RICE'S TOUR: YOUR TURN, EUROPE

 

 Artículo de Reginald Dale en  “The International Herald Tribune” del 12-2-05

 

Por su interés y relevancia, he seleccionado el artículo que sigue para incluirlo en este sitio web. (L. B.-B.)

 

 

WASHINGTON All European eyes this week have been glued on the peripatetic Condoleezza Rice as she issued her plea for a "new chapter" in trans-Atlantic relations after two years of acrimony and misunderstanding. It has been equally instructive, however, to observe her European audience.

 

As the new U.S. secretary of state dashed around their capitals, Europeans sat comfortably auditioning Rice for the new role they want her to play in drawing the Bush administration closer to Europe. They produced copious reviews of her performance, from the glowing to the snide. But none felt the need to step up on the stage themselves.

 

The overwhelming message from the audience was that a fresh start in trans-Atlantic relations would require the United States, and not Europe, to make all the concessions. Typical was the comment of an EU diplomat, who demanded "a complete convergence of views," meaning that Washington should swallow European viewpoints hook, line and sinker.

 

It is true that Rice was not seeking decisions of substance. In repairing trans-Atlantic relations, the first prerequisite was to improve the political climate and the style of discourse, as she has done. A principal complaint of the Europeans has always been President George W. Bush's rough-hewn Texan style.

 

If, however, the Europeans think they do not need to do anything to respond to Bush's conciliatory efforts, then the rebirth of the alliance will be stillborn. Rice made that clear in responding to this much-quoted remark by Britain's prime minister, Tony Blair: "If America wants the rest of the world to be part of the agenda it has set, it must be part of their agenda too." Her riposte came in Paris: "America stands ready to work with Europe on our common agenda, and Europe must stand ready to work with America."

 

Bush has been loudly signaling his wish for better relations with Europe. He is making the first foreign trip of his new term to meet European leaders in Brussels, to show respect for the EU institutions. He is answering European demands that he take the European Union more seriously and get more involved in the Middle East peace process. He has overcome his reluctance to discuss global warming in the G8.

 

Bush first sent out doves across the stormy Atlantic waters last May. U.S. officials muzzled their previous anti-European rhetoric; Bush bowed to European insistence that he work more closely with the United Nations, and Iraqi reconstruction contracts were opened up to noncombatant countries. These doves did not return with any sprigs of greenery, at least in part because many European leaders wanted Senator John Kerry to win the U.S. elections.

 

Now, with Bush due to visit Europe this month, it is time for the Europeans to step up to the plate. The obvious place to begin is Iraq, the main source of animosity, where the recent elections have opened the way for a new approach.

 

It is not necessary for France and Germany to send soldiers there if they do not wish. What is needed is that the Europeans raise the tone of the dialogue far above the nickel-and-diming over such issues as where NATO should train Iraqis, and whether a few more trainers should be added. It is time to show genuine, overarching political support for what Washington is trying to achieve in Iraq and the broader Middle East, without petty, nit-picking reservations.

 

Washington has now concluded it erred in building a coalition against Iraq by assessing the value of allies simply in terms of the number of countries participating and the number of troops contributed. It ignored the vital importance of winning broad political and psychological support, even from countries that did not send troops, so the world could see the West united behind America.

 

That is what France, Germany, Spain and other European critics of the United States must now offer. Their governments say they want to put past disagreements behind them. If they mean it, they should not be calling for better relations one minute, and fomenting anti-Americanism the next.

 

Elevating the discussion and supporting America's broad goals, such as freedom and democracy, need not mean "pledging allegiance" to the United States, which Michel Barnier, the French foreign minister, scornfully rejected this week. It means acknowledging that Europe and the United States face a wide range of common global dangers that they can best - perhaps only - tackle together.

 

(Reginald Dale is editor of the policy quarterly European Affairs and a media fellow of the Hoover Institution at Stanford University.)