Tampere, Finland
When I was an undergraduate student, I constantly heard about the effectiveness and benefits of European style collectivism. More and more interdependency and the theory of constructivism have become the politically correct way of viewing international relations. Realism was seen as outdated and an obstruction to progress. But how about now? It seems that collectivism is not the bulwark it was made out to be and neither is constructivism. The EU, which has served as the shining jewel of collectivism is on the verge of falling apart. Why, because states will always act according to their own interests on crucial matters, whether they are conscious of it or not. Collectivism and post-modern thinking has left the European Continent not only in tough economic shape, but also militarily weak.
Collectivism among nation states takes place when the nations involved decide to act multilaterally and place the actions of the group above the actions of the individual states. Hence the economic and social agreements (regulations) of the EU. The premiss for collectivism in the EU was that interdependent states are less likely to wage wars or brutalize each other either in a military sense or in an economic sense. The EU started off as economic agreements between France and Germany that were designed to prevent any future wars after WWII. This eventually grew into what is now the EU. For over a decade and a half, the EU has been strong and effective economically. Militarily countries have either relied on the US for protection or simply think that war is dead (example, Sweden).
The Failures of Economic Collectivism in the EU
While this way of thinking worked in the short-term, the weaknesses of collectivism in the EU are beginning to appear quite strongly as the economic crisis in Europe grows. Even though collectivist thinking places the group above the state, states themselves do not act that way. (even if they think they do). For example Greece, during the current crisis has time and again shown that it will act as it seems fit. Last month they bought 400 main battle tanks with some of the bail-out money. Why? Well they were more concerned about the Turkish military than about the Euro. Now after days of hard work by EU leaders to hammer out a debt deal for Greece, Greece wants to put it to a public referendum and may simply reject it. Rejection of the deal may result in Greece's expolsion from the EU. If they vote the deal down, countries such as Finland have already made it clear that they see a rejection of the deal as a vote to leave the EU. If Greece leaves the EU or is forced to leave, it will defeat the primary goals of collectivism.
Another example of how collectivism is failing, is Germany. Germany is not a charity ward that simply gives out money to the poor. Yes, it is true that they are the biggest donator to the Euro bailout fund, but they also are attaching a lot of strings to the money the banks have lent to the struggling countries. What does that mean? It means that Germany will control for more of the European economy after the crisis than it did before. Nothing is truly free. The Greeks have been evoking images of economic Nazis as a result. But what is Germany supposed to do? Just shell out money with no guarantees? Germany is acting as a realist state, even under the guise of collectivism. Sure they will help, but it comes with a cost. Germany is maximizing its relative power in Europe. Just as Greece is acting selfishly with the money they have received, so Germany is acting as a realist with the money given out.
The fact is states will act in their own self interest on major issues no matter how much collectivism seems to be dominant. Many EU countries are furious at Greece for their mismanagement of the economy and even more so at Greece's waste of funds and their audacity to keep playing chicken with the economic deals. People are asking how dare they?! But, the question that should be asked is, why not? The real incompetents are the ones pouring money into Greece without strings attached or the ones who advocated to bring Greece into the EU in the first place. Greece is acting like a sovereign state and is taking advantage of EU generosity. Finland was made to look bad when they made Greece pay a 25% advance on the Finnish bailout loan. And yet Finland may be the only country to not take a 100% loss on Greece. You see, many EU countries are still acting like realists, and the ones who aren't are sitting ducks. This brings us a to a short discussion about the effects of collectivism on EU nations' militaries.
The Failures of Collectivism in Relation to Defense
During the time immediately following the Cold War most of the western world took for granted the peace and prosperity that followed. Nations that have for years had been under the threat of the USSR were now free. The United States was the undisputed military power in the world and European nations capitalized on the lack of an enemy by building their economies and social welfare services at the expence of defense. At the time it made sense. During the Cold War the United Stated had protected Western Europe and the lack of an enemy after the USSR led to even more relaxed defense standards. Post-modern thinking began to take hold and countries drifted toward collectivism and the idea that war was dead in Europe was prevalent. However, no good thing lasts.
To date, only a few countries in the EU have conscription armies. Due the the small size of many European countries mandatory conscription has historically been the best means of defense and enabled a trained population. This is increasingly being fazed out. The only counties of consequence that still have conscription for longer than 6 months are Finland, Estonia and Greece. The most recent country to drop conscription is Sweden. This is their last year. The past decade has effectively seen the demilitarization of much of Europe. Some think this is a good thing and yet times are changing fast. It is true that the UK and France can still foot modern armies, but these are small and inexperienced.
While Europe has been in a post modern dream, countries on the continent's periphery have been growing stronger and US protection is growing relatively weaker. The old bear of the north, Russia, is rising again (maybe only temporarily and yet dangerous) and the Muslim south east is on the march. Recently, Russia has deployed large quantities of offensive military units to the boarder of Finland and the Baltic states. Offensive ground forces are stationed between Saint Petersburgh and the Finnish and Estonian boarders. In the north, right about in the middle of Finland, Russia has built up a huge amount of attack choppers. Historically, when Russia invades Finland it has tried to cut the country in half. It is now posed to do so. This is not to say that there is an impending Russian attack on Finland, but it does raise the question of why offensive units are there. In modern warfare there is a huge difference between offensive and defensive units, so one can gather that Russia doesn't have them there for defensive purposes.
The point of all this, is that while Europe has been disarming, the rest of the world has not. Russia is attempting to regain its old glory, Muslim demographic seems to signal unrest, and China is becoming an undisputed great power. Post-modern thinking combined the end of the Cold War has made Europe dependent on the US and exposed to possible aggression. In the unlikely event of a Russian attack on north-eastern Europe, no one except the Finns would be able to put up a fight and Finland would not last long. All of Scandinavia could fall with the drop of a hat and the same could happened in the Baltic states. It is unlikely that this will happen and yet, what if the US was tied up somewhere else (maybe Asia) and not prepared to defend Europe? Russia might size the opportunity to attack one of its European neighbors.
The sad truth is that the EU nations are not ready to defend themselves and in the event of aggression by one nation, would be forced to watch until one of the old powers such as the UK, France or Germany was threatened. Peace and prosperity has lulled too many nations into a false sense of security. The future remains to be seen and in the words of Winston Churchill, "I cannot Forcast to you the action of Russia. It is a riddle, rapped in mystery, inside an enigma… The only key is the national interest of Russia."
Collectivism is Not Dead
Some ideas die hard and still others never really die at all. So, it is unlikely that the current crisis in the EU is the end of collectivism. In fact the EU and the Euro in my opinion will continue. However, it seems that if economics in the EU continue to get much worse, some countries may be cut loose and collectivism will be dealt a hard blow. The same can be said for any military aggression against an EU member state. While Collectivism seems like a great idea, is neglects basic human nature and eventually ends up exposing its followers to danger.
what would Russia seek with an invasion of Finland
ReplyDelete