EU wants to cooperate closely with Obama

Discussion in 'Politics & Law' started by Sim, Nov 16, 2008.

  1. Sim

    Sim Registered Member

    Europe Wants to Cooperate Closely with Obama

    The European Union is seeking a close working relationship with US President-elect Barack Obama, but it wants to do so with equal footing. In a strategy paper developed by EU foreign ministers, Europe says it is ready for closer cooperation on a number of difficult issues.

    The proposal is seven pages long and states: "The world order has changed. In it, the Europeans want to play their role alongside the Americans." The plan, created under the auspices of the European Union rotating presidency of French President Nicolas Sarkozy, is to be discreetly delivered to the Obama team.

    According to information obtained by SPIEGEL, it has four central areas where closer cooperation is foreseen: Reform of the United Nations and the G-8, the conflicts in the Middle East and Afghanistan/Pakistan as well as the approach to Russia.

    On those issues, the Europeans are seeking equal footing with the Americans. "We have to work with each other and not against each other," the document states.
    "Americans and Europeans must and can complement each other and take care of common responsibilities together," the paper, which also has German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier's stamp on it, states. It also says the Europeans want to more strongly pursue talks with Syria together with America and that Europe will "immediately reengage in Iraq."

    In dealing with Russia, the European leaders call for broader cooperation and for reserve in criticism of Moscow's behavior in the Georgia conflict. "Isolating Russia is not an option," the EU foreign ministers warn the US. They also declare a fundamental preparedness to participate in international military missions. Legal or technical "difficulties during interventions," the paper states, "are not an excuse for not acting."




    What do you think? Is this the great chance to unite America and Europe again, after there has been disagreement and resentment over Iraq and many other issues?

    Obviously, Europe now reaches out to America again. That's a great gesture, I think.

  2. Bjarki

    Bjarki Registered Member

    I'm critical (as always :lol:). Reengagement in Iraq; an active policy in the Middle East; new UN/NATO missions; a shared policy towards Russia...

    Sounds like a bad plan to me. Compared to the US the Middle East is of minor importance to Europe. There's no need to get into that minefield yet again just to please American oil interests :shake:
    Our relation with Russia is far more important to us and I fear that, even the notion of cooperation between the US and the EU on this front, may endanger these fragile ties.

    If they hold on to this policy we will once again be the bank of the US. Financing and supporting their foreign policy whereever it takes them. :(
  3. pro2A

    pro2A Hell, It's about time!

    I have no problem with cooperation, what I have a problem with is when world or European courts think they can come above U.S. sovereignty. I have a feeling Obama will bend knee to these courts and disregard our own.
  4. Stab-o-Matic5000

    Stab-o-Matic5000 Cutting Edge in Murder

    I just hope that the western world seriously does stop being so much of a dick to Russia. Obviously, they're not being the nicest guys on the planet either, but it seems to me that the US is unable to let go of the cold war and it's causing us to treat them like an enemy when if we play our cards right they could be an ally.
  5. Tainted_Glory

    Tainted_Glory Not a Scientologist

    Cooperating with the UN means more global unity. And I'm all for that. But this reengagement of Iraq is not something I want. Just get out of there and leave them to deal with reconstruction. Even though we caused it, we still have our own issues at home.
  6. Bjarki

    Bjarki Registered Member

    You have a lot of faith in the Iraqi's :-/
    The 'democracy' (if one can call it that) over there is based on the military presence of the US forces. Pull those guys out and the whole thing will collapse.. Iraq will turn into an anarchy, the economy (and oil supply) will go to ruin, warlords will take control over towns or small regions and the whole Middle East gets involved to have their share of the power.
    On the other hand.. you have to let go one day.. I think the best prospect is another strong man Sadam-style, like in the early 80's before he turned against us. Iraq and democracy doesn't match. The best thing to aim for is stability under strong leadership. :sick:
  7. Tainted_Glory

    Tainted_Glory Not a Scientologist

    It's not that I have faith in the Iraqi people, I don't have faith in the human race, how can I have faith in them? It's that we can't have a police action going on half the world away while our own economy suffers. As much as some of our leaders would like to think, we are not world police, we do not need to impose our ethics on other nations, and we sure as hell do not need to change the regime of other countries. Yes, Sadam was a bad guy, but we don't need Iraq turning into another Somalia. Anarchist states for the mother fucking lose.

    And that is my little rant.
    Sim likes this.
  8. ysabel

    ysabel /ˈɪzəˌbɛl/ pink 5

    I like the idea of working together instead of against each other. However, for some reason others think that such act automatically implies as one having a control over the other...or at least a threat. Some of us just need to forget about who has the bigger power and instead concentrate on how we can come up with better solutions.

    Obama won't meet everybody's expectations. Even EU leaders don't agree with each other all the time. But at the very minimum, an acceptance of the idea of working together with other world leaders and to willingly discuss issues with an open mind would be an advantage.
  9. Bananas

    Bananas Endangered Species

    From a European perspective even though the result of the US election went in Europes favour we now have to act appropriate to that result.

    Where as before Bush with his ignorant unilateral arrogance gave Europe and its states the option to oppose actions and US foriegn policy. Now with a new guy at the helm (a diplomat as well) it will be more difficult to argue against US rhetoric. The EU and its members will have to make counter offers, compromise and obligations to global affairs and US strategy.

    When(If) Obama pulls out of Iraq and re-enforces Afghanistan he will turn to Europe and say heres our contribution, whats yours? .....Europe will have to be careful in its answer, too much cooperation and it will contradict its own foreign policies or over stretch its capabilities whilst seeming to leap straight back into bed with the US which would upset the EU citizens, the Middle East, NAfricans and importantly also Russia. Not enough of a contribution and the EU will loose face in the International community(especially the US and Israel) and be seen as all talk and no bite..... & for those countries that refuse to cooperate, this is no longer a viable option, they must justify why not? and the excuse that Bush is a moron no longer has any weight to the arguement.

    All the above under different circumstances can be said for most of the globe, Iran will now have to come up with a new strategy, it can no longer be ignorant to the Bush administration, its back may still be against the wall but you'd hope it sees foresight to negotiate and take a step forward. The same can be said for Syria.

    Russia are taking advantage of the political change over in the US, exploiting Obamas silence and Bushs negligence. This for the EU is becoming a problem as it is between the US, Russia and the Eastern bloc to fucntion. Whilst the US has gone silent, Russia is flexing, whilst making European eyes and ears go in one direction only. For western Europe this is starting to become a dipomatic nightmare. It is hard to negotiate when only one party is at the table.

    I think the US and EU will have to improve on having a two way relationship. The US will have to learn to listen and accept others have a say, whilst the EU(& its members) will have to learn to compromise.

    Was there anyone Chirac agreed with!:lol:
    Last edited: Nov 17, 2008
  10. ysabel

    ysabel /ˈɪzəˌbɛl/ pink 5

    He and Schroder have similar positions on international issues, maybe except for the TVA. It could be me and Sim. :lol: But Obama has to deal with Sarkozy and Merkel (at least at present).

Share This Page