In my previous blog I tried to link European understanding/experiences with American imperatives - A Tale of Two Cities: Paris and Washington - as a way of suggesting that the differences between these two worlds are many in spite of shared values and aims that the empowered and the lazy love to concentrate on. Then came Brussels... and the reaction to the 'terrorists on the lose' was markedly different from Paris, Why the security shut down? What does the 'capital of Europe' represent that Paris does not? Is this just a natural heightened extension of fear after missed opportunities or is their something else in the mix?
Brussels is primarily the capital of Belgium but sometimes you wonder. I find it far easier to speak English in the capital then poor Flemish especially if I'm hungry, OK thirsty - I'm not the only one. But lets pretend that it is not now dominated by French language and sentiment, lets pretend that this form of cultural nationalism does not matter - it shouldn't but it does to some - and recognise that Brussels is the archetypal hub; citizens of the World spilling in and spinning off around Europe - an amazingly vibrant crossroads. It is also the administrative centre of the EU. Did Brussels actually invent the word Bureaucracy! If they didn't they should of, just listen to the way EU institutions communicate, it defies 'gravity'.
Brussels also, crucially, is the centre of the United States political and military footprint in Europe - NATO. This organisation was initially set up to protect 'Free Europe' from the dastardly Soviets. But when that particular raison d'etre ended a new reason for maintaining this institution had to be found, Why? Couldn't Europe of 1990's provide their own security ? Didn't the US want to go home ? After all victory had been declared, the US had won and as Hegel sort of predicted, history was a process that would end with no longer anything to be written about. Well, as awkward questions started to be asked about this institution's future, 'thank heavens' along came the Balkans conflict and the 'War on Terror' linking for 'ever 'European security to American imperatives. But what is fundamental to this ongoing relationship is the majority of NATO's funding comes from Washington, the majority of the military input from West Point, and regardless of what European face fronts this organisation the agenda continues to be set and influenced by Washington. In other words, the lens that is looked through to consider European security was undoubtedly made in silicon valley.
Therefore, as the US has 'significant' assets in Brussels I wondered if the urgency and agency surrounding this new approach in Brussels had something to do with Washington talking to Charles Michel? Surely not! What I can suggest with some degree of surety is that this conversation would have been far more clearly understood than Secretary Kerry's talks with the Elysee Palace earlier in the week. UK PM Cameron's meeting with President Hollande tomorrow in Paris is not coincidental, this leading Brit is there to clarify what Kerry did not understand as well as saying thank you for the French led UN agreement earlier in the week. The British PM if he wishes to continue to eat at all the political top tables must keep Washington in the loop - as Kissinger famously remarked but then half heartedly denied, 'who do I call if I wish to call Europe'? Ironically, and surely paradoxically the answer was London. Why not Brussels? And we wonder why Europe still remains a mystery to the average desk bound State Department official let alone the political decision-makers!
Last week, the influential US Atlantic magazine printed an article entitled, 'What is Wrong with Belgium? Strange since two years ago whilst talking to three State Department officials based in Brussels they asked roughly the same question, roughly since we had all been drinking copious amount of Belgium beer. Putting aside their expletives the staffers observations were focused on the differences between this nation's understanding of freedom and Washington's. I did observe that you cannot expect Brussels to be Boston or Baton Rouge, precisely came the retort that is 'your' problem. I would not have minded but no one laughed.
On Thursday the United States celebrates Thanksgiving - I will write nearer the time on this - but I hope that many in Belgium are NOW counting their blessings that how lucky they are/ we are to live in this place and space with our particular unique nuanced understanding of freedom regardless of the few that come to live here and try to infect our society with hatred.For our sense of life should not be up for debate regardless of where and who, and Brussels should reflect that in any language that is clearly understood.
We zijn allemaal Belgen (excuse my poor Flemish)
KK
Brussels is primarily the capital of Belgium but sometimes you wonder. I find it far easier to speak English in the capital then poor Flemish especially if I'm hungry, OK thirsty - I'm not the only one. But lets pretend that it is not now dominated by French language and sentiment, lets pretend that this form of cultural nationalism does not matter - it shouldn't but it does to some - and recognise that Brussels is the archetypal hub; citizens of the World spilling in and spinning off around Europe - an amazingly vibrant crossroads. It is also the administrative centre of the EU. Did Brussels actually invent the word Bureaucracy! If they didn't they should of, just listen to the way EU institutions communicate, it defies 'gravity'.
Brussels also, crucially, is the centre of the United States political and military footprint in Europe - NATO. This organisation was initially set up to protect 'Free Europe' from the dastardly Soviets. But when that particular raison d'etre ended a new reason for maintaining this institution had to be found, Why? Couldn't Europe of 1990's provide their own security ? Didn't the US want to go home ? After all victory had been declared, the US had won and as Hegel sort of predicted, history was a process that would end with no longer anything to be written about. Well, as awkward questions started to be asked about this institution's future, 'thank heavens' along came the Balkans conflict and the 'War on Terror' linking for 'ever 'European security to American imperatives. But what is fundamental to this ongoing relationship is the majority of NATO's funding comes from Washington, the majority of the military input from West Point, and regardless of what European face fronts this organisation the agenda continues to be set and influenced by Washington. In other words, the lens that is looked through to consider European security was undoubtedly made in silicon valley.
Therefore, as the US has 'significant' assets in Brussels I wondered if the urgency and agency surrounding this new approach in Brussels had something to do with Washington talking to Charles Michel? Surely not! What I can suggest with some degree of surety is that this conversation would have been far more clearly understood than Secretary Kerry's talks with the Elysee Palace earlier in the week. UK PM Cameron's meeting with President Hollande tomorrow in Paris is not coincidental, this leading Brit is there to clarify what Kerry did not understand as well as saying thank you for the French led UN agreement earlier in the week. The British PM if he wishes to continue to eat at all the political top tables must keep Washington in the loop - as Kissinger famously remarked but then half heartedly denied, 'who do I call if I wish to call Europe'? Ironically, and surely paradoxically the answer was London. Why not Brussels? And we wonder why Europe still remains a mystery to the average desk bound State Department official let alone the political decision-makers!
Last week, the influential US Atlantic magazine printed an article entitled, 'What is Wrong with Belgium? Strange since two years ago whilst talking to three State Department officials based in Brussels they asked roughly the same question, roughly since we had all been drinking copious amount of Belgium beer. Putting aside their expletives the staffers observations were focused on the differences between this nation's understanding of freedom and Washington's. I did observe that you cannot expect Brussels to be Boston or Baton Rouge, precisely came the retort that is 'your' problem. I would not have minded but no one laughed.
On Thursday the United States celebrates Thanksgiving - I will write nearer the time on this - but I hope that many in Belgium are NOW counting their blessings that how lucky they are/ we are to live in this place and space with our particular unique nuanced understanding of freedom regardless of the few that come to live here and try to infect our society with hatred.For our sense of life should not be up for debate regardless of where and who, and Brussels should reflect that in any language that is clearly understood.
We zijn allemaal Belgen (excuse my poor Flemish)
KK
RSS Feed
