What should the EU do about US power?

[BeBMan]

Originally posted by Rogan Josh
Why on Earth would the EU want an army as big as the US army???

I`m not sure if I want an army as big as the US army, but I want Eurpean forces who can act independently if necessary, without whining about the US on the one hand, and asking them for military support the other hand...I don´t say Europe should go to war in every corner of the world, in fact I hope we don´t need to do this, but I think we should have the ability to do so. For example currently, the Bundeswehr had not even enough air transport capacity to transport its own peacekeepers to Afghanistan, that is weak IMO.

The whole point of the EU criticising the US, is that we don't want them to go around killing people quite so much. Why would we counter that by doing the same thing?

I generally do not criticise the US for doing that as long as I think it is justified what they do. Sometimes in the past it was not, but currently in Afghanistan I think it is. What would Europe do in a similar situation?

[Bereta_Eder]

Originally posted by BeBro


Currently, there exists a French-German corps (or something like that, I forgot the exact name ) - it could be a model for the future of Europe´s military...

yes I know.. it could be although maybe it is too small to be used as a model for a unified army of some 450 millions of people!

(since the unification, if it happens, will not happen before the expansion).

it is useful to study how armies which has different languages can coordinate though. I think this is its biggest contribution.

but all in all we already have a working model for a european army.. it's called NATO

we just have to make it exclusively european

[Faeelin]

I'm from the US, and I think that if the EU should develop a projection force similar to America's. If and when that happens, they may have an equal say. Until then, if Americans spend the money to fight, t hen Americans shouldn't listen to anyone else who tells us how to fight our wars. Especially when said nations offer support so long as its nothing major.

Actually, where does the graying of Europe tie into all this? This is happening in America, but it's offset here by infusions of immigrants from Asia and Latin America. How rapid is the immigration into Europe? From what I"ve seen, according to the UN, at current rates of population growth/emigration, Europe's population will be smaller than America's by 2050.

[Bereta_Eder]

well america and europe will not be exactly the same in 50 years.

you will be much more latin american in population maybe even spanish will be your second official language.

and we will be much more "arabic".


and yet maybe not. the problem with these studies is that they often ommit possibilities that can present themselves during the time - span encapuslated in the study so that they prove what they are seeking to prove

[Drake Tungsten]

Originally posted by paiktis22
you will be much more latin american in population maybe even spanish will be your second official language.

When did America adopt its first "official" language? I've never heard of it...

[DanS]

"It could either spend more on developing a significant millitary force - in order to do this we would probably need to spend significantly more than the US does for at least 10 years to develop the 'power-projection' forces we lack - the US would then be able to spend less but would also need to accept the EU as an equal partner with equal say."

This is what the US would like. Essentially, since WW2 we've been helping Europe on its track to achieving this. A European superpower.

"Or Europe could keep it's millitary spending at a minimum as any power that could threaten our interests would probably also be an even bigger threat to US interests as so would likely be dealt with by them - this would be very like the position of the US in the 19th century vis-a-vis the British Empire - of course this would mean that Europe could expect no influence over US policymaking."

This is what seems likely from our vantage point. The only public that appears willing to go with #1 is the UK.

Our response is to try to buck up the expenditure figures from #2 (by giving speaches saying that Europe isn't spending enough). But this moderation essentially means the status quo...

"In some ways the current situation where the EU expects a voice in US policymaking whilst being unable to provide any significant millitary support is the worst of both worlds."

Personally, it gets incredibly tiresome to hear about American "unilateralism" from the continent, especially when we have several huge coalitions successfully prepared for the tasks at hand. I sure hope that this isn't going to continue.

"To get defence spending up to the US's level would require a rise in the EU's tax burden (measured as taxation's share of GDP) of less than 6% - between 1989 and 1999 it went up by 5%."

While possible, where exactly is the political will to do this? Can you conceive a combination of Euro countries that would support it?

...

"The only way to try and deal with the US is to try and acheive economic dominance. This is something which Europe can and should do (although it policy makers would need a serious kick up the arse first....). The EU has a highly trained populace and good infrastructure, as well as good relations (on the whole - at least better than the US) with developing countries."

RJ: Economic parity is within reach and would support ef's #1. But economic dominance is highly unlikely, even with a serious kick up the arse.

[Bereta_Eder]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten


When did America adopt its first "official" language? I've never heard of it...

well IIRC Iowa just planned on doing just that

pitty that greek was outvoted by the english by just a couple votes when deciding your US primary language in the birth of the US republic... (symbolic move but noteworthy nevertheless)

[el freako]

Originally posted by Faeelin
How rapid is the immigration into Europe? From what I"ve seen, according to the UN, at current rates of population growth/emigration, Europe's population will be smaller than America's by 2050.

Europe recieves between 0.5m and 1.0m immigrants a year.

50 year forecasts should always be taken with a large pinch of salt (and I speak as someone who uses and makes them ).
For example in 1940 the US population was forecast to peak at 145m in 1950 and then fall.

[Bereta_Eder]

Originally posted by DanS
This is what the US would like. Essentially, since WW2 we've been helping Europe on its track to achieving this. A European superpower.

This is not so clear. You are VERY ambivalent on this regard.
You want Europe to increase military spending that's for sure. OTOH you try to guarantee that Europe will not have a strong say as to how her own forces should be deployed.

You keep a very ambivalent stance to all of this. Sometimes "letting it happen" and other times doing your outmost to "keep it down".
Very undecisive.

[Paul Hanson]

Seems odd. A powerful European military is in America's best interests. Firstly, it means that Europe can take some of the slack off America in the "world policeman" role. And secondly, it would mean that America doesn't have to bail Europe out when they do naff things up.

[Bereta_Eder]

Originally posted by Paul Hanson
Seems odd. A powerful European military is in America's best interests. Firstly, it means that Europe can take some of the slack off America in the "world policeman" role. And secondly, it would mean that America doesn't have to bail Europe out when they do naff things up.

It also means that the EU can say "No" and really mean it when their interests are different. (recent examples: plans to bomb Iraq, get tough on Iran, neverending support on Israel and the protection of Sharon from being tried in the Hague along Milosevic).

[BeBMan]

Originally posted by DanS

BeBro: Economic parity is within reach and would support ef's #1. But economic dominance is highly unlikely, even with a serious kick up the arse.

Was that me who said something about dominance?

[DanS]

Oops. Apologies.

[Sandman]

I'm from the EU and I think the US should get its army down to EU standards

I vote for this one too. America's military is far too big.

[el freako]

Originally posted by DanS
"To get defence spending up to the US's level would require a rise in the EU's tax burden (measured as taxation's share of GDP) of less than 6% - between 1989 and 1999 it went up by 5%."

While possible, where exactly is the political will to do this? Can you conceive a combination of Euro countries that would support it?

I was showing that Faded Glory's statement that the EU couldn't spend a simmilar amount as the US was false - as to political will it probably is not there now, but as the US's own history has show that can change.