The US may be paying closer attention to Asia but it won’t lose touch with the Old Continent – By Christoph von Marschall
Hillary Clinton and Leon Panetta had news for the Germans attending the Munich Security Conference. “Europe remains America’s partner of first resort,” the Secretary of State said. Her cabinet colleague at the Pentagon explained why Washington was pulling two brigades out of Europe, but pointed out that more US military personnel would remain permanently stationed there than on any continent besides North America.
Was this really news? For those familiar with transatlantic relations today, probably not. But sometimes, in some contexts, even simple facts can seem like sensations – for instance when many people in a country or continent feel insecure about their lives and futures.
For weeks, opinion makers in German media and think tanks have been debating whether geopolitical power is shifting, not just a little, but fundamentally. The US, many believe, has lost interest in Europe and now looks to Asia. The alliance across the Atlantic was yesterday’s institution; the future is along the shores of the Pacific.
The dual presence of Clinton and Panetta in Munich refuted that outlook. It was the first time that the US Secretaries of State and Defense attended the Munich conference together. A leading congressional figure, Senator Sam Nunn, also assuaged German fears. The Euro-American economic zone was “the bedrock” of the global economy, he said.
How could the idea that the US was moving away from Europe (or would do so soon) in favor of Asia have gained such widespread currency in the first place? Europeans are not exactly brimming with confidence these days, for many reasons. The Euro debt crisis is dragging on into its third year and will not find a convincing end anytime soon. The Libyan conflict is still fresh in people’s memories. The Germans dodged military involvement. After some weeks the British and French ran out of ammunition. In the end, the world’s only global power had to save the day – again.
In this subdued atmosphere of pervasive European self-doubt, a speech by President Obama convinced people a tectonic shift was underway in international politics. The era of Atlantic hegemony was ending and a Pacific century dawning, it seemed.
In mid-November, Barack Obama visited Australia. In a speech in Darwin he weighed the risks and opportunities stemming from China’s rise and assured allies in Asia that America would stand by them in a crisis. He announced the US would base 2500 Marines in Australia. Saying America had long been a leading power in the Pacific, Obama opted for rhetorical flourish: he ushered in an “Asia-Pacific era of the 21st century.” But on one key point, German commentators cannot invoke his words. Obama never said Asia would supplant Europe in significance for the US.
A glance at the president’s foreign travel schedule would have served to caution against jumping to conclusions. By the time he visited Australia, Obama had been to Europe repeatedly. The Asia-Pacific tour, on the other hand, took place only on the third attempt. He twice had to cancel ahead of important congressional votes on his proposed reforms. His oratory was supposed to comfort Asia, not denigrate Europe.
The president’s advisers at the White House responded to inquiries about his core message in the following way. Because of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the US had neglected its ties in Asia for years. But that was where the challenges of the future lay. Despite its economic turbulence, militarily Europe remains a center of stability, they said. What the president was doing, they explained, was to move US military assets from Iraq and Afghanistan to Asia – not from Europe to Asia.
The completely different interpretation of many Germans is probably linked to the wounded sense of European self-esteem. It has rocked their belief in their own strength. It seems only logical that the US should be drawn to the more dynamic Asia-Pacific region.
German political leaders responded calmly. What’s so bad about the US being more involved in Europe and withdrawing troops from Germany, asked former foreign minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier and Defense Minister Thomas de Maizière at the conference. Surely it was a good sign that Europe no longer stood at the epicenter of international tensions as during the Cold War, they argued, adding that the US now trusted the Europeans to solve their own troubles. Yet they too did not question the theory that fundamental shifts in power and influence are taking place.
The Atlantic is the backbone of the global economy and will remain so for the foreseeable future. US investments in Europe easily outstrip those in Asia. Conversely, investments by Germany’s individual federal states in the US are greater than the entire volume of German investment in China. Both are clear indicators of future expectations. Asia will not have a military alliance like NATO for decades.
The world is seeing a gradual shift. That cannot be denied. Asia’s populations and economies are growing faster than Europe’s. China, but also India and South Korea are emerging powers. It would moreover be mistaken to discount the leadership potential of Japan on account of the country’s current challenges.
Seen from a global perspective, it is true that Asia and especially China are growing more important every year – and that the relative significance of Europe but also the US is therefore slowly falling. It will still take a good long time, however, before these small changes add up to a fundamental transformation and Asia becomes more important than Europe. And that will come to pass only if Asia’s rise continues unabated. Given China’s many internal tensions, who can guarantee that?
Leon Panetta came to a completely different conclusion in Munich: Asia’s rise has consequences for Europe. It is high time for a close strategic dialogue between the EU and the US on the issue of how to approach China and Asia.
– Christoph von Marschall is the White House correspondent of the Berlin daily Der Tagesspiegel. He is the author of “What’s Up With the Americans? Why They Hate Everything We Love About Barack Obama” (in German only).