| September-October 2005
German-American Relations | Transatlantic Relations | NATO |
F1 - German Self-Definition Against the U.S.
Richard Herzinger
Internationale Politik, Fall 2005, v6 #3, pp35-41
"It‘s not easy to explain why Germans are so irritated with their American foster-father. Why has the mood in Germany turned so vehemently against the United States?" In this essay, the author argues "that Germany's dissociation of itself from America is more about identity and political history than about realpolitik.” Richard Herzinger is the German correspondent of the Swiss Weekly Weltwoche in Berlin. Order Article
F2 - Transatlantic Trends 2005
A project of the German Marshall Fund of the United States and the Compagnia di San Paolo with additional support from the Luso-American Foundation and Fundación BBVA, published September 7, 2005
“For the fourth year in a row, the Transatlantic Trends survey of American and European opinion looks into the issues shaping the U.S.–European relationship, including threat perceptions, global leadership, superpowers, and general feelings toward each other. This year, additional questions were asked about the European Union, democracy promotion, human rights in China, and Iran. Despite a flurry of diplomatic efforts on both sides of the Atlantic to improve relations, public opinion has not shifted much from last year. Our findings show that divisions noted in 2004 remain strong, although things have not worsened much. Europeans are still skeptical of U.S. leadership and Bush’s handling of foreign policy, while Americans still want to work together with Europe on global issues, despite a slight downturn of such feelings since last year.” Fulltext
F3 - America's Stake in Project Europe
Weygandt, Daniel A.
Hampton Roads International Security Quarterly, July 15, 2005, pp. 23-36
The benefits arising from the transatlantic partnership motivate the United States' continued commitment to EU enlargement. As President [Bush] remarked on May 1 of this year: "This enlargement will bring opportunity and hope to millions of Europeans. Along with NATO's expansion, the EU's enlargement further unites the new and the established democracies of Europe, and helps create a Europe whole, free and at peace. Daniel A. Weygandt is a former Deputy Chief of Mission at the U.S. embassy to Vienna. Fulltext
F4 - The Strategic Culture Of The European Union: A Progress Report
Cornish, Paul and Geoffrey Edwards
International Affairs, July 2005, v81, # 4, pp801-821
The authors assert that the European Union (EU) has established itself as what they term a "strategic culture" -- an international organization with the political confidence to manage and deploy military force. They note that the EU has gained significant experience and some credibility for ad hoc military operations in both the Democratic Republic of Congo and the Balkans. They point out that the EU has developed a closer working relationship with NATO, which was evidenced in the EU campaign in the Balkans. Paul Cornish is head of the International Security Programme at Chatham House, and Geoffrey Edwards is Jean Monnet Chair in Political Science at the Centre of International Studies, University of Cambridge. Order Article
F5 - Imagining Europe: Symbolic Geography and the Future
Liotta, P.H.
Mediterranean Quarterly, Summer 2005, v16, #3, pp67-85
"The US-European relationship has been based, in the past, on mutual trust, mutual interests, and mutual respect. Admittedly, it has been an unbalanced engagement, as well with the United States almost always a first among equals in almost any strategic conversation, and with Europe almost always having acted in a convenient, if sometimes codependent, acquiescence. This unequal association of the past may well prove the first casualty of the coming of Greater Europe."
P.H. Liotta is professor of humanities at Salve Regina University and executive director of the Pell Center for International Relations and Public Policy. Order Article
F6 - Terms Of Estrangement: French-American Relations In Perspective
Serfaty, Simon
Survival, Autumn 2005, v47, 3 3, pp73-92
”The United States and France have many good reasons to be exasperated with their difficult partnership. Over the years, each often found the other to be a predictable obstacle to the other’s leadership or aspirations. During the Cold War, however, their bilateral crises never had serious or lasting consequences, and both countries repeatedly proved to be reliable and proactive partners whenever crises reached a danger point. But with the Cold War over, haunted by the daunting legacies of 11 September 2001, and in the midst of the uncertainties surrounding European institutions, the reciprocal visions that shape the US–French ambivalence ought to be adjusted. However French policies are (mis)represented in the United States, and whatever is thought of US policies in France, understanding them for what they are, and why – and what they do, and how – would be more constructive than the over-simplified, and occasionally offensive, caricatures that became commonplace during the harsh and flawed debate over Iraq.”
Simon Serfaty is Professor of US foreign policy at Old Dominion University (ODU) in Norfolk, Virginia. He also holds the Zbigniew Brzezinski Chair in Global Security and Geostrategy at the Center for Strategic & International Studies (CSIS) in Washington DC. Order Article F7 - How Wide is the Atlantic?
Hanson, Victor Davis, Pletka, Danielle; Glassman, James; Donnelly, Thomas
The American Enterprise, October-December 2005, v16, #7; pp36-41
"The new chasm between Europe and the United States seems to widen still-even as transatlantic diplomats assure us that it has narrowed-despite a common heritage and a supposedly shared goal of global democracy, free markets, and defeating terrorists. What is behind this divide? Is it that the U.S. is militarily strong while the wealthy Europeans have made themselves essentially impotent-classic ingredients for deep-seated envy?" Hanson et al offer very different views on the future of the relationship between America and Europe. Fulltext
NATO Peacekeepers Need a Partner
Dobbins, James
International Herald Tribune, September 30, 2005, online edition
”For nearly a decade the dialogue between NATO and the EU has focused almost exclusively upon how NATO can help Europe conduct military operations. Yet of the two organizations, it is NATO that needs EU assistance to successfully perform such missions more than the reverse. ... It is time, ... to stop asking what NATO can do for the EU, and begin asking what the EU can do for NATO. And Afghanistan is the place to start. This might best be done in a triangular dialogue between NATO, the EU and the United States. ” James Dobbins is the director of the RAND International Security and Defense Policy Center. Fulltext
|
