Reference News Network, July 1st: An article titled "Welcome to the World of Wolves" was published on the website of the German magazine "International Politics and Society" on June 26th. The author is Mark Saxon, Director of the Asia Regional Cooperation Office of the German Albert Foundation. The following is an excerpt:
The tragedy of the current debate in Germany lies in the fact that almost no one in the entire political field can draw the correct conclusions from the transformation of Europe's strategic landscape after the end of the "American Peace."
The Trump 2.0 administration is chopping down the pillars of the liberal world order. Leaving the World Health Organization and the Paris Agreement shows that this liberal hegemonic country no longer supports the global governance architecture it itself created. Trade wars highlight America's break with the open world economic order, shifting toward a protectionist system.
No one can predict what the future world order will look like—or whether there will be any order at all. Will Europe become an independent power center, or become a pawn of great powers? Is the transatlantic partnership permanently damaged, or will it open a new chapter after a redistribution of responsibilities? Will the world economy remain open, or split into competing groups?
We are currently in a period of strategic uncertainty. Decisions on arms procurement, energy supply, and supply chain layout will create path dependencies for decades, even though no one can predict the world situation next year.
One thing is certain: the profound global changes are fundamentally changing the framework conditions for the economy, external security, and internal order. Here is an overview of the various schools of thought:
The moderates point out that, in the long term, reconciliation with Russia is necessary for peaceful coexistence on the European continent. They underestimate Europe's military vulnerability after the disappearance of the American umbrella.
The transatlanticists recognize Europe's vulnerability and therefore try to delay the US withdrawal through concessions. However, they ignore the shift in US strategic priorities. Unlike the transatlantic alliance during the Cold War, which united against a common threat from Europe and Asia, the US now sees China as its core challenge. Shifting the defense burden to Europe has long been a bipartisan consensus in Washington.
The multilateralists understand that a Europe based on treaty systems cannot survive in a lawless, barbaric world where power prevails over international law. But the liberal fantasy of expanding global governance after the "end of the nation-state" in the 1990s has proven to be an illusion.
The neoliberal free trade advocates still believe that economic interdependence can create prosperity and peace. However, unlike the 1990s, the liberal hegemon no longer promotes mutual dependence today but instead uses protectionist trade wars to attack the open global economic order.
The human rights activists point out that democracy and basic rights are under pressure worldwide. However, left-liberals overlook the double standards of the West in Eastern Europe and the Middle East, which are undermining the credibility of European speech in the Global South. The neoconservatives remain stuck in the "war on terror" mindset (the stage where the US tried to export democracy through military means) and attempt to defend European freedom in Ukraine and "liberate" Iran through regime change.
If Europe is to safeguard its interests in a dangerous environment, it must promote integration. However, European federalists have ignored the fear that the US reclaiming its security commitments will once again trigger concerns about Germany's rearmament and potential dominance. Divergences in threat perception among Eastern, Western, and Southern Europe will intensify Europe's centrifugal forces.
None of these ideological currents align with the times, so their analyses are biased, their debates are sharp, and their policy recommendations are detached from reality.
Europe must learn to decipher the geopolitical codes of competing great powers, clarify its core interests, and develop appropriate means of strength to protect its interests. A vulnerable Europe should, in principle, adopt a defensive stance. In this lawless, dog-eat-dog world, the EU, which relies solely on treaties, cannot remain untouched. Therefore, strategically, Europe must seek partners to jointly save the parts of the rule-based international order that can still be saved.
On the tactical level, Europe must learn to maintain balance between the great powers. Through balancing diplomacy, a multipolar world may maintain stability. To survive in this wolf-filled world of crises, we need to draw wisdom from all innovative schools of thought. (Translated by Jiao Yu)
Original: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7522053859943055912/
Statement: This article represents the views of the author. Please express your opinion below using the [up/down] buttons.