It is seventy years since the signing of the original Coal and Steel Common Community. We can only wonder what Robert Schuman would make of it all today
Forget the hysteria surrounding the Alternative for Deutschland Party [AfD] and the far right in Germany. The return of authoritarianism in Europe is being driven by centrist parties, mainstream media, and entrenched bureaucracy. It is the establishment that is determined to punish “wrong think,” imprison dissidents, and censure political dialogue. And, as one would expect, Germany finds itself at the center of the controversy.
Germany’s role in Europe, especially in the 19th and 20th centuries, has been one of paradox and contradiction. Long a center of educational excellence, the land of Goethe, Hegel, Kant, and Schiller led the way in the 19th Century in supporting public education and a superb university system. Anyone who has spent time in Germany knows it is a beautiful and industrious country. My experiences there as a traveler and in the military reflected a nation remarkably ordered and clean, where owners washed the sidewalk in front of their house every morning. Everything worked and ran on time. And, oh yes, they produced the best mechanically engineered machines in the world. Back then, even the Bundeswehr, although a conscript army, was impressively equipped and capable, albeit with hair a little too long.
Located at the very center of Europe, Germany was destined to play a critical role in the continent, especially after Bismarck united the country in the second half of the 19th century and Germany emerged as the dominant economic power on the continent. But today the question of Europe’s capacity to govern itself, especially under German Leadership, is on the table. German leadership of late looks anything but steady.
Who but mad Angela Merkel could have come up with the idea that a war in Syria, supported by western aid and arms, could be solved by moving as much of Syria as possible to western Europe. I defy anyone to provide a sane rationale for this cultural, demographic suicide. The idea was anything but popular in Germany and would never have passed a referendum. Here we see the first cracks separating German and European leadership from its citizenry. This crack is on its way to becoming a chasm.
The decision to shift people from the Middle East, with very different languages, culture, history, and religion, to western Europe was a policy error of the first order. Unlike the United States, which has a long tradition of accepting and integrating immigrants from different cultures, Europe has no such legacy. The millions of immigrants pouring in from the Middle East likewise have no tradition of integration. On the contrary, their traditions were rooted in religious tension and conquest. What could possibly go wrong?
Europe’s history has been one of eternal conflict between states and kingdoms dating back to the fall of Rome and end of the Pax Romana. These struggles reached global proportions in the First and Second World Wars when tens of millions perished and much of the global economy was destroyed.
As the US began rebuilding Europe under the Marshall Plan—one of history’s great acts of enlightened self-interest—the underlying concern was about keeping Europe from plunging itself into a new round of murderous wars in the future. Into this environment stepped Robert Schuman who is seen today as the father of the European Union. Schuman’s first step was to create a common market for coal and steel, the very sinews of war, making them part of a common European market. Further treaties followed in Paris and Rome, aimed at expanding the fledgling European common market. This opened the door to an expanded European Union which was formalized under the Maastricht Treaty in 1992. By the mid 1990s, Europe’s GDP per capita was within striking distance of America, no small achievement for a continent that had lain in ruin 50 years earlier. As an economic power, Europe was now on par with the United States. This was arguably the apogee of the European Union.
Imbalances in the relationship between the US and Europe were beginning to show. Even amidst European prosperity, the United States (US) still had a quarter million servicemen and women stationed in Europe as part of NATO, even after the collapse of the Soviet Union. It was at this point that Western Europe began disinvesting in national defense, leaving the heavy military lifting to the Americans. That the Americans would go on paying the bill indefinitely was just assumed. The great divergence had begun.
As Europe demilitarized, it simultaneously lurched to the left in economic and energy policy. This turn to the left was expected given political trends, but the implications for the economy were profound and indeed scary. From the very beginning, the numbers never particularly added up regarding energy.
These changes in economic policy came gift wrapped in left wing rhetoric about saving the planet, the universe, and all things good. If history teaches anything it is this: whenever politicians talk about creating a perfect world, take your stuff and run. Nothing in history has generated more mass murder and mayhem than leaders promising perfection, a new world that transcends the imperfections of the human condition. Even today The World Economic Forum proposes creating a more perfect world but reducing population. The “useless eaters” in the economy are to be eased out. But who cares as these are mostly poor people without resources or representation. What happens, however, when the definition of “useless” expands is another question.
The business community could see the dire implications of Europe’s lurch to the left, but their voices were muted and often ignored. The EU could not sustain the world’s highest energy costs and expect to stay competitive. Combined with high labor costs and burdensome labor regulations, European companies were being priced out of business or at least out of Europe. They began to flee abroad. This exodus, slow at first, became a torrent in recent years and shows no sign of stopping. Without a growing economy, Europe cannot afford its lavish and expensive social welfare system at a time that waves of refugees are burdening it to the breaking point. The response of European governments to this economic shortfall, which they had created, was predictable: raise taxes. This set off a new economic migration as people of means began shifting residences and capital to lower tax environments.
Worst of all, Europe’s authoritarian instinct, thought buried since WW 2, crept back into the corridors of power. The EU governments began passing and enforcing laws that severely curtailed individual freedom and speech. Suddenly, Europeans were being arrested and charged with thought crimes. Even criticizing someone online has become a potential crime. Brussels has also determined to censure the online platforms that enable free speech.
Vice President Vance upset the apple cart with his recent blunt speech at the Munich Security Conference where he mightily offended some NATO allies. He held up a mirror for them to see and the picture was grim. The EU had become a host for illiberalism at the highest levels of government. Free speech was under attack and the tech platforms delivering it threatened. Rather than relying on the electorate to set direction and policy, ordinary citizens found themselves increasingly viewed as incapable of governance. Who needs feisty voters when you can have compliant bureaucrats instead? In Germany and elsewhere, whole swaths of society with contrary viewpoints found themselves ignored, isolated, and even threatened. The question of who is even allowed on election ballots was raised in some jurisdictions. All this under the auspices of the EU super state.
At the same time this all-powerful apparatus seemed incapable of defending itself and blithely assumed the US would close the gap and pick up the bill. (Canada is going through its own shock therapy regarding this new “pay your own way” American policy.)
Paradoxically, many European leaders remain full of fervor and fight when it comes to Russia and Ukraine. They are willing to fight to the last Ukrainian or American boy, if they can beguile the US into staying in the fight. But on the street, anti-war sentiment is rampant. The German people seem to remember the last time they went to war with Russia but not so their leaders.
Having come to the aid of the old world in the First and Second World Wars and again during the Cold War, the US is making it clear that there will be no rescue this time around. Europe must clean up its own mess and face its own challenges. Nor is there much stomach in Washington for saving the European Union from itself, as it becomes a threat to democracy and free speech. The EU has run itself into a closing circle and the implications are ominous. Along the way Europe rediscovered its atavistic authoritarian roots. Ironically, this authoritarian memory muscle is most pronounced not on the right of the political spectrum but on the left and center.
What does the present crisis say about Europe’s capacity to govern itself, especially under German leadership? The answer is not reassuring. More and more European states are looking to leave the EU or renegotiate membership. The centrifugal forces pulling the EU apart are not imposed from abroad but generated from within.
It is seventy years since the signing of the original Coal and Steel Common Community. We can only wonder what Robert Schuman would make of it all today.
Read next: Political Upheaval In The United Kingdom Over Migrant Crisis
Email Us | Reader Friendly | Comments
