Search

Begin New Search Topic Transatlantic Relations Political Geography United States of America

31. Transatlantic relations and European strategic autonomy in the Biden era: Neglect, primacy or reform?

Author:
Ville Sinkkonen and Garret Martin
Publication Date:
02-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Finnish Institute of International Affairs (FIIA)
Abstract:
The relief in Europe following Joe Biden’s election has been tempered by uncertainty as to how the new administration might approach transatlantic relations. This paper lays out three paths that the US could take. The benign neglect model assumes that Washington will be consumed by domestic challenges and competition with Beijing, de facto downgrading Europe as a priority. In the primacy model, the US sees its leadership as indispensable for sustaining the international order and battling authoritarianism. The US would expect Europe to follow its lead, while old reservations about European strategic autonomy would resurface. The major reform model would see a humbler US foreign policy, understanding that it cannot repair the fragile international liberal order alone. Supporting European strategic autonomy would be key in devising a new transatlantic division of labor. Domestic challenges and ingrained policy habits mean that the US will likely gravitate toward neglect or primacy in its dealings with Europe. A major reform of the transatlantic relationship, while desirable, would require significant political will and investment on both sides of the Atlantic.
Topic:
Security, International Cooperation, Leadership, Transatlantic Relations, Autonomy, and Strategic Interests
Political Geography:
Europe, North America, and United States of America

32. The crisis of American power: How Europeans see Biden’s America

Author:
Ivan Krastev and Mark Leonard
Publication Date:
01-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR)
Abstract:
Most Europeans rejoiced at Joe Biden’s victory in the November US presidential election, but they do not think he can help America make a comeback as the pre-eminent global leader. Europeans’ attitudes towards the United States have undergone a massive change. Majorities in key member states now think the US political system is broken, and that Europe cannot just rely on the US to defend it. They evaluate the EU and/or their own countries’ systems much more positively than that of the US – and look to Berlin rather than Washington as the most important partner. There are geopolitical consequences to American weakness. A majority believe that China will be more powerful than the US within a decade and would want their country to stay neutral in a conflict between the two superpowers. Two-thirds of respondents thought the EU should develop its defence capacities. There is a great chance for a revival of Atlanticism, but Washington cannot take European alignment against China for granted. Public opinion will have a bigger effect on the relationship than it once did, and needs to be taken into account.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Politics, Public Opinion, and Transatlantic Relations
Political Geography:
China, Europe, and United States of America

33. Artificial divide: How Europe and America could clash over AI

Author:
Ulrike Franke
Publication Date:
01-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR)
Abstract:
Artificial intelligence is a rapidly advancing field that policymakers everywhere are struggling to keep up with. Calls for international, and particularly transatlantic, cooperation are growing. In Europe, interest in strengthening “ethical” AI policy is particularly strong – including as a way of making Europe more attractive than other jurisdictions around the world. Close cooperation between Europe and the US is not a given: Europe sees the US as its main competitor in AI; the US wants to join forces against China on AI, but European interest in such a front is weak. The non-combat military realm may be a good area for transatlantic AI cooperation.
Topic:
International Cooperation, Artificial Intelligence, and Transatlantic Relations
Political Geography:
China, Europe, and United States of America

34. Bosnia to war, to Dayton, and to its slow peace

Author:
Carl Bildt
Publication Date:
01-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR)
Abstract:
The international community was gravely unprepared for the conflicts that followed the dissolution of Yugoslavia. In particular, it neglected the challenge of Bosnia. Europe alone was not enough to bring peace, and the United States went from disinterested to disruptive and finally to decisive for a credible peace process. Russia in those days was a constructive actor. The war in Bosnia lasted years longer than it should have more because of the divisions between outside powers than because of the divisions within the country and the region itself. The fundamentals of the Dayton Agreement in 1995 were not too dissimilar from what had been discussed, but not pursued, prior to the outbreak of the war. It is a solution that is closer to the reality of Belgium than to the reality of Cyprus. After the war, many political leaders in Bosnia saw peace as the continuation of the war by other means, which has seriously hampered economic and social progress. Ultimately, it will be difficult to sustain progress for Bosnia or the region without a credible and clear EU accession process.
Topic:
Politics, European Union, Conflict, Transatlantic Relations, and Dayton Accords
Political Geography:
Bosnia, Eastern Europe, and United States of America

35. 100 days of Biden’s new transatlantic strategy – where does Central and Eastern Europe stand?

Author:
Danielle Piatkiewicz
Publication Date:
04-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Europeum Institute for European Policy
Abstract:
In her policy paper, our research fellow Danielle Piatkiewicz provides an in-depth review of President Biden’s first 100 days in office. Piatkiewicz particularly examines Biden's new transatlantic strategy and how it affects the Central and Eastern Europe region. So far, the US administration’s focus on tackling immediate shared threats has called upon their EU allies to take a stronger role and to continue to invest in its own defense capabilities. This includes not just investing in stronger NATO cooperation, but also the strengthening of economic and security support in CEE region through various avenues. For the CEE region, it will be a true test to see how they adapt towards a Biden administration – the deterioration of democratic processes and rule of law will certainly come to haunt the region, but the question remains to what extent? For Poland and Hungary, whose relations flourished under Trump’s administration, may have to reevaluate their posture to adhere to the pro-democratic policies that the Biden administration will certainly call for, and this can lead to a splintering within the V4 particularly between Slovakia, Czech Republic and Poland and Hungary.
Topic:
Security, NATO, Economics, Transatlantic Relations, and Joe Biden
Political Geography:
Eastern Europe, Poland, Hungary, North America, Czech Republic, Central Europe, and United States of America

36. Breaking the Law of Opposite Effects: Europe’s Strategic Autonomy and the Revived Transatlantic Partnership

Author:
Iulian Romanyshyn
Publication Date:
03-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
EGMONT - The Royal Institute for International Relations
Abstract:
The post-Cold War transatlantic relations have been marked by something akin to the law of opposite effects. When the relationship is vibrant, Europe’s defence cooperation stagnates. When the relationship is in trouble, Europeans pull themselves together to advance their security and defence interests. During the Clinton presidency, Europeans comfortably outsourced military crisis management in the Balkans to Washington. In contrast, a major transatlantic rift over the Iraq war during the Bush administration triggered the adoption of the European Security Strategy and a bulk of EU military operations under the banner of the European Security and Defence Policy. EU-US relations were back on an even keel during the Obama era, the time when Europeans haphazardly reduced their defence budgets and lost a great share of their military capabilities. Enter Donald Trump. During the deepest crisis of confidence among transatlantic allies in decades, Europeans re-energized their defence integration with a set of new initiatives, such as permanent structured cooperation (PESCO) and the European Defence Fund (EDF). It is therefore somewhat logical and far from unexpected that when Joe Biden emerged as the winner of the 2020 US presidential elections, there is yet again a heightened risk that Europeans would fall back into a lazy, self-defeating mindset of dependency on the US military shield. Breaking this pattern of reverse effects and avoiding European complacency is crucial for a healthy transatlantic partnership, but it requires concerted efforts on both sides of the Atlantic.
Topic:
Security, Diplomacy, International Cooperation, Military Strategy, European Union, Transatlantic Relations, and Strategic Stability
Political Geography:
Europe, North America, and United States of America

37. A New Start for EU-US relations?

Author:
Jim Cloos
Publication Date:
06-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
EGMONT - The Royal Institute for International Relations
Abstract:
The election of President Biden was greeted by sighs of relief across Europe and offered the promise of a renewed relationship. The first hundred days in the office have been impressive. The tone vis-à-vis the EU has changed radically. New perspectives of cooperation are opening up, as set out in the Commission’s December communication on “EU-US: A new transatlantic agenda for global change”. For this to be fruitful two conditions need to be met. The first and most important one is linked to the capacity of the EU to deliver and to do what it takes to be a credible and strong partner. In this sense the future of the transatlantic partnership depends more on the European side than the American one. America is a super power and will remain one. And super powers only listen to other powers that are serious. But there is also a need for changes on the U.S side. The quiet assumption, so prevalent in the U.S, that it is natural for it to lead on all major issues and for the Europeans to follow will not stand up to the requirements of today. A strong partner can and will at times have different views and even different interests and should be allowed to defend them without being accused of jeopardizing the relationship.
Topic:
Security, Diplomacy, International Cooperation, Treaties and Agreements, European Union, and Transatlantic Relations
Political Geography:
Europe, North America, and United States of America

38. How 2400 Pages of Tech Industrial Policy will change Transatlantic Relations

Author:
Tobias Gehrke
Publication Date:
07-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
EGMONT - The Royal Institute for International Relations
Abstract:
The currently 2400-page long ‘US Innovation and Competition Act’ making its way through Congress is about one thing only: China. But it also signals a much broader shift in American geoeconomic strategy towards tech industrial policy which matters just as much for Europe. To avoid major rifts, tech industrial diplomacy will need to become a staple of transatlantic affairs.
Topic:
Industrial Policy, Science and Technology, Transatlantic Relations, Industry, and Strategic Interests
Political Geography:
China, Europe, Asia, North America, and United States of America

39. #NATO2030: America’s Transatlantic Agenda

Author:
Robertas Sapronas
Publication Date:
03-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
International Centre for Defence and Security - ICDS
Abstract:
Donald Trump’s transactional approach to diplomacy stood in stark contrast to the long-standing broad commitments that have traditionally underpinned relations between the US and its allies. It is no surprise that Joe Biden’s victory was met with sighs of relief in many NATO capitals. In the fifth of our series of policy briefs intended to shed light on some of the issues related to the Alliance’s further adaptation, Robertas Šapronas examines the challenges facing the Biden Administration in its efforts to rebuild the transatlantic relationship and America’s leadership of NATO.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Defense Policy, NATO, Diplomacy, and Transatlantic Relations
Political Geography:
Europe, North America, and United States of America

40. #NATO2030: Addressing the Burden-Sharing Challenge

Author:
Kristīne Rudzīte-Stejskala
Publication Date:
03-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
International Centre for Defence and Security - ICDS
Abstract:
NATO routinely measures and compares the national defence inputs and outputs of its members to assess how they share the burden of collective defence. It has always been apparent that by comparison with the US, Europe needs to do more, but NATO’s burden-sharing discussion is stuck on tired arguments about simple spending measures. In the sixth of our series of policy briefs intended to shed light on some of the issues related to the Alliance’s further adaptation, Kristīne Rudzīte-Stejskala of the Ministry of Defence of Latvia describes NATO’s burden-sharing debate and offers some new approaches.
Topic:
Defense Policy, NATO, and Transatlantic Relations
Political Geography:
Europe and United States of America