'Barack Said It All'
Published in La Tribune
(France) on 7 April 2014
by Florence Autret (link to original)
On Wednesday, March 26, the day of Barack Obama’s visit to Brussels, the flickering of camera flashes at the moment when the president of the United States lifted his hands from the lectern to use a digital aid to accompany his presentation said more about the state of relations between the two sides of the Atlantic than his actual speech did. It revealed a fascination and conveyed the American president’s message.
Obama didn’t point a finger at the Europeans; rather, he extended to them an invitation … to grow. His message? Faced with Russia, we Americans are in a position to help you export to the Old World all the liquid gas necessary.
But that will not arrive “overnight.” And to unlock shale gas exporting licenses, the ending of the treaty for transatlantic free trade, the famous Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), will “facilitate” things. While waiting, you will do well to build your energy independence. “Freedom isn’t free,” he said, highlighting the “concern” that inspired him to lower military spending among certain members of the Atlantic Alliance (the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, or NATO).
A Deal that Hasn’t Changed Since the '50s
This line between the reciprocal opening of markets on one hand, and on the other hand the provision of energy supplies at a time when Eastern Europe is a time bomb, isn’t incidental. It reminds us that when all is said and done between Washington and Brussels, the “deal” hasn’t changed since the 1950s after all: strategic alliance in return for economic integration. At the heart of this deal — today, as yesterday — lies the question of Germany, torn between the East and the West, indecisive about its role at the heart of the continent.
The trans-Atlantic treaty which is on the table is much more than a vector for trade and investment development, of which the potential is, in reality, already maxed out: 60 percent of the assets of American companies in the world are in Europe and this share is no longer going to increase.
As the accusers knew well, the TTIP is a business of bringing together not only industrial standards, but also societal standards that deal with the protection of figures, individual liberty and social norms. The Ukrainian crisis weakens Europe’s position in this negotiation, as it emphasizes Europe’s strategic dependence with regard to the United States and its difficulty in giving precedent to the interests of all its members individually. It gives away its weaknesses against Russia, as against its Atlantic ally.
Sacrifices for Europe
As in the 1960s, the question posed to Europeans is this: What price are you willing to pay for American protection on matters of political and cultural autonomy? It’s not a question from yesterday, but one for tomorrow, for the months to come and for the next [European] Commission. The Ukrainian crisis is here for a while.
In fact, as for the TTIP, Trade Commissioner Karel De Gucht is suspending the negotiation by launching a consultation on the manner in which the multinational companies, established at some place or another in the Atlantic, could defend their interest against the states under the current framework agreements, but also under the rights granted by the future treaty.
The fact that Germany is both the weak link of the resistance to Russian realpolitik as well as the defender of the TTIP shows how Angela Merkel has been seized by the dilemmas of European construction.
The fact that it will be very equally Atlanticist only emphasizes the irony of the situation. Once more, through the voice and gestures of Barack Obama, the United States sends the Old World back to its dilemmas.
They wonder about the interests [of the U.S.], its unity, its identity. They can’t decide on [Obama’s] behalf, but can only propose an alliance to him without surrendering any of their interests. If only for that, [the Old World] is a valued partner.
Twice during the press conference, the president of the Commission, José Manuel Barroso, began his remarks with, “Barack has said it all.” He spoke of gold.
Obama didn’t point a finger at the Europeans; rather, he extended to them an invitation … to grow. His message? Faced with Russia, we Americans are in a position to help you export to the Old World all the liquid gas necessary.
But that will not arrive “overnight.” And to unlock shale gas exporting licenses, the ending of the treaty for transatlantic free trade, the famous Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), will “facilitate” things. While waiting, you will do well to build your energy independence. “Freedom isn’t free,” he said, highlighting the “concern” that inspired him to lower military spending among certain members of the Atlantic Alliance (the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, or NATO).
A Deal that Hasn’t Changed Since the '50s
This line between the reciprocal opening of markets on one hand, and on the other hand the provision of energy supplies at a time when Eastern Europe is a time bomb, isn’t incidental. It reminds us that when all is said and done between Washington and Brussels, the “deal” hasn’t changed since the 1950s after all: strategic alliance in return for economic integration. At the heart of this deal — today, as yesterday — lies the question of Germany, torn between the East and the West, indecisive about its role at the heart of the continent.
The trans-Atlantic treaty which is on the table is much more than a vector for trade and investment development, of which the potential is, in reality, already maxed out: 60 percent of the assets of American companies in the world are in Europe and this share is no longer going to increase.
As the accusers knew well, the TTIP is a business of bringing together not only industrial standards, but also societal standards that deal with the protection of figures, individual liberty and social norms. The Ukrainian crisis weakens Europe’s position in this negotiation, as it emphasizes Europe’s strategic dependence with regard to the United States and its difficulty in giving precedent to the interests of all its members individually. It gives away its weaknesses against Russia, as against its Atlantic ally.
Sacrifices for Europe
As in the 1960s, the question posed to Europeans is this: What price are you willing to pay for American protection on matters of political and cultural autonomy? It’s not a question from yesterday, but one for tomorrow, for the months to come and for the next [European] Commission. The Ukrainian crisis is here for a while.
In fact, as for the TTIP, Trade Commissioner Karel De Gucht is suspending the negotiation by launching a consultation on the manner in which the multinational companies, established at some place or another in the Atlantic, could defend their interest against the states under the current framework agreements, but also under the rights granted by the future treaty.
The fact that Germany is both the weak link of the resistance to Russian realpolitik as well as the defender of the TTIP shows how Angela Merkel has been seized by the dilemmas of European construction.
The fact that it will be very equally Atlanticist only emphasizes the irony of the situation. Once more, through the voice and gestures of Barack Obama, the United States sends the Old World back to its dilemmas.
They wonder about the interests [of the U.S.], its unity, its identity. They can’t decide on [Obama’s] behalf, but can only propose an alliance to him without surrendering any of their interests. If only for that, [the Old World] is a valued partner.
Twice during the press conference, the president of the Commission, José Manuel Barroso, began his remarks with, “Barack has said it all.” He spoke of gold.