Europe has much to offer the White House

By Wolfgang Ischinger

As the battle for the US presidential nomination continues, Europeans are developing an intense interest in this process – as if they had the right to vote in America. Regrettably, this interest does not appear to be reciprocated: the subject of Europe, and of the European Union, hardly ever appears in the speeches and debates of the candidates.

Regardless of who wins, 2009 promises to be decisive for the transatlantic relationship. On some key issues, serious differences between US and European views remain, such as on climate change, the speed of Nato’s next enlargement steps and the strategic relationship with Russia. But it is often overlooked that there will not only be a new US president in January, but also a new and slightly improved EU, with the Lisbon Treaty ushering in the first president of the European Council, who will be a principal interlocutor with the US in 2009.

View from Europe

Video: Wolfgang Ischinger on Europe’s tricky but vital relations with the US and Russia

At this critical moment, what should Europe do? The worst recipe is to wait until the next US president tells Europeans what he expects them to do. Instead, the EU has a rare opportunity after the election to present to the White House a comprehensive offer of co-operation, coupled with specific proposals and expectations. It is a useful coincidence that the EU presidency will be held by France in the second half of 2008. Nicolas Sarkozy, the French president, has already moved to re-energise the transatlantic relationship and bring France back into the military side of Nato. France can thus be a powerful messenger of European interests at a time when the US president-elect starts defining his policies at the end of 2008.

The EU cannot expect a warm welcome in Washington if it is only a demandeur. It should not forget that the US faces tough choices, from the financial crisis to cutting troops in Iraq without destabilising the region and leading Nato’s work in Afghanistan.

Here are just a few ideas to be taken to Washington this November. First, Europe should promise to do more than in the past in sharing the global military burden, including in Afghanistan. But let us be realistic. Most EU governments will not be capable or willing to raise their defence budgets substantially. But the 27 EU member states could deliver more “bang for the buck” by eliminating military duplication and creating defence synergies. Some steps have been taken, such as co-ordinating long-range air transport. But this is not enough. We should streamline arms procurement policies and examine savings from eliminating separate military training programmes and institutions in the EU countries. We were ambitious and courageous enough 15 years ago to create the euro. Can we not now be the same again in pooling defence resources more effectively?

Second, Europe should renew its standing offer to contribute significantly – politically, financially and militarily – to a final settlement of the conflict in the Middle East. We should link this offer to a firm expectation that the next US administration starts leading the Arab-Israeli peace process, beginning in the spring of 2009. Too much time has been lost since 2000.

Third, the US and Europe should define common positions on Nato’s future, non-proliferation, Russia, Iran and Syria. Europeans might gently remind the US that having a dialogue only with friends should not necessarily be seen as a virtue. Denying direct dialogue to a country such as Iran for 30 years is not a virtue either.

Fourth, the EU might propose – again – a common US-European position on climate change. Without that unity we cannot expect China, India and others to come fully on board. Energy and food security will also be key issues on the transatlantic agenda.

Finally, for the west to deal credibly with radical Islamism and terrorism, the main precondition is to regain the moral high ground. The poisonous effect on global public opinion of Guantánamo and torture, and question marks over the use of the Geneva conventions, have damaged the west’s image considerably. Only if the west unequivocally renews its commitment to international law can we hope to defend and enhance the universal acceptance of our common – western – values.

If the EU gets its act together and elaborates on a position seen by the next US administration as helpful, friendly, clear and determined, a new and better period of transatlantic relations could be inaugurated in January. This is the historic opportunity that Europe should seize before it is too late.

The author recently left his post as Germany’s ambassador to London to serve as the new chairman of the Munich Security Conference