Should Europe embark on rearmament? Should it seek to replace the U.S. as a global power? Political scientist, political economist, author, and journalist C. J. Polychroniou takes a stance on these critical issues in an interview with the independent French-Greek journalist Alexandra Boutri. He argues that Europe’s priorities should be on the social and ecological dimensions—unless the aim of the continent is to experience in full the militarism, war mongering, and dysfunctional social order that have defined the contemporary United States.
Alexandra Boutri: During his first few months in office, President Donald Trump has shown hostility towards U.S.’ closest allies, even threatened some of them, and is bent on overturning the global order. In the process of doing so, he has weakened the nation’s strengths, making in fact a mockery of U.S. soft power. What is he after?
C. J. Polychroniou: It is not easy to offer a straightforward explanation for Trump’s actions. Doing so would suggest that this unstable wannabe dictator has an overarching global strategy. But nothing could be further from the truth. Trump is neither a thinker nor a strategist. Look at his on-again, off-again tariff policy. It was just a bet that went bad. That said, I also don’t think that he came to office with a strategy to upend the global order. He is not against global capitalism. He is just trying, but failing so far, to force a change in trade terms that would be overwhelmingly favorable to U.S. interests and in the way that international institutions behave. And he must be delusional to think that he runs the world. As we have seen, for instance, scores of countries retaliated against Trump’s tariffs and China forced the U.S. into retreat. Moreover, Trump’s ratings are very low not only in the U.S. but around the globe. Perhaps only in Israel, where a unique form of far-right extremism is prevalent, can Trump claim to be a popular leader. He is extremely unpopular in Europe, “even in countries with a strong far-right voter base,” as Jeremy Shapiro and Zsuzsanna Végh pointed out in a recent commentary in the European Council on Foreign Relations. But you are right in saying that he has already succeeded in making a mockery of U.S. soft power. No one trusts the U.S. anymore. I don’t think it would be an exaggeration to say that the world sees Trump as an infantile narcissist, though a very dangerous one. Indeed, why U.S. voters opted to give Trump a second chance is one of the most mind-boggling political phenomena in the modern history of politics. Probably more irrational than Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu continuing to win elections in Israel.
Do we really want Europe in the 21st century to become yet another global empire?
Alexandra Boutri: One would have expected Europe’s far-right to be fully aligned with Trump and his MAGA movement. But that isn’t the case. Why not?
C. J. Polychroniou: Trumpists in the U.S. and European right-wing extremists do share certain common ideological traits. Both camps are against immigrants, (especially Muslim immigrants) and pro-climate policies and want to rollback LGBTQ+ rights. Nonetheless, there are some striking differences. America’s far-right is animated by white supremacy and anti-governmental extremism. The European far-right, on the other hand, emerged as a major political force only during the time of the euro crisis and the Syrian refugee crisis, both of which erupted in 2011. However, while European far-right parties see the European Union (E.U.) as a bureaucratic monster that undermines the national identity of a member state, they favor a strong national state with welfare benefits and healthcare services, but only for native citizens. Their view of the state has its roots in the history of fascism. Here, the state engages in a comprehensive takeover of economic and social life. A fascist state is an authoritarian state, but not all authoritarianisms are fascist. Of course, in today’s world, the extent to which far-right parties in Europe are committed to a fascist welfare state needs to be questioned as most of them are not simply pro-capital but have embraced the main tenets of neoliberalism. They may be opposing the consequences of neoliberalism but, as odd as this may sound, they do not reject neoliberalism itself.
That said, there are also clear differences among the different European far-right parties. Some of them, like Italy’s far-right party Brothers of Italy, are Euroskeptic rather than anti-E.U. Indeed, Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, who has defended Italy’s fascist past but is a very calculating leader, has shown no interest in undermining the E.U. and has even positioned herself as a mediator between Europe and the United States. Meloni has also sided with Ukraine, is backing NATO, and described Trump’s tariffs as “a mistaken choice.”
Alexandra Boutri: Isn’t the E.U. a bureaucratic monster?
C. J. Polychroniou: There is a lot about the E.U. that deserves harsh criticism. But let’s not forget that some of the E.U.’s shortcomings and failures have been the result of the overwhelming influence exercised in decision-making processes by some powerful member states. Germany has dominated the E.U., and how this came to be the case is too long of a story to cover here. Suffice to say that while Germany may have been a driving force behind European integration, it has also been the principal stumbling block to a fiscal union and to the boosting of the E.U.’s social dimension. In fact, only just recently Germany eased off on its national fiscal rule, the “debt break.” But the irony here is that Germany may not be able to use its new national borrowing space under the E.U. fiscal rules that Germany itself had historically insisted on.
Alexandra Boutri: How likely is it that Europe will be able to replace the U.S. as a global power?
C. J. Polychroniou: It’s not expected to happen in the near future even with Trump’s disruptions of the global economy. A new E.U. needs to be built before Europe can become a global power in the true sense of the word, let alone replace the U.S. as a global hegemon. First, a fiscal union for the euro is a prerequisite for the E.U.’s ability in tackling future challenges and to foster convergence. Second, a standing common E.U. force is needed so Europe can not only defend itself without the U.S. but be a meaningful player in the global chessboard. As far as I can tell, there is no political determination among today’s European leaders for the successful realization of any such project. And I am not sure whether such a project is practical or desirable. The U.S. is a global empire, with some 750 overseas military bases costing $66 billion annually. Do we really want Europe in the 21st century to become yet another global empire? I am not even in support of Europe’s rearmament project, which will cost over 800 billion euros. European leaders really need to have their heads examined if they sincerely believe that their capitals are under threat by Putin’s Russia. This is Cold War mentality 2.0. Europe needs to spend more on its welfare states and make the green transition fast and fair, not boost military spending. Unless, of course, the ultimate goal of the continent is to experience in full the disastrous economic and social order that has taken hold across U.S. society and take pleasure in waging illegal and catastrophic wars.
