On Jan. 22, the leaders of Germany and France plan to sign a treaty aimed at bringing the bloc’s two most powerful economies – and its original founders – even closer.
What could possibly go wrong?
And I'm leaving out Charlemagne and the Holy Roman Empire because they really didn't get off and running for a truly continent-wide effort.
The proto-imperial EU is attempting to bind Europe together not with troops but with increasingly intrusive cheese regulations. And God help us, but it could work. Mark my words, if this project works the "proto" part will disappear and Europe will be dominated by two hostile powers--the EU and Russia. And those two will work out some sort of ... pact ... to reduce aggression between the two.
Oh, and this is kind of funny:
This “twinning” pact, negotiated over the past year, also calls for ministers to regularly sit in the cabinet meetings of each other’s government. It seeks greater unity in diplomacy and peacekeeping missions. France will push for Germany to become a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council.
One, I'm sure the Germans think their power will allow them to dominate France; and France believes it is clever enough to dominate Germany.
Wait, I've seen this movie.
But more importantly, the French push for a German permanent seat is pure theater (perhaps part of the cleverness the French imagine they have).
Russia will never grant a permanent seat to the country that invaded them twice in the 20th century. And the Russians aren't too happy about the Teutonic Knights, either.
And if France was really serious, they'd offer their own permanent UNSC seat (and veto power) to the European Union. Nothing would even need to be done to the UN charter. France could simply agree to allow the EU bureaucracy to decide when to use the French veto. A veto by proxy as I've suggested we could do for Japan or India, the only two states that deserve it.
But France will never grant their cherished status symbol veto to the EU no matter how much they want the EU to grow more powerful (in the belief they will dominate it).
And let's not get carried away win pan-continental solidarity and even bring up the question of turning France's nuclear force to the EU.
I used to like the EU--when it was the European Economic Community for free trade, and not a proto-empire that will inevitably become something less than an enemy but far short of an ally of America.
This article highlights why I worry about a Europe without American influence (originally from this post):
It is easy to forget--and this was a useful reminder to me--that Europe with its autocracies and monarchies was not fully part of a free West (although obviously part of the Western tradition) until we rebuilt Western Europe in that template after World War II. And NATO expansion after defeating the Soviet Union was more explicit in demanding democracy and rule of law for new members.
We really do need Europe in our team. Which is one reason I am a firm supporters of America's leading role in NATO and do not think the alliance is obsolete.
But Europe does have a role in keeping America in Europe by remaining worthy of defending--as we designed it to be. Which is why I so vocally despise the European Union.
We should not want the EU to develop a "closer union" as they put it.
