In a recent event organized by the Vienna Institute for International Economics (WIIW) and the Central European University (CEU), a question was raised about transformation and integration in an insecure world. The conference took place just after Russian President Vladimir Putin added a new source of insecurity to our world by ordering the partial mobilization of Russian reserve soldiers. The ongoing war in Ukraine is unquestionably the greatest threat to European security and integration today. Nevertheless, it is essential that the EU and its decision makers adopt an increasingly global perspective. Eurocentric attitudes and worldviews must be left behind. European integration cannot proceed without a holistic consideration of the broader global context.
The European viewpoint is not the only one
After Queen Elizabeth passed away recently, many of us observed a massive wave of sympathy and grief. The queen was undoubtedly an anchor and symbol of stability for many -- for British citizens in particular, but for many others too. The stability of her 70-year reign as monarch can hardly be matched in today’s world.
But there was criticism to be heard as well. In contrast to the praise expressed for a queen who supported the construction of the Commonwealth, a new wave of criticism emerged in former colonies over the dark side of the British empire, especially the British slave trade.
Needless to say, the white European male view is not universal. Most recently, we have been forced to recognize this in light of the different reactions among countries to Russia’s aggression against Ukraine, as evidenced by voting at the UN. In such pivotal times, history once again comes to life and highlights the divergent interests of countries outside the European zone of influence. Colonialism and the building of empires were forms of integration but were based on unequal partnerships rather than voluntary decision making.
The world is much more fractured than we suppose. As William Faulkner said, „the past is never dead. It’s not even past.“ And so the past of European arrogance and misdeeds contributes to the fractures of today’s world.
We should also take note of shifting alliances. Saudi Arabia, a long-term US ally, is building up a strong alliance with Russia, another oil and gas supplier. US President Joe Biden’s criticisms of Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman in connection with the killing of journalist Jamal Kashoggi, in addition to Saudi Arabia’s common interest with Russia to sell oil and gas at higher prices, have led to a loosening of contacts between the two former allies.
China and India, while certainly not allies themselves, are both trying to find balanced positions vis-a-vis Russia that are based on economic and/or political considerations. There is no clear-cut, black-and-white division in today’s world, and the West should not insist on such a split. This would not be successful, and it could even push countries into the “wrong” camp.
Inequality of opportunities
We must consider the differing reactions to Western/European policies based on social status – including both relative income and wealth as well as the perceived acceptance or respect felt by different social groups. It is not enough to think about „the people“ in critical times when their support is needed and forget about them in „normal“ times. Our societies are much more fractured than we imagine or are ready to recognize.
Both a global view and a social view are of utmost importance for the thorough transformation that climate change is enforcing upon us. We must realize that the significant carbon footprint of the wealthy – both on a global level and a domestic level -- is much heavier and more detrimental than that of the poor. Without this recognition, any transformation of our social and economic systems will meet with strong opposition.
The EU as a global actor
If the EU wants to be a global actor -- not least concerning climate change -- it must also approach its domestic challenges from a global perspective. We saw this when the EU began to seek new sources of energy, especially gas. Moreover, we must think globally when we want to put green energy -- and its storage -- at the center of future electricity supplies and green transportation. The resources for such an energy system, including rare earth metals, are to be found largely outside Europe.
However, while in the short term we need energy from wherever we get it, we must carefully plan our transition to a sustainable energy future in order to prevent catastrophic economic or social disruptions. The long-run task of the energy transition must always be changing our minds.
It is also true that there are many substantial challenges that the EU must address internally. But neither the challenges within the present EU nor the long-overdue integration of Western Balkan countries can be solved without considering the global consequences of integration or non-integration.
Globalization versus fragmentation
The war in Ukraine has further fragmented the world, and questions of war and peace beyond Ukraine -- let us not forget the cruel wars in places such as Yemen and Ethiopia -- demand global and urgent action. The same is true for food security and climate change. All these challenges demand cooperative, multilateral solutions.
Can economic globalization help to overcome global fragmentation? Irrespective of movements towards reshoring, nearshoring, or friendshoring, economic globalization remains far advanced in comparison to political globalization.
We are currently confronted with significant skepticism around globalization, which has been exacerbated by the fact that economic globalization failed to prevent growing inequality or war, especially when trade partners have different political structures. While Russia is in principle as dependent on the gas trade as Germany and other EU countries, an authoritarian or even dictatorial regime can afford to cut such links and blackmail its trading partners without having to fear political unrest. In democracies, conversely, such cuts are much more dangerous for political stability. Democratic governments must deliver goods and services for their citizens’ wellbeing and cannot replace these with nationalist propaganda in the way that authoritarian regimes can. Thus far at least, Putin has been able to neglect the long-term consequences of sanctions for the Russian economy. He offers nationalist and aggressive rhetoric instead of a vision for Russia’s economic and social future.
To return to the question of globalization, Paul Krugman wrote recently in an opinion piece titled “The World is Getting Less Flat” for The New York Times that „[i]t does seem likely that we‘re about to see some retreat from globalization.“ I would add that the retreat from a common political approach to meet the public demand for food and sustainable livelihoods is moving even faster than the retreat from economic globalization.
That the planet is a collective public good is nowadays even less accepted or respected by many political forces than in the last decades. Nevertheless, we must find a way to accomplish some vital global tasks despite the increased political fragmentation. We must at all costs prevent the division of the world into two blocs, such as an US-EU bloc and a China-Russia one. The isolation of Russia is a necessity today, but it cannot be a long-term strategy. Europe must also strengthen its ties with countries „in between,“ from Turkey to India, from South Africa to the countries of Latin America
Democracy versus pragmatism
A particular challenge in this respect is the delicate balance between global cooperation to meet the most important tasks -- including climate change and the fight against poverty, hunger, and diseases -- and the defense of democratic values. If we defend not only national sovereignty but also democratic values in the case of Ukraine, we must also defend such values within the EU, including in both Hungary and Poland. The EU must be built on a clear democratic basis.
Globally, however, we must look for an effective balance between achieving global solutions to global challenges and the advancing of democratic values. The EU should not renounce its global democratic aspirations, but we must not fall into the trap of arrogance and neocolonialism. A values-based foreign and trade policy must be combined with pragmatism in order not to violate important aims such as peace and combating climate change.
In fact, there should not be a choice between a human rights and democracy strategy and a geopolitical strategy. The EU must combine these strategies in a well-structured way. Some EU governments see the fight against authoritarian and dictatorial regimes in Russia and China as the EU’s only -- or at least the primary -- purpose. And with the weakening of Germany and France due to their past Russia-friendly policies, a shift towards a more geopolitical policy has won more support. However, a policy built on a clear and rigid friend-foe scheme would be neither viable nor effective. The world is much more complex.
Climate change, food insecurity, and migration
The emigration and flight of Ukrainians into EU countries had a very different reception than when Syrians, Afghans, or African refugees sought to enter the EU. Nevertheless, emigration from other countries has not stopped. The majority of people who leave their home -- often without a choice -- seek refuge nearby. But as more regions become inhabitable due to climate change and the resulting increase in heatwaves, droughts, and floods, more people may be forced to leave their home regions in order to survive.
A more coordinated and cooperative migration policy is one of the most pressing tasks that the global community must undertake. Any climate policy that is both progressive and realistic cannot prevent certain regions from becoming uninhabitable and the concomitant tendency of people moving to regions where survival is possible. These regions are mostly located in the richer Global North. Climate policy must thus include both mitigation as well as adaptation, and migration is a necessary part of any adaptation strategy.
We must also approach climate change, food insecurity, and war from a perspective of human security. We must accept that neither military conflicts nor the fight against climate change can ever be decisively won. It is too late for a complete victory, but we can fight to minimize human suffering through a unified climate policy and a coordinated migration policy. In both respects, the challenges for the richer part of the world will be enormous.
A new balance between markets and politics
All these tasks cannot be simply left to markets. Today and in the future, we need even more public engagement, especially on the international level. This is especially true for the EU as an important part of the Global North.
Still, the EU itself is facing enormous structural challenges. Its economic model of the past was built on cheap energy that enabled EU economies -- including Germany as the economic “leader” of the EU -- to produce high-value goods and export these products to foreign markets such as the US and China. Now the time of cheap energy is over, and the terms of trade for the EU are deteriorating. Industries may move to countries with cheaper and more secure supplies, such as the US. This may also create new social tensions inside Europe.
Even if Putin is not successful in occupying Ukraine and making it dependent on Moscow, one of his aims has been to weaken the EU, and he is currently succeeding in this aim, strengthening the position of the US in relation to the EU. This is also true for some Arab countries, especially those that can deliver liquified natural gas (LNG).
The accelerated transition toward renewable energy that is now being forced on Europe will in the longer term be beneficial. But there are many steps to be taken in between and some of them, such as seeking new energy sources that are even less sustainable than gas, are going in the wrong direction.
The energy policy of the future cannot be so reliant on the market, and the same is true for climate policy and food security. Markets must play a supportive role in guaranteeing supply and will still support integration in the future, but the most important decisions must be made politically. EU decision makers must adopt an increasingly global outlook.
Integration within the EU and on a global level has become much more difficult as a result of new fractures and divisions. However, unless we are ready to accept catastrophic developments -- including more wars, heat waves, floods, and famine and consequently more enforced and chaotic migration -- we must invest in stronger global cooperation with whomever is ready.
Dr. Hannes Swoboda, President of the International Institute for Peace (IIP), started his career in urban politics in Vienna and was elected member of the European Parliament in 1996. He was Vice President of the Social Democrat Group until 2012 und then President until 2014. He was particularly engaged in foreign, enlargement, and neighborhood policies. Swoboda is also President of the Vienna Institute for International Economics, the Centre of Architecture, the University for Applied Science - Campus Vienna, and the Sir Peter Ustinov Institute.