ark og ulands

 

 

 

 

 

The drive-wheel and the brake

In terms of Denmark, our role and taking part in the 'Coalition of the Willing'. Is this of any significance - that the US was capable of building the coalition such as it were? The British, evidently, can contribute to some extent - but how significant is it for the US to have these allies such as Denmark, Poland etc., in terms of the international scene? Not militarily, but in relation to the US in the UN and the sense that this is the international community acting, rather than the US acting? 

DH: It's very important. Again, if you're talking about this specific example, there are some arguments - but if you talk about the broader argument: Why you have alliances and partners? that expands, of course, the reasons. We're still having that debate in this country. I think some in this administration want to use alliances sort of like toolboxes, in that you pick and choose who need on a given occasion. I think that the counter argument, also in this country, by many people (among whom I would count myself) is that it has to be the coalition that determines the mission and not the other way around. Because you're in this for the long haul with other countries - you can't simply pick and choose depending on a given day who you need. You have to maintain relationships. 

Over the past half century we have seen that alliances can provide a user-friendly extension of American power, interests and ideals - and that our alliance across the Atlantic in particular remains the core of any coalition that you can imagine on any issue, globally. When we agree across the Atlantic, we are the drive-wheel of progress. We are the core of any broader coalition. When we disagree across the Atlantic, on any issue, we stop each other – we become, together, the global brake. Neither Europeans nor Americans can say this about any other relationship either of us have. This is why transatlantic relations remain so distinctive. The relationship with our core partners remains essential, and when one forgets this, one is not likely to be very effective. The Bush administration put this simple premise to the test in Iraq - and we're in a mess. The EU put this premise to the test with Kyoto, and the result is likely to be a failed climate regime. How can you have a climate change-regime without the world's leading economy? You can't. So the EU is trying to build a regime around the US that is going to fail, in the end, because it failed to take account of this simple lesson of policy. 

So, you know, those two examples I think prove my point: that, either you're gonna approach this together - and you built coalitions with your closest neighbours first - and then draw in others. Or, you're gonna have a mess on your hands. That's why allies are important. It's an augmentation of your influence.

FIRST PAGE

   NEXT

PREVIOUS

 

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 Illustrationsfoto: The White House (Tina Hager)

Portrætfoto: American Institute for Contemporary German Studies, The Johns Hopkins University