The Spanish and Dutch way for the strategic and productive autonomy of the European Union, as an alternative to the French and German visions

After Trump’s four years, the relationship between the US and the European Union, which represents the fulcrum of the strategy in Washington’s western camp, is in the process of improving, to return to the levels prior to the penultimate tenant of the White House. The repeated meetings, those already held and the next ones, signal a common desire of both parties to strengthen relations, especially in a very delicate world phase marked by the worsening of relations with China, Russia (which affirms the strategic need for cut ties with Brussels), Turkey, Iran and other potentially dangerous situations capable of profoundly changing the current structures and balances. Despite the importance recognized by all members of the Union regarding the renewed ties with the United States, the debate in Europe continues, already compulsorily begun during the Trump presidency, of the need for greater autonomy of the main organization of the old continent, in order to achieve the aim of effectively affecting world scenarios with an autonomous strategic and military capacity, but to be integrated, especially with the arrival of the pandemic, in a productive independence, both in the field of medicine, telecommunications and other industrial capacities to be conquered in order to reach a position of autonomy and independence from other subjects: be they allies or adversaries. The question has no easy solution, because the vision of the members of the Union is not univocal and the decisions, which should be rapid, are conditioned by unanimity mechanisms, which constitute the means to exercise vetoes and mutual blackmail functional to the interests of individuals. states to the detriment of the common interest of the Union. There are essentially two major orientations, which differ in the different attitude on this issue, which is central to the development of Europe. On the one hand, the one led by Germany, who lean towards the continuation of American protection, through the Atlantic Alliance and, on the other, the French idea, which considers it essential to find European autonomy, albeit, always within the Western camp. . The German vision seems too conditioned by the particular interest of Berlin, which does not want to give up sovereignty to protect its economic independence, with which it conditions and commands the Union as the majority shareholder. The opinion of Paris follows the French grandeur and wants to transport it to Europe to make the old continent a protagonist capable of autonomously influencing global issues. It must also be said that if with the Biden presidency we return to a situation pleasing to Germany, the Trump experience has highlighted that there are no acquired position rents and the need for European strategic autonomy becomes indispensable if Washington adopts behavior of isolation even from his usual allies. So at this stage Germany can have a wait-and-see attitude, but it remains true that even with an optimal situation like the present one, the Union moves without its own identity to spend on the international scene, because it is always under American protection and this is what it wants. mean giving up on advantages and being able to effectively emphasize your position. Faced with these two trends, the governments of Spain and Holland are looking for an alternative way that can allow intervention in global issues, certainly through a common armed force, but also with an autonomous capacity in the industrial sector, to be pursued no longer with the unanimity, but with the majority of member states’ adhesions, that is, through a new definition of sovereignty, which can allow rapid and uncoupled responses from the supranational organizations in which Europe is inserted, but which often have conflicting interests with Brussels and functional to current interests of major partners. This is a solution that needs to be pursued, but which traces a clear path, even for those who remain in Europe only to have the funding, without sharing its aims. The renunciation of substantial parts of sovereignty appears to be an indispensable requirement and in open contrast to the French and German visions and also the relations between northern states with the Mediterranean ones are an obstacle because they conflict with their respective interests. able to subvert the current hierarchies, it appears as a unique and indispensable opportunity to make the most coveted market in the world also an undisputed protagonist, capable of spreading and affirming its own vision in competition with the international subjects who now have the monopoly.