Renegades!

Great Expectations

Over the last week there has been much newsprint devoted to the mending of the Trans Atlantic relationship between the US and Europe. Hurt feelings over 'Old Europe' comments and the hyperpuisse unilateralism have made cooperation on certain issues next to impossible. Terrorism, of course, suffers from a massive difference of expectations. Like many issues seperating the continents, terrorism is interpreted differently on a variety of levels.

Of course, terrorism is not the first issue to seperate the two. Sex, religion, and violence has also divided the two. While the US bristles at Janet Jackson's ridiculous nipplegate 'scandal', Europe loves the topless Page 3 girls, nude beaches, porn TV and revealing apparel. Similarly, while the US enjoys extreme violence on TV and in movies, Europe's censors work overtime to edit American TV's graphic beatdowns. These are superficial examples, but they point to a dichotomy of morals and expectations. Expectations guide policy and actions in regard to terrorism, especially.

Europe's expectations towards terrorism have been adjusted over centuries of dealing with guerilla warfare and domestic insurgencies. Prior to dealing with far off colonies on different colonies uprising against the European masters, the Europeans attempted to colonize each other. Sicily, formerly a French holding, started its own underground resistance that used harsh violence to finally kick the French off the island for good. This group of violent Sicilians spawned a criminal subculture that later morphed into the Mafia. Meanwhile, the Irish rebelled against the British in various forms and methods for over 700 years, which lead to the rise of the IRA. More recently, Moscow's bouts with Chechen terrorists are the latest incarnation of long running terrorist violence in the Russian capital. Bukanin anarchists and Bolshevik communists tore Moscow apart with ruthless suicide bombings of ministers and leaders. Similarly, Germany (Red Army Brigades) and Italy have gone through brutal communist terror campaigns. Spain, for its part, has been dealing with Basque terrorists for millenia, and the more recent 3/11 attacks. Yugoslavia, famously, suffered from the assasination of Archduke Ferdinand by a terrorist. These are only a few examples, but it is obvious to the casual observer that Europe's long experience has made it a veteran partner in the long running war on terror. Its response to the 9/11 was the sympathy of the knowledgeable older brother who had gone through the same harsh experience.

The US, by comparison, has little in the way of experience of terrorism, domestic or otherwise. Long guarded by a culture of assmilation and two large oceans, the US was shielded for centuries from the terrorist violence that plagued Europe. While the SLA, the Unibomber and Timothy McVeigh were serious local menaces, they never approached the widespread and organized attacks suffered by Europe over the last two centuries.

Europe, long a player in the anti-terrorist game, has developed its own longstanding methods to dealing with the terrorists. Realpolitik, deals with the devil, a developed sense realism, plus some measures pushing the scale of liberty and security towards security have kept the existence of the European states a reality. Mostly, these measures were made after having realized that terrorism (in their mind) was a nuisance to be dealt with, rather than a problem that could be eradicated. The US, by comparison, being the newbie to the game, comes equipped with the enthusiasm and power it displays in many endeavours. The US hasn't been fatigued by attrition and continuous failure like the Europeans in respect to terrorism, while the US keep the hope alive that they can free other nations from this menace to keep their own nation secure. In a way, it is not unlike the approach and idealism of Kennedy in the fight against communism. Where the Europeans had bunkered down in the hopes of the problem would pass it by taking remedial action and hoping they would survive, the US was relied on to do the heavy lifting.

In a sense, the US is like the new CEO at a Fortune 500 company. The company is stuck in a rut with a set culture, rigid rules, and a long history. The CEO has to steer a new course for the War On Terror, INC and that means hiring, firing, and setting a new strategy and vision for the company. Of course, CEO's often fail in their new roles. They might come into a new job with fresh enthusiasm and ideas that comes with being at a new post, but expectations will be adjusted with experience at the healm.

In one sense, the US can relate to the European experience. While the US may be new to the terrorist violence, it is no stranger to the most threatening aspect of US society: gun violence. While unorganized and sometimes completely random, the US has been dealing with high murder rates and violent crimes, and a culture that glorifies that best villians of the underworld like Capone, Dillinger, Bonnie and Clyde and Gotti. Americans can expect that if they are involved in crime, or visit certain parts of town, they expect violence to occur. They have adjusted their expectations of their own society and have dealt with the fact that they live in a gun culture, with high murder rates. This is an accepted part of modern life in the US, and there is an awarenesss, but also an attitude that it is an expected nuisance that is to be handled rather than eradicated.

The Europeans, and especially the British are quite new to the phenomena of the gun culture and gang violence. Organized political violence in the form of IRA bombings is what a Briton might expect, but armed thugs in the East End of London or Birmingham are a brand new threat. Predictably, the British believed they could attack the problem with harsh action, and started banning guns altogether in some areas only to see the black market for illegal guns explode. Also predictably, the Americans laughed at this effort to rid the gangs of guns as the naive action of a novice. Funny they should think that......

The relationship between the US and Europe does not necessarily have to be antagonistic even as the two differ on their methods. The Americans could begin to at least respect the length of the struggle that Europe has endured in respect to terror, and perhaps learn from some of the European experiences. The Europeans for their part could at least appreciate that their whille their paradigm on the War on Terror is refined and ancient, it might be premised on some arguments that are simply antiquated. While at one point it may have been taken for certain that the Middle East was not ready for democracy, it now seems to be a imminent reality. At one point it might have been ridiculous to think that long term international stability would be dependent on universal freedom, it is now apparent. While at one point it would be safe to assume that simply leaving nations alone to pursue their own sovereign right to govern as they see fit (in the post-colonial era) would be acceptable, if these independent countries pursue totalitarian dictatorships, it will mean a brutalized population of discontents, motivated to commit mass destruction.

It is hoped that with the new detente in the post-election Bush-EU relationship, the two sides can start to appreciate the others' experience and expectations in this shared struggle against this old (new) foe.

posted by Shamrocks! @ 5:30 AM 0 comments

Bygones Be Bygones: The EU and Japan

A new report from the European Policy Centre concentrates on the relationship and joint cooperation of Japan and its new big brother: Europe. While the EU sees Japan as a natural buyer in the larger first world markets that haven't appreciated their currency against the Euro, as the US Dollar has, Japan's new appreciation of Europe is something of a mystery. While a casual observer might pass over this detail as insignficant given the apparently close relationship between the US and Japan, there are obvious signs that Japan is looking for new trading partners and a renewed independence as a leader in Asia, while the EU seeks to further its own influence. To do this, Japan needs to break off some of the ties to the US and seek its own path to some extent, with the help of an old nemesis.

Long before the US showed up on Japan's shores to demand trade treaties with gunboat diplomacy, the Dutch had set up shop off the shore of Japan to trade. Japan feared the foreign barbarians, but enjoyed the brisk trade and huge trade surplus that European markets supplied. While Japan later broke off most trade with the outside world to go into what you might call 'seclusion' for 200 years, Japan maintained links with the Dutch traders in what might have been called Japan's most positive foreign relationship until the post World War II era. Even today, fruits of the EU-Japanese relationship are evident on the streets of Osaka: While American cars on unheard of, Volkswagon and Mercedes are commonly seen alongside Toyotas and Nissans.

Mining this relationship for ideas on the future, the report makes an interesting policy recommendation calling for a Japanese version of the International Monetary Fund to fund Asia's struggling smaller economies (a recommendation Renegades! has previously made). Currently, there is an aversion to US aid in some quarters as the IMF has enforced some very tough measures on struggling economies: Restricting deficit financing to 3%, etc. Japan has taken it upon itself to rectify this funding issue by quietly 'encouraging' its own private and semi-private banks to take on riskier loans to these economies to protect Japan's trading interest, but also the regional economy as a whole. With the largest banks on earth and highest savings rates in the free world, there is no shortage of capital, either in the Federal Reserves or in private banks to keep Asia liquid if the need came.

The report implies that the 1997 currency crisis and the IMF's poor handling and outdated recommendations worsened the problem. There is a sense that report implies that possibly a less dogmatic (Read: US free-market) approach to resolving the crisis would have been preferable. The unspoken reasoning is that a pragmatic Japanese resolution could have saved the turmoil that rocked Indonesia and Malaysia.

Cynics can look at Japan's history and wonder if Japanese leadership in Asia would be positive given the enormous baggage of WW II and the Interwar Period. While perceptions of Japan in Asia have not always been positive, there has and continues to be reverance reserved for Asia's natural leader. It's economy is still larger than China's, and has been a first world country for a long time with some of the highest living standards on earth. The respect of Asia has been regained, and with the US' brand in a public relations disaster, Japan sees an opportunity to put an Asian face on market capitalism in the Far East. With massive contributions to tsunami relief (over $500 mill, Japan again raised its regional profile.)

With weakness in North Korea, and the possibility of either a collapse of the regime or an opening in dialogue with the six party talks, Japan might see further opportunity to raise its regional profile. If it can take a leadership position in the talks, a UNSC seat might be in the cards. Further complicating the issue, China is hinting they might trade a disarmed North Korea for US and Japanese leeway on the issue of Taiwan. If Japan position itself as a peacemaker and bring a resolution to the North Korea (with some US cooperation) they can consolidate their recent foreign policy gains.

In the Asian theatre, the EU is active on all kinds of fronts. While these talks concentrated on the EU-Japanese relationship, there were sections that read like a passage from Gulliver's Travels, as the Lilliputians attempted to tied down the 'monster', Gulliver (Read: The US). The EU sees Japan as a counterforce to be unleashed to diminish the relative unipolarity of world power. This line of thinking would never have gained much in previous post WW 2 years, but the younger generations of Japan no longer look towards the US as their guardian and cultural icon. The Japanese, while extremely pacifist in nature and constitution, want a real independence from the US and want to become a normal nation: Sovereign, free and independent. The EU sees this desire as an opportunity to push for a rising Japanese state as a counter to US dominance in the economies of the far east. With massive US-Japan trade, and a foreign reserve of well over $1 trillion of USD, Japan has a special hold over the US' power in the area. The EU's calculation is that if the EU can wield its influence over Japan, it might hold more sway with the US as well.

Of course, apart from Japan, the EU is focusing its might on building up China as well. The proposed abolition of the ban on weapon sales to China could lead to a rising arms race across the Straits, and if war broke out (which the EU is thinking won't happen)the US could have dead soldiers on its hands...killed with EU weapons. The EU of course is thinking with its wallet, and the possibility of again countering the US' dominance in the area. Japan, for its part, would be wise to see that Europe is playing both sides of the aisle.

While it would be easy to assume that both the EU and Japan are eager to see the US fall from grace, both economies are extremely interlocked to the US'. It hasn't escaped either the EU or Japan that in this intergrated world economy that if one player falls, the repercussions for the rest would be disasterous. For now, the EU needs the US market, while Japan's defender and the main buyer of manufactured Japanese goods is still the US. Any currency shenanigans perpetrated by the Japanese (ie: dumping USD) would result in the collapse of the Japanese and EU markets. In terms of their relationships with the US, the EU and Japanese aren't running for the door, but there are sideways glances and slow moving feet.

posted by Shamrocks! @ 4:28 PM 0 comments