U.S. attitudes evolve about EU security ambitions.

• Author: Oudraat, Chantal de Jonge

When it comes to U.S. thinking about the development of a security policy by the European Union, there are three main schools of thought that can be discerned in the policy community. The spectrum is always present, but dominance has evolved among the three currents. All the Americans concerned with the issue have a grounding in strategy, so they posit U.S. interests as a starting point for their evaluation of European objectives.

The first group can be called "the skeptics," who dismiss or belittle the development of an EU security policy. They argue that security issues remain in the hands of national policy-makers and insist that European states are unlikely to concede sovereignty on these issues any time soon. The skeptics point to the widely divergent views of Europeans on the big strategic dossiers, notably the future course of a European Security and Defense Policy (ESDP). They cite the gap in this area between small and big European countries and the division between those that emphasize the development of more muscular, military instruments in ESDP and those that, on the contrary, emphasize the development of civilian instruments in ESDP. Finally, the skeptics cite the lack of stronger military capabilities among the European nations and their low military spending. In the view of most such U.S. skeptics, the real security challenges of today--the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and international terrorism--are best handled through bilateral relations and, if necessary, through NATO. In sum, for most such skeptics, ESDP is an irrelevant irritant. This stream of thought was dominant in the early 1990s, and it continues to attract a reasonable number of followers in U.S. policy circles.

A second group can be characterized as "the wary." They recognize the efforts by the Europeans to build up their military capabilities, but view these efforts largely as an attempt to balance U.S power. The wary believe that, in an anarchic world, powers and blocs feel compelled to maximize their strength and do everything possible to avoid the domination of a single power. In other words, ESDP is viewed as a European riposte to unipolarity under U.S. aegis. So for these Americans, the development of ESDP is viewed as a desire by the Europeans to lessen U.S. influence in the world and marginalize the role of the United States in Europe. In this view, ESDP will exacerbate differences between the U.S. and Europe and duplicate--read...