U.S., Europe Must Get Reacquainted : New Generation of Leaders Should Learn to Cooperate

Thirty years ago the European Community’s founding Treaty of Rome was signed by six member states. Now there are 12, celebrating three decades of a commitment that changed thoroughly their presence on the world scene. This evolution is not yet finished.

My countryman, P. H. Spaak, who was very devoted to European unity, used to speak of being struck by a newspaper photograph in 1945 showing an American soldier and a Soviet soldier shaking hands at the Elbe River in Germany. The caption read: “Liberation of Europe . . . .” At the time, European politicians with vision realized that more cooperation was required, not only to overcome their postwar economic difficulties but also to assert Europe’s voice in a world dominated by two superpowers.

The first advocates of postwar European integration (among them Spaak and Jean Monnet) were great friends of the United States and realized only too well how important a role America would play in the recovery of Europe. In those days European unity was encouraged by American statesmen such as Dean Acheson, and as recently as 1962 President John F. Kennedy conceived the ideal of European-U.S. cooperation in the slogan equal partnership.

A quarter of a century later the question is asked: Can the United States and the European Community be partners and allies while at the same time becoming fiercer competitors? It is too easy to say that this is a phenomenon that happens in daily life among the best of friends. We need to have the courage to cope with our conflicts.

The European Community has increasingly become a more cohesive economic unit with its own interests, preferences and trade policy. It also has the basis of a common currency--something that the average American may not realize.

Recently economic relations with the United States have become more strained, with a major trade crisis carrying the menace of a vicious circle of retaliation. This time it was not merely steel but also food products at the center of controversy. As surplus food producers, both the United States and the European Community are fighting more frequently over outlets to sell their excess corn and wheat.

There are also complaints about protectionism, currency manipulations and budget deficits.

Both the United States and the 12 European Community states are members of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade and of the group of leading industrialized countries known as the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. And each year seven Western industrialized nations meet to thrash out their economic problems. But this obviously is not enough to give European-U.S. relations a firmer foundation.

Politically, tensions are also appearing. Since the early 1970s the member states of the European Community have attempted to achieve a common attitude regarding the issues of international politics. Results in this field were, from a European view, sometimes disappointing. Slowly but steadily, though, Europe has been speaking more and more often with one voice. Recently this was the case in matters ranging from Central America to the Middle East (for which the 12 member states now support an international peace conference).

This evolution is a natural consequence of more cooperation, and it corresponds with the greater goals and objectives at the foundation of the European Community. This will be even more the case when the newly ratified amendments to the Treaty of Rome (“the European single act”) are implemented.

From the American side it is repeatedly being stressed that the Europeans do not contribute enough to their own defense. But the moment Europeans make an effort to reflect about their own security--for instance, in the framework of the Western European Union--suspicions are aroused in Washington. Europeans were alarmed when they realized how casually matters that were pertinent to their defense and survival were dealt with at the Reykjavik summit meeting by the Americans and the Russians.

I could go on in this fashion. But isn’t it surprising that two entities, striving to defend the same fundamental values and conscious of the necessity of a good transatlantic relationship, do not search for a more regular basis of consultation for mutual analysis and understanding?

Both the United States and the European Community states are members of a number of international institutions, yet these forums do not solve all of their problems.

In the political sphere, high officials of European foreign ministries and the U.S. State Department will meet each other occasionally as a result of a recent initiative. But what about the elected officials with direct political responsibility? Within the framework of European political cooperation, the 12 regularly meet at a ministerial level with Japan and China and other Asian and Persian Gulf states. Similar meetings do not take place with the United States.

It appears to me that this type of regular and streamlined dialogue could remedy or prevent unnecessary and hurtful accusations. A dialogue would in any case lead to a better understanding for each other’s perspectives and problems.

In the 1970 “Tindemans Report” concerning the European Union, I argued that a common reflection between the United States and the European Community about the nature and content of their relations was absolutely necessary.

Today, 30 years after the signing of the Treaty of Rome, it is time that a new generation of leaders gets to know each other by renewing the kind of close contacts that can lead to better cooperation and understanding in European-American relations.