2017: Just Another Crucial Year (for the West, for Europe and for everything related to them)

 (Photo: Flickr|Jeff Krause, licensed by CC BY-NC-ND 2.0)

The past year brought us a series of unexpected developments culminating in rather shocking surprises. First, Brits decided to embark on the riskiest geopolitical experiment for generations and voted to exit the European Union. Less than a half year later, Donald Trump became the 45th President of the United States of America. Only the history will reveal us the lessons learned, and so will it eventually judge the general wisdom of the respective electorates on the both coasts of the Atlantic.

However, this year, the fate of a political Europe could be decided by parliamentary elections in the Netherlands, France and Germany. The outcome of the elections could either push the continent towards (at least a temporary) stabilisation or produce a historical shift towards continuous disintegration – likely constituting neo-nationalism to be the new ideological leitmotiv of the political Europe. The former being represented by an unconventional, but still pro-EU government based on a wide coalition in the Netherlands, anyone but Marine Le Pen in power in the Élysée Palace and probably a coalition government of historically established parties in Germany. The latter being represented by Geert Wilders emulating the success of Jörg Haider from 2010 (i.e. winning the elections and participating in the government), Marine Le Pen bringing the Brexit-Trump phenomenon into its third act and Merkel (and along with her Germany as well) losing its appetite for being the last bastion of political constructiveness on the ‘old continent’.

In March, i.e. in the very same month as Britain will likely invoke the Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty and make its first formal step in the process of historic withdrawal, the 27 remaining EU members will gather in Rome and will seek to rearticulate the bloc’s raison d'être – ergo its status of peace guarantor, security provider, prosperity enabler and social cohesion amplifier. Facing the cumulative societal effects of the rising ideological nativism, persistent threats of terror, sizeable social exclusion (in essence, the division of society into the winners and losers of globalization) and problematic economic performance, the Union is admittedly in worse fix than was twelve months ago, and if this downward spiral is to be continued, it understandably will be in a lot worse fix in another year. Of course, one might hope that the more the problems grow, the more of necessary courage, devotion and invention we will see from our leaders to stabilize the system before it crumbles further on.

In May, the G7 Summit (i.e. the political institutionalisation of the West) will seek to address the key challenge of global migration, state failure, political violence and societal hopelessness in the Middle East and North Africa – which will remain to be the most relevant external determinant of Europe’s stability. Possibly, in just the same time, NATO Leaders will gather to cast some clarity on the future modus vivendi between the two sides of the alliance. NATO’s European flank is in desperate need of reassurance, while the Southern allies need to see the Alliance contributing to addressing their existential challenges – namely the nexus of migration-crime-terror. As long as either a deliberate or unintended military confrontation between the Alliance and Russia remains a realistic (although still an unlikely) scenario, the West needs to work out a strategic setting that reassures its most vulnerable members (to possible Russian aggression), convinces the power elites in the Kremlin to adopt  a pragmatic (non-ideological) attitude vis-à-vis Ukraine (and Georgia) and finally to open the space for strategically important cooperation against terrorism (and its potential derivations: transnational organized crime and WMD proliferation). In all of the mentioned fields, American leadership will presumably prove to be decisive – provided that there will be one. As President-elect Trump has consistently stated his determination to significantly revamp the past foreign political axioms of America, Europe is to lose the most from a potentially inward-oriented US.

A unilateralist, nationalist and confrontational US foreign policy would not only put America into a political collision course with the UN, with the EU, (in many matters also) with its key Arab allies and even with Russia, but such an approach to foreign policy could also undo most of the volatile record of President Obama administrations’ accomplishments – namely the Paris climate accord, nuclear agreement with Iran and the support for the establishment of global norms of conduct in arms trade and nuclear security.

President Trump’s inauguration on the 20th January could be remembered as the defining moment for the West. As much as in the case of his predecessors, his presidency will not only impact how capable, respectable and ambitious America will globally be, but also how secure, stable and united Europe turns out to be. In 2017, the defining political events within the political West do not have to be as shocking (and historic) as those from the last year, however, they might pave the path towards a profoundly new West. One of the bitter lessons learned from 2016 was that one shall apply a rather modest ambition towards embracing any form of political forecasting. Another important lesson to be learned, this time from 2017, could be that understanding the real strategic implications of momentary shocks might require a significant amount of patience in (geo)political judgement.

Tomáš A. Nagy

Research Fellow

GLOBSEC Policy Institute

The Last Call to Deliver on Transatlantic Relations

(Source: NATO)

The year of 2016 has been exceptional in delivering potentially transformative political shocks. After Britain decided to adopt the course of withdrawing from the EU, after America elected Donald Trump (in many terms the most unconventional President ever having  this privilege), with the EU itself having a political “make-or-break” moment and with Russia geopolitically benefiting from all of it, the transatlantic community reaches another milestone. Because of the cumulative effect of these events, the political alliance that has shaped the world like arguably no other before is once again at the forefront of policy discussions on both sides of the Atlantic – and that could be perceived both as bad news and good news.

On the negative side, the seven decade long political bond between America and Europe has arguably never look so faint as it does look today. At the end of the Cold War, the West (with the US on its forefront) was the sole guardian of the international order and its will and interest were the main determinants of stability, prosperity and security. A quarter of century later, we are living in a world that hardly fits into the aforementioned narrative.

On the positive side, no ambitious partnership can afford to "waste" any serious existential crisis to reflect and address the roots of its inner disorder. And, over the course of president Obama´s administrations, both America and Europe have been wasting time by avoiding such a reflection  to take place While the reality of Donald Trump´s public elevation to the highest office of the free world might come to many of us as a rather shocking occurrence, hardly anyone attentive could be shocked by the level of overall regress in the geopolitical weight of the transatlantic partnership – as this process have been continual, tolerated and largely ignored, but on the other side, this regress could have also been prevented from happening. There is almost an unavoidable general tendency to perceive nature of this trend via a prism of fatalism. Yes, admittedly history never pauses as power tends to move within the everchanging international system and the rise of Asia, the resurgence of Russia and the spill-back effect of failed regional transformation attempts in the Middle East have all had an overall negative impact upon transatlantic leadership, but there is certainly more in the causality of the perceived transatlantic despair.

The most obvious, yet societally ignored and politically neglected factor of the regress rests in the lack of mutual appreciation of the value of the transatlantic bond. Despite the realization that NATO is the ultimate cornerstone of European security, only few of the European allies have taken continuous American calls for enhanced budgetary contribution in European defences to their hearts despite being fully aware of the continual damage done to the mutual relations.

On the economic and societal fronts, the globalization pioneered by both America and Europe has empowered citizens around the globe to live more flexible, interconnected and mobile lives than any generation ever before have had a chance to live. However, the very same globalization induced rising inequalities in the very same societies. Blinded by our hubris of societal progressiveness, we somehow failed to realize that maintaining a sound level of social cohesion is a key precondition for a functioning democracy, stabile societies and capable (i.e. non-demagogic and populist) political leadership. The rejection of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) on both sides of the Atlantic is the clearest demonstration of public aversion towards encouraging more dynamism before the lack of cohesion is being addressed.

Furthermore, the prospects of positive reforms in transatlantic affairs (both NATO and TTIP related) are being complicated by the fact of a key American political ally (i.e. Britain) embarking on a path out of the political Europe. On the continent itself, the Dutch, German and French political mainstream is already bracing for the outcome of key elections in 2017. The Italian PM Matteo Renzi is struggling to maintain power. The Europe´s south is continuing to cope with governance inefficiencies and significant part of Central Europe has been more than flirting with Putinism.

Despite the daunting mood in the West, it is important to understand that the decrease in relevance of the transatlantic relations has not happened primarily because of the objective decrease in power, or influence, or prestige that the West possess externally. But the relevance of transatlanticism faded rather due to an ignored malaise in our strategic judgement and due to a too-long tolerated lack of will to honour our mutual commitments – what has ultimately weakened us internally. Last weekend, at the Château Béla, GLOBSEC hosted exceptional transatlantic leaders seeking to address these challenges with building a new narrative for transatlantic relations defined exactly in honouring our mutual commitments, comprehending the changing reality within our societies and understanding the dire strategic implications of a divorce.

The stakes are as high as they could be since further potential decline in American global leadership and continued European political incompetence could not only threaten the existence of Euro-Atlantic political axis in shaping global affairs in general, but it would almost certainly produce a profound change in the politics and security of Europe and would also push America towards an even greater isolation.

After a divisive, aggressive and unpleasant campaign, the weight of responsibility of occupying the Oval Office will reveal us the width of the gap between candidate Trump and president Trump, or if you will, between the Donald Trump – a politician and Donald Trump – a statesman. While difficult to resolutely foresee, the next US administration will presumably pursue a transactional approach to the transatlantic partnership – both in security and economic affairs. That essentially implies that a Trump presidency could be (at least a modest) catalyst for European political leadership – if there will be one for the start. Before committing fully to the conventional Allied obligations, the new US leadership will likely be eager to witness   substantially greater European drive towards honouring their share of the “transatlantic deal”. That implies that “the ball” is on the side of Europe. Showing determination to invest in security, defence, intelligence cooperation will be equally important than pursuing walkable path in regaining transatlantic leadership in global trade policy. Europe has relied for too long on American pro-activeness, despite its obvious internal challenges, it needs to make a credible and compelling case for the new American administration to preserve the transatlantic bond.

Tomáš A. Nagy

Research Fellow

Defence and Security Programme

GLOBSEC Policy Institute