I thought I would take this my final opportunity to use this particular blog by constructing THREE SHORT STORIES concerning the historic, political and philosophical relationship Europe had and has with the United States.
To understand the long-standing 'friendship' between Western Europe and the US you might wish to consider two notions. Firstly, that some associations endure because of their obvious attractions whilst others continue in spite of their obvious differences. Simply put, one is born from the heart, the other is born from the head. Secondly, whilst Europe has spent an inordinate amount of time and effort trying to reconcile the disconnect between what they believe in - their values - and how they have acted, the United States largely has not. In other words, whilst Europe continues engage in self analysis and increasing self doubt, the US engages in tomorrow. That just might be because the narrative of European nationhood is long, deep,confused and complex. Whilst the US has yet to recognise its past fearful that it might get in the way. As you will now read they might have a point.
Let me try and explain...
Part 1
The US Needs Europe
Like any personal relationship the evocative notions of attraction, need, desire even love - whatever that is - are often underwritten or overwritten by the equally powerful senses of pragmatism, security and safety. In other words, international relations is often just a collective expression of feelings, thoughts and actions that can describe and drive our every day 'rational' relationships. Why wouldn't they be! Since nation-states are at their simplest just a recognised, defined, and framed socio-political construct of us. Consequently, these nation-states' foreign policies are also at their most basic just a linguistic, diplomatic re-articulation of our own 'affairs of the heart' built on a often confused collection of promises, aspirations, and dreams that are then often tempered by the necessities of survival, sanity and the cold light of day. Therefore, when 'boys in the band' - Jefferson, Madison, Washington et al decided to divorce themselves from English paternalism so that they could construct their own 'new' understanding of society in 1776 they may have declared, desired or even dreamed of doing this in isolation of external influences but these 'political musicians' had already acquired a symphony of ideas that had emanated from British and European thought, for they were taking their political and cultural antecedences from their former relationships with the 'Old World' and re-framing them within a vast environment that would need some control of or at least order within their new understanding of freedom. Of course, the Founders often talked and wrote about this sense of separation, independence, and self reliance from Europe as their driving abiding attraction but the pragmatic issues of security, safety and power meant otherwise; to pull away from London's influences they had to sign a trade, property and political treaty with Paris and Madrid. In other words, this new Republic that wanted nothing to do with kingly states that were instructed and supported by Rome, from the get go needed assistance from the old Catholic Monarchies of Europe to survive. The often trumpeted beliefs of the New World would actually play second fiddle in determining their immediate future, for their degree of self determination would be contingent on Europe's own domestic competence and competition - ironically, paradoxically this condition has never really changed.
By 1783 with the British beaten thanks largely to this injection of French and Spanish military might and British political incompetence - nothing new there then - the governance and future of the US seemed hopeful but due to their continuing need for European assistance they swiftly found that their nation's future was once again in dispute. Primarily, because of a lack rigour in the political and economic structure that bound together the originating thirteen states - The Articles of Confederation, secondly, because of the growing interference from the French and Spanish domestically and the British externally as the Royal Navy continued to rule the waves. Simply put, as Paris and Madrid looked to expand and strengthen their own imperial designs in Louisiana and Florida thanks to their interpretation of the war time treaty with the Americans, London looked to react to their loss of the colonies by strengthening their control of the crucial Atlantic trade routes. The result, this New World socio-political project was being slowly strangled at birth.
For the Founders their solution to these dual existential crisis was twofold. Madison, Adams, Hamilton et al met secretly in Philadelphia to replace the weak and ineffective Articles of Confederation with the US Constitution(1787). In spite of its 'missing details' this iconic document provided the strong legal and political framework for the new states to cling onto survival. Moreover, the US government looked to break their entreated and destructive ties with Paris and Madrid and turn back to London or more precisely the British Royal Navy who would hopefully provide badly needed security. As the British could no longer rule these colonies it would make sure its European competitors could not either by parking their powerful navy off the eastern seaboard of the US. Also, in secret Washington and London agreed by 1794 to a new commercial deal that gave security of the trade routes to both nations. So, once again the US used the on going political and economic rivalry between European nations to help assist in the development of their own nationhood. For the notions of isolationism or independence of the New World from the Old just like love was actually just a imagined, seductive condition not a realistic or realisable proposition.
Subsequently, As the United States looked to expand from East coast to West over the next fifty odd years the British Navy largely fulfilled their role of keeping other interfering Europeans away. There was the little hiatus of the War 1812 when the US in the person President Madison got a little over confident and thought he could do without the continuing help from London. After nearly losing his nation and his neck thanks to this hubris by 1814 -having signed a peace treaty with the British in the Flemish heartlands of Ghent during Christmas Eve - the nation went back to focusing on inward expansion and their practical securitised relationship with the British. The US Civil War(1861-1865) - The United States 'Real Revolution' - duly arrived after their focus on domestic expansion had lost its immediacy and the enlarged nation could look back to try and reconcile the 'missing details' that had gone in the 'too hard file' when considering the Constitution some seventy years earlier - slavery, citizenship, federal governance, the economy and states rights'. London and Paris looked on at this development without direct interference as this bloodiest of conflicts ensued. Economically, the British and the French had interests in the cotton that the Southern States provided, since it kept the mills in Paris and Northern England busy. Politically, both were attracted to the Northern States and their potential influence. But both wisely stayed neutral during this domestic conflict. It is a good principle - stay well clear of communities and countries that are fighting over their own identity - which,unfortunately, has largely been ignored by the super powers as we have witnessed subsequently in Korea, Vietnam, Northern Ireland, Iraq, Afghanistan and more recently in Syria.
After fighting out their own notion of national identity post war America heralded Reconstruction and the Gilded Age of the 1870's, and until the turn of the new century they witness the US evolving somewhat erratically but effectively from a regional power into a intercontinental industrial powerhouse as Alexander Hamilton had predicted some century ago. The American Eagle had at last spread its vast commercial and financial wings across the Pacific to the 'Far West'. The wash back from Uncle Sam's arrival and the resultant impact would be to upset European imperial control in this region but also to destablise the Eurocentric nature of World order. Moreover, by 1898 and the Spanish American War when Washington removed militarily the last vestiges of Spanish imperial control from the islands of Cuba and the Philippines many within the chancelleries of Europe recognised that the American Empire had not only arrived but was here to stay. Consequently, as the twentieth century said hello many in Berlin, Paris, London and Moscow realised the 'American Century' was also about to begin.
Resultantly, the relationship between Europe and Uncle Sam - the direction of travel - began to gather speed and spin dramatically and decisively as Europe descended into 'Total War' that would sound the death knell for numerous empires and the end of European pre-eminence. Moreover, as Europe battered, gassed and bombed itself to a barbaric and futile standstill on the bloodied battlefields of Belgium and Northern France, London and Paris in the guise of Lloyd George and Clemenceau started to look across the Atlantic to Washington. The presiding president Woodrow Wilson returned their gaze. The time was coming when the very nations that had helped the US grow from a collection of ideas and ideals which had originated from the Enlightenment, into a imperial nation was about to ask for help from the New World. For the strength - the longevity - of all relationships whether individual or international is in recognising and realising where the power now sits. Since many in the US are charmed and enamoured by the cultural diversity and history of Europe whilst many in Europe are attracted by American directness, energy and focus yet this mutual attraction is only enjoyed to its fullest if both really need each other.
Part Two to follow: Europe Needs the US
KK
To understand the long-standing 'friendship' between Western Europe and the US you might wish to consider two notions. Firstly, that some associations endure because of their obvious attractions whilst others continue in spite of their obvious differences. Simply put, one is born from the heart, the other is born from the head. Secondly, whilst Europe has spent an inordinate amount of time and effort trying to reconcile the disconnect between what they believe in - their values - and how they have acted, the United States largely has not. In other words, whilst Europe continues engage in self analysis and increasing self doubt, the US engages in tomorrow. That just might be because the narrative of European nationhood is long, deep,confused and complex. Whilst the US has yet to recognise its past fearful that it might get in the way. As you will now read they might have a point.
Let me try and explain...
Part 1
The US Needs Europe
Like any personal relationship the evocative notions of attraction, need, desire even love - whatever that is - are often underwritten or overwritten by the equally powerful senses of pragmatism, security and safety. In other words, international relations is often just a collective expression of feelings, thoughts and actions that can describe and drive our every day 'rational' relationships. Why wouldn't they be! Since nation-states are at their simplest just a recognised, defined, and framed socio-political construct of us. Consequently, these nation-states' foreign policies are also at their most basic just a linguistic, diplomatic re-articulation of our own 'affairs of the heart' built on a often confused collection of promises, aspirations, and dreams that are then often tempered by the necessities of survival, sanity and the cold light of day. Therefore, when 'boys in the band' - Jefferson, Madison, Washington et al decided to divorce themselves from English paternalism so that they could construct their own 'new' understanding of society in 1776 they may have declared, desired or even dreamed of doing this in isolation of external influences but these 'political musicians' had already acquired a symphony of ideas that had emanated from British and European thought, for they were taking their political and cultural antecedences from their former relationships with the 'Old World' and re-framing them within a vast environment that would need some control of or at least order within their new understanding of freedom. Of course, the Founders often talked and wrote about this sense of separation, independence, and self reliance from Europe as their driving abiding attraction but the pragmatic issues of security, safety and power meant otherwise; to pull away from London's influences they had to sign a trade, property and political treaty with Paris and Madrid. In other words, this new Republic that wanted nothing to do with kingly states that were instructed and supported by Rome, from the get go needed assistance from the old Catholic Monarchies of Europe to survive. The often trumpeted beliefs of the New World would actually play second fiddle in determining their immediate future, for their degree of self determination would be contingent on Europe's own domestic competence and competition - ironically, paradoxically this condition has never really changed.
By 1783 with the British beaten thanks largely to this injection of French and Spanish military might and British political incompetence - nothing new there then - the governance and future of the US seemed hopeful but due to their continuing need for European assistance they swiftly found that their nation's future was once again in dispute. Primarily, because of a lack rigour in the political and economic structure that bound together the originating thirteen states - The Articles of Confederation, secondly, because of the growing interference from the French and Spanish domestically and the British externally as the Royal Navy continued to rule the waves. Simply put, as Paris and Madrid looked to expand and strengthen their own imperial designs in Louisiana and Florida thanks to their interpretation of the war time treaty with the Americans, London looked to react to their loss of the colonies by strengthening their control of the crucial Atlantic trade routes. The result, this New World socio-political project was being slowly strangled at birth.
For the Founders their solution to these dual existential crisis was twofold. Madison, Adams, Hamilton et al met secretly in Philadelphia to replace the weak and ineffective Articles of Confederation with the US Constitution(1787). In spite of its 'missing details' this iconic document provided the strong legal and political framework for the new states to cling onto survival. Moreover, the US government looked to break their entreated and destructive ties with Paris and Madrid and turn back to London or more precisely the British Royal Navy who would hopefully provide badly needed security. As the British could no longer rule these colonies it would make sure its European competitors could not either by parking their powerful navy off the eastern seaboard of the US. Also, in secret Washington and London agreed by 1794 to a new commercial deal that gave security of the trade routes to both nations. So, once again the US used the on going political and economic rivalry between European nations to help assist in the development of their own nationhood. For the notions of isolationism or independence of the New World from the Old just like love was actually just a imagined, seductive condition not a realistic or realisable proposition.
Subsequently, As the United States looked to expand from East coast to West over the next fifty odd years the British Navy largely fulfilled their role of keeping other interfering Europeans away. There was the little hiatus of the War 1812 when the US in the person President Madison got a little over confident and thought he could do without the continuing help from London. After nearly losing his nation and his neck thanks to this hubris by 1814 -having signed a peace treaty with the British in the Flemish heartlands of Ghent during Christmas Eve - the nation went back to focusing on inward expansion and their practical securitised relationship with the British. The US Civil War(1861-1865) - The United States 'Real Revolution' - duly arrived after their focus on domestic expansion had lost its immediacy and the enlarged nation could look back to try and reconcile the 'missing details' that had gone in the 'too hard file' when considering the Constitution some seventy years earlier - slavery, citizenship, federal governance, the economy and states rights'. London and Paris looked on at this development without direct interference as this bloodiest of conflicts ensued. Economically, the British and the French had interests in the cotton that the Southern States provided, since it kept the mills in Paris and Northern England busy. Politically, both were attracted to the Northern States and their potential influence. But both wisely stayed neutral during this domestic conflict. It is a good principle - stay well clear of communities and countries that are fighting over their own identity - which,unfortunately, has largely been ignored by the super powers as we have witnessed subsequently in Korea, Vietnam, Northern Ireland, Iraq, Afghanistan and more recently in Syria.
After fighting out their own notion of national identity post war America heralded Reconstruction and the Gilded Age of the 1870's, and until the turn of the new century they witness the US evolving somewhat erratically but effectively from a regional power into a intercontinental industrial powerhouse as Alexander Hamilton had predicted some century ago. The American Eagle had at last spread its vast commercial and financial wings across the Pacific to the 'Far West'. The wash back from Uncle Sam's arrival and the resultant impact would be to upset European imperial control in this region but also to destablise the Eurocentric nature of World order. Moreover, by 1898 and the Spanish American War when Washington removed militarily the last vestiges of Spanish imperial control from the islands of Cuba and the Philippines many within the chancelleries of Europe recognised that the American Empire had not only arrived but was here to stay. Consequently, as the twentieth century said hello many in Berlin, Paris, London and Moscow realised the 'American Century' was also about to begin.
Resultantly, the relationship between Europe and Uncle Sam - the direction of travel - began to gather speed and spin dramatically and decisively as Europe descended into 'Total War' that would sound the death knell for numerous empires and the end of European pre-eminence. Moreover, as Europe battered, gassed and bombed itself to a barbaric and futile standstill on the bloodied battlefields of Belgium and Northern France, London and Paris in the guise of Lloyd George and Clemenceau started to look across the Atlantic to Washington. The presiding president Woodrow Wilson returned their gaze. The time was coming when the very nations that had helped the US grow from a collection of ideas and ideals which had originated from the Enlightenment, into a imperial nation was about to ask for help from the New World. For the strength - the longevity - of all relationships whether individual or international is in recognising and realising where the power now sits. Since many in the US are charmed and enamoured by the cultural diversity and history of Europe whilst many in Europe are attracted by American directness, energy and focus yet this mutual attraction is only enjoyed to its fullest if both really need each other.
Part Two to follow: Europe Needs the US
KK
RSS Feed
