It is time to point a finger at the guiltiest parties in this tragedy of Europe’s on-going decline: the “Big 3”. Indeed, Britain, France and Germany are foremost responsible for the triple disaster - economic, political and moral - that Europe is facing today.
The irony is that this is not new: the Big 3 have been responsible for European disasters in the past as well. This fact does not excuse them for their significant responsibility for Europe’s decline today; rather, it relativizes it. It also means that the smaller nations, and the publics at large in Europe, should finally learn from History and start opposing the leadership of the Big 3.
The Burden of History
The “Big 3” have been the center giants of Europe, influencing its periphery culturally, scientifically, and politically. This is still largely true today, notwithstanding the centralizing and redistributive will of the European Union. Indeed, it is precisely the lack of responsible statecraft from the Big 3, both domestically and internationally, that is now dragging not only their own societies but all of Europe down.
Britain, France and Prussia/Germany have been the main protagonists of European History since at least the Enlightenment. At times, they have shared their place in the sun with a few other nations, such as the Habsburg Empire and Tsarist Russia, but the fate of Europe since the 18th century has largely been decided by the Big 3.
It must be recalled that when mentioning these countries, what is meant are not the societies but the political classes of these three nations. Before the rise of the modern state at the end of the 18th century, the ruling minorities of these three countries had mostly economic power, not political power, and were far better aligned with the interests of their respective societies.
With the rise of the modern state, the impact of the ruling minorities became overwhelming and nefarious, in particular in states which could dominate others; namely, Britain, France, and later Germany, and a few others.
These minorities share the shameful distinction of having triggered both WWI and WWII, leading to the death of millions of Europeans and the destruction of private property on a massive scale. All Europeans today are worse off today hadn’t it been for this disastrous period of European History spanning about thirty years; from 1914 to 1945.
France and Germany were then instrumental in building the European project in the 1950s, under Uncle Sam’s approving gaze. The “Big 3” were key in allowing Germany to unite in 1990, and the Franco-German couple helped the EU usher in the Euro, amidst criticism especially from German society reluctant to abandon the relatively strong Deutsche Mark. Britain, France and Germany bare, or at least should bare, in the European collective consciousness, a particular responsibility for Europe’s current political and economic predicament, because of their key roles in creating the failure that Europe has become today.
Considering this historical importance of the “Big 3” and their enormous experience in international diplomacy and foreign affairs, which most of the smaller Europeans countries lack, it is therefore not surprising that other Europeans still look to them for guidance, as they have done for centuries. Even though they have no objective reason for adopting this reverent attitude today, the actions and the words of the Big 3 have left a deep imprint in the psyche of the historically younger and geographically smaller nations of Europe.
Polls Are Tanking
As if historical responsibility were not enough, the economies of the Big 3 are now in the doldrums, worse than most EU countries in terms of economic decline and social tension. Bad socialistic choices were made. This whole situation for the Big 3 is epitomized by their hapless, unpopular and disconnected leaders: President Emmanuel Macron, Chancellor Friedrich Merz and Prime Minister Keir Starmer. The pettiness, shortsightedness and narrowmindedness of these Big 3 leaders has now been on shocking display for several years and help explain the following polls:
Indeed, Macron has been converted into a quasi-lame duck that nobody listens to any longer with a year left of his presidency, Merz is trying to ostensibly prepare Germany for war with Russia while the AfD nibbles more and more of his majority in the polls, and Starmer could be forced to resign at any moment because his mendacity and his preference for Ukraine rather than Britain.
Spitting on the Rule of Law
The most serious problem with the Big 3 today is arguably the creeping immorality of their states; their unwillingness to stand up for what is right. They suffer from moral absolutism, as an influential analyst nicely wrote :
“The Ukraine conflict—now in its grinding, irreversible phase—has exposed something deeper than strategic miscalculation. It has laid bare a continent caught in a web of psychological commitments, institutional rigidity, and ideological absolutism. Europe today is not suffering from a lack of morality. It is suffering from moral absolutism—a worldview that confuses moral intention with strategic outcome.”
What is perhaps even worse, morality is openly selective as well for the Big 3, since there is a clear lack of interest in upholding the rule of law when it is not considered politically convenient. Not surprisingly, their lack of constitutionality is sapping the trust not only of their own societies but of all of Europe in the eyes of the Global South. This concerns both the domestic and international spheres.
The political classes of the Big 3 are exposed as hypocrites when they sometimes insist on International Law to be applied but applying it themselves in uneven and selective ways. In the case of the tragedies in Gaza and Lebanon, the Big 3 treat International Law with utter contempt; in the case of the US operation in Venezuela, they see the UN Charter is a trifle that can be disregarded; in the case of Iran they publicly condemn Iran more than the actual aggressors.
Further, Israel has been able to continue its genocide in Gaza with hardly any disapproval shown by Berlin, London, and Paris. Palestinians in the tens of thousands have been literally starved to death in Gaza and their properties attacked with impunity in the West Bank for decades, but little or no condemnation has been coming from the ruling “elites” of the Big 3. It is not a coincidence that it is in these three countries that the Zionist influence defending Israel is the strongest.
But the position of the Big 3 on Israel is also explained by their mimicking of the US position. As long as Washington is pro-Israel and anti-Iran, the Big 3 and the EU, will be pro-Israel and anti-Iran; this is their default position as vassals to Washington. Yet, the rest of Europe may not want to follow the path set out by the US and Israel. There are mid and small-sized countries that are showing this clearly, first and foremost Spain, but also Ireland, Sweden, Slovenia and maybe Italy.
Distancing strategically and psychologically from the United State requires a change in mind-set and in values, first and foremost. Since the Big 3 seem unable or unwilling to publicly divert from the destructive and immoral political path that they have embarked on hand in hand with the United States and Israel, then it is up to others to publicly demand strict adherence to rule of law, return to geostrategic sanity and the adherence to pragmatic self-interest for the peoples of Europe.
Small is Beautiful
The predicament in which the Big 3 find themselves has also confirmed the general rule that for state entities at least, smaller is better. The more there are nations, the better the prospects for freedom globally. Not only have smaller states less capability of projecting power and doing harm, but small nations also have better economic and political results than big nations, all else being equal.
Many indicators such as GDP per capita, unemployment levels, debt size, economic growth levels, strength of innovation, labour market agility, and so on, show that small European countries generally outperform large ones. The pattern is strong and well‑supported by EU, IMF, and OECD data.
The most successful countries of Europe are also the smallest; Andorra, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, and Monaco. What characterize these nations are, if not hard currency, then at least neutrality, low taxes, light bureaucracy, and free trade. This is not new : the recipe for a nation’s success has been known for over a century, spelled out by Ludwig von Mises, for instance, in Nation, State and Economy (1919) and Liberalism (1927).
Compared to Big 3, the difference is stark: so why should the Big 3 be acceptable or de facto leaders of Europe? Considering the dismal economic record of the Big 3, the time has come for the smaller nations to reduce the influence of the Big 3. The historical respect for the Big 3 that exists all over Europe should end. Indeed, the EU system itself gives relatively more institutional weight to small nations than bigger ones in decision-making; in the European Commission in the form of strict equality of states regardless of size, and in the European Parliament in the form of degressive proportionality of seats. Of course, this does not mean that these EU institutions shall take over from the Big 3; as the saying goes, “two wrongs don’t make a right”.
A Fresh Wind from the East
The only nations somewhat resisting the European decline driven by the Big 3 have been the East Europeans; Hungary, Slovakia, Czechia, and now Bulgaria. They are doing what the Big 3 are not; they tend to put priority on diplomacy instead of warmongering, on strategic realism instead of post-modern ideology, and on conservatism in fiscal and cultural matters.
It is surely not a coincidence that precisely these nations replaced all their political institutions relatively recently; their ruling (Communist) minorities were disrupted in the 90s. They were forced into a “Circulation of Elites”, to use Wilfredo’s Pareto’s famous term; now they have fresher and less entrenched ruling minorities than the Big 3. The political institutions of these Eastern European states are therefore still today not as strong and robust as in Western Europe, but certainly more pragmatic and patriotic, in the sense of being attuned to their own societies.
The leaders of the Big 3 should learn from these Eastern European countries. And the Big 3 should become humbler, just as their degraded economic and political positions naturally require. Their societies should start demanding radical political change in Berlin, London, and Paris. European politicians should stop listening to the leaders of the Big 3. This will happen naturally, to some extent at least, as the Big 3 fail faster than others in the West. Yet, only a severe economic and political crisis hitting the Big 3 head on, may finally bring much needed change to Europe.
No comments:
Post a Comment