America, but of Europe versus Europe. The conflict
made a lie of French pretensions to global relevance at the highest
level.
Ironically, a cherry-picking strategy
would serve as a way for France to end its dilemma of craving the
ability to oppose America while remaining relevant. By siding with
the U.S. where common interests exist--for example, in the war on
terrorism--France could be perceived as a significant player on the
international stage while also continuing to carp at Washington
when it chooses to disagree. Such a nuanced diplomatic strategy
would suit both traditional diplomatic rivals.
Making the Strategy Work
To
pursue a cherry-picking strategy, the U.S. and European governments
should:
- Identify and address issues of common interest to the
United States and its European allies. In this case, closer
cooperation regarding NATO reform, the Middle East, trade issues,
and Latin America seem obvious starting points.
- Refrain
from using inflammatory rhetoric geared primarily to domestic
audiences.
- Take
leading roles in the further transformation of NATO. The U.S. must
make full use of the NATO consultation process, while the European
states, in turn, must engage fully in the modernization of NATO's
military capabilities.
- Conduct
a joint strategic dialogue at the highest level to narrow
differences in threat perceptions and develop common policies.
- Establish a common modus operandi for
international decision-making based on the recognition that the
cherry-picking approach, whatever the specific issue, is likely to
become the most often used configuration.
Adhering to this process, given an
out-of-area mission, America should always try to attain the full
cooperation and support of an international institution such as
NATO in line with European concerns. However, failing this, America
should then try to assemble a coalition of the willing within NATO
through the Combined Joint Task Force process. If that fails, the
U.S should try for a coalition of the willing outside international
organizations, then attempt to bring along bilateral support, and
only as a last resort take unilateral action.
Such
a decision-making process ought to be endorsed by both Washington
and Europe, acknowledging that while it is essential for America to
bring along as many allies as it can on a particular issue,
Washington simply cannot allow a cacophonous Europe to derail
political and security initiatives.
Conclusion
Foreign policy is as much about heading
off problems as it is about crisis management; a cherry-picking
strategy is likely to stop in its tracks any chance of a French-led
coalition challenging American primacy. Continental Europe presents
the United States with an opportunity: it has yet to embrace the
French line regarding American power. It remains divided into
Gaullist and Atlanticist camps. A Europe of many voices, where the
nation-state is again seen as the primary decision-making unit in
formulating foreign policy, will best suit American interests well
into the future.
In
addition, helping to retard the perpetuation of a
Franco-German-Russian alliance designed to balance the U.S. must be
seen as a primary American national interest. In the particular
case of the anti-American coalition over Iraq, there is ample
evidence that most European countries are amenable to such a
strategy.
National Security Adviser Condoleeza Rice
was wrong when she recently said, "Punish the French, ignore the
Germans, and forgive the Russians." A cherry-picking approach would
lead to a different conclusion: "Ignore the French (though work
with them where possible), and engage the Germans and the
Russians." This is by far the best way to secure America's
diplomatic advantage in the wake of the Iraq war.
John C. Hulsman, Ph.D., is
Research Fellow in European Affairs in the Kathryn and Shelby
Cullom Davis Institute for International Studies at The Heritage
Foundation.