This past week saw not only the Irish rejection of the Lisbon treaty, forcing a crisis summit this week to chart an alternative path to EU continuity, but also the annual EU-US summit in Slovenia, aiming to forge a common trans-Atlantic agenda on Middle East peace, climate change and trade.
The Irish vote is likely to fuel rumors of the EU’s demise, yet it is the latter summit that will prove more revealing about its future. While mending trans-Atlantic divides is commendable, the summit presents an opportunity to rectify misperceptions about the US leading and Europe following on global issues. No matter who occupies the White House, the actual trend is the reverse.
UNASUR
On May 23 in Brasilia, a treaty was signed to establish the Union of South American Nations (UNASUR). It was the most recent example of the real geopolitical revolution that has been under way since the end of World War II: the regionalization of international relations on the precedent set by the six nations who established the Treaty of Rome, which became the European Economic Community in 1957.
It was this breakthrough in thinking that offers the greatest potential to prevent the return of what conservative thinkers take for granted: superpower conflict between the US and China, or an East-West conflict between democracies and autocracies.
From ASEAN to UNASUR and the African Union (AU), it is globalization within regions that has become the driving narrative of political and economic life. The issue is not whether rival trade blocks will emerge, but rather that each regional grouping promises to eliminate conflict among its members, as Europeans have done. The US is no longer providing the security blanket or umbrella; rather, each region is building its own.
For elite observers in Western capitals, it has always been easier to conceive of globalization as global first and local second. Globalization is thought to be synonymous with Westernization.
But in many places today, globalization starts with bringing down barriers between neighbors, building common diplomatic institutions and eventually even common armies, peacekeeping forces and criminal courts — all of which the AU has now established.
A world of regions still needs leadership, but not necessarily a single leader. While many have fretted that Europe follows the US without providing an alternative course, in fact the EU has been providing this model for decades, and it is bearing fruit around the developing world, despite the US’ post-Sept. 11 actions, which have served only to discredit the West.
Today the EU provides more than itself as an institutional model. Its emissions trading system is the world’s leading carbon market and a model that progressive US voices yearn to replicate. It is the largest aid donor and market for goods from developing countries. And next year it will launch an external action service through which eventually the embassies of the EU will be larger abroad than those of individual members.
The EU is not finished. Even if its expansion stops at 30 or 35 members, its global presence will be increasingly felt on matters of global concern.
PAVED THE WAY
Even as multilateral institutions such as the UN, the IMF and the World Bank strive for reform to remain relevant, the EU has paved the way for a world of unions to focus on resolving their own problems and managing globalization as collectives.
One sees this in East Asia’s selective integration of WTO standards, and even in the push for an EU-style North American Union to boost competitiveness. Europe has become the gold standard for creating such institutions, and is far better poised than the US to be the arbiter of disputes among them.
A future concert of powers among the US, China and the EU — capable of setting basic global standards and leveraging the adherence of other major powers such as Russia and India — is a vision with which Americans should be familiar. It resembles Roosevelt’s “Four Policemen.”
A half century later, it is clear who the three most influential global actors are and who must assume responsibility for preserving peace. But among these three, the EU has the most credibility today, and must ensure that the other two do not return the 21st century to the 19th.
Parag Khanna directs the global governance initiative at the New America Foundation. Alpo Rusi is ambassador in the office of the president of the UN General Assembly.
The return of US president-elect Donald Trump to the White House has injected a new wave of anxiety across the Taiwan Strait. For Taiwan, an island whose very survival depends on the delicate and strategic support from the US, Trump’s election victory raises a cascade of questions and fears about what lies ahead. His approach to international relations — grounded in transactional and unpredictable policies — poses unique risks to Taiwan’s stability, economic prosperity and geopolitical standing. Trump’s first term left a complicated legacy in the region. On the one hand, his administration ramped up arms sales to Taiwan and sanctioned
World leaders are preparing themselves for a second Donald Trump presidency. Some leaders know more or less where he stands: Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy knows that a difficult negotiation process is about to be forced on his country, and the leaders of NATO countries would be well aware of being complacent about US military support with Trump in power. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu would likely be feeling relief as the constraints placed on him by the US President Joe Biden administration would finally be released. However, for President William Lai (賴清德) the calculation is not simple. Trump has surrounded himself
US president-elect Donald Trump is to return to the White House in January, but his second term would surely be different from the first. His Cabinet would not include former US secretary of state Mike Pompeo and former US national security adviser John Bolton, both outspoken supporters of Taiwan. Trump is expected to implement a transactionalist approach to Taiwan, including measures such as demanding that Taiwan pay a high “protection fee” or requiring that Taiwan’s military spending amount to at least 10 percent of its GDP. However, if the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) invades Taiwan, it is doubtful that Trump would dispatch
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) has been dubbed Taiwan’s “sacred mountain.” In the past few years, it has invested in the construction of fabs in the US, Japan and Europe, and has long been a world-leading super enterprise — a source of pride for Taiwanese. However, many erroneous news reports, some part of cognitive warfare campaigns, have appeared online, intentionally spreading the false idea that TSMC is not really a Taiwanese company. It is true that TSMC depositary receipts can be purchased on the US securities market, and the proportion of foreign investment in the company is high. However, this reflects the