The Foreign Service Journal, April 2017

leaders. In part this was based on a genuine mutuality of inter- ests, and in part it was grounded in the hope that with persever- ance backed by American power the division of the continent could one day be ended. Such a hope has now become illusory. There is a growing feeling in Europe that the United States, by its lack of willingness to face facts in time, has been contributing not to the end but to the perpetuation of the hostile confrontation that divides the continent. Most Europeans now seem to consider, for example, that the recently abandoned U.S. attempts to foster greater military integration were out of step with changing histori- cal conditions and served only to obstruct the evolution of a much- needed and desired detente. It is in the field of politico-military affairs that the United States is facing its greatest difficulties in Europe. Having insisted for over a decade and a half on the indispensability of an American troop presence to guarantee European security and help bring about an eventual ColdWar settlement, the United States now finds for a very mundane reason—to wit, lack of money—that this is not quite so essential as it seemed. And instead of working together with its allies in search of a solution to the East-West tangle, the United States has begun to talk about arrangements with the Russians while pressing the Europeans tomake greater financial contribu- tions to the maintenance of its defense establishment on their territory. The results of this kind of maneuvering are predictable. As far as the Europeans are concerned, it will mean a lessening of confi- dence in the reliability of the United States as an ally and a more questioning attitude toward American ability to achieve the goals it has proclaimed for Europe. The Russians, for their part, may view these developments with equanimity, if not satisfaction, since they appear to be on the verge of achieving a long-standing objective— namely a U.S. troop withdrawal—without the necessity of giving up anything in return. Although the United States can take small comfort from this situation, it may find that as a result of such tribulations its rela- tionship with the Europeans will eventually be established on a sounder basis. The United States has become too closely involved on the European scene and is toomuch identified with certain groups of interests. Such involvement is neither desirable nor necessary. First of all, it calls forth latent resentments and leads to charges of meddling and interference. Secondly, while European and American interests frequently converge, this is not always the case, and each side should be free to pur- sue its affairs in whatever way is appropriate. Rethinking the U.S. Role Given the present consti- tution of the world, it would in fact be more satisfactory for the United States and Europe to have a less interdependent relation- ship. The U.S. economy is in some respects so volatile, and Ameri- can political preoccupations in some parts of the world so intense, that a too-close integration could have serious consequences on both sides of the Atlantic. Ideally, one side should be able to come to the aid of the other in case of need, as the United States has done since 1945 and as Europe may be required to do in the not-too- distant future if present trends continue. The European scene is currently characterized by somuch diversity and inner vitality that it is difficult to see how, as a practi- cal matter, the United States can continue to play the role of guard- ian it has assumed for the past 20 years. Not only is this becoming technically impossible, but it is also to a certain extent a self-defeat- ing proposition from the point of view of achieving U.S. objectives in Europe. The United States must learn to be more detached, to be available for assistance and help if called upon rather than attempting, as it now so frequently does, to influence the course of events by interference andmanipulation. At the present time, the United States is much too emotionally involved in toomany international conflicts and quarrels, both in Europe and elsewhere. American officials, wherever they are located, appear to have a compulsion to assume a stand on every troublesome issue, whether it concerns themdirectly or not. While such an approach is theoretically admirable, especially in light of the self-imposed U.S. mission for keeping the peace, the results often tumout to be meager in terms of time, effort andmoney spent. As applied to the European political scene, the American attitude of compulsive neighborliness is coming to be less and less appreciated. From a purely practical or realpolitischer point of view, the United States has already passed the stage where its counsels are accepted on the basis of shared ideological convic- For many years, the U.S. position on vital issues affecting their countries was accepted without serious questioning by European leaders. 40 APRIL 2017 | THE FOREIGN SERVICE JOURNAL