What do you think?
Rate this book
The Next Superpower?: The Rise of Europe and Its Challenge to the United States
Americans have been recently lectured that "Americans are from Mars and Europeans are from Venus." But this slogan fails to account for the economic might of the European Union, which has elevated the EU―and its member countries―to near superpower status. What are the implications of this development for the United States? Ambassador Rockwell A. Schnabel and Francis X. Rocca take up this critical and complex question in a detailed, firsthand analysis of the EU institutions, their leadership, and the member countries. Although Europe today cannot challenge America in military terms, the 25-nation economic giant can influence world events to the benefit or detriment of the United States. This book will answer the timely and crucial question of how the "rise of Europe will affect U.S. prosperity and security for decades to come."
Ambassador Schnabel dispenses with diplomatic niceties. He is critical of both U.S. and European policies. Schnabel and Rocca give readers a compelling and provocative inside look at the people and issues that will decide whether the world's most consequential partnership flourishes or flounders. While alerting readers to the economic and geopolitical challenges posed by a stronger EU, the authors reject the complacency of those who see American "unipolarity" as a license to neglect our allies, or those who entertain the illusion that we can "divide and conquer" Europe. This book will make clear why the U.S. must work with the EU―or expect the EU to work against it.
Ambassador Schnabel dispenses with diplomatic niceties. He is critical of both U.S. and European policies. Schnabel and Rocca give readers a compelling and provocative inside look at the people and issues that will decide whether the world's most consequential partnership flourishes or flounders. While alerting readers to the economic and geopolitical challenges posed by a stronger EU, the authors reject the complacency of those who see American "unipolarity" as a license to neglect our allies, or those who entertain the illusion that we can "divide and conquer" Europe. This book will make clear why the U.S. must work with the EU―or expect the EU to work against it.
192 pages, Hardcover
First published October 25, 2005
1 person is currently reading
6 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews
July 30, 2009
I was not a fan of this book. The author bases his arguements on his personal experiences, and makes wide generalizations based these very specific happenings. He spends the entire first chapter talking up his 'pedigree' as a European and then a naturalized American, to justify why we should listen to him. He just spends so much time establishing his lineage I'm tempted to write and ask him politely if he'd take a fan letter back to Lord Byron for me when he returns to the 19th century. It's just an odd attitude for a man who is a naturalized American and clearly proof of the idea that converts make the worst zealots. It was such a reactionary, snobby way to approach the analysis. I found I couldn't concentrate on the arguements, because I wanted to psychoanalyze the author and do an anthropological study on the patterns of his thinking.
But when you /do/ get to the substance of the book? It's basically the platform of the Republican party, except that this guy likes Europe. All of his arguements about the US-EU relations are based in a very Cold War mentality of "the West" and "we" versus an implicit "them". At one point, he talks about the fact that the "US and EU have only a few decades left to make the world operate the way that they want it to, before the Asians take over." ... like it's some kind of competition? Furthermore, he's very cynical and realist in the worst kind of way about US-EU relations about how we can twist EU integration to our own advantage and use the Europeans. I just think his way of thinking is again, very reactionary.
And when he isn't making his Cold War arguments about 'the West' he's turning his discussion of the EEC into an argument for the free market and the Wealth of Nations. He tries to state the case that the EU is moving away from the dirigiste French/German model towards a more "Anglo Saxon" model. Not only is this wishful thinking on his part, I'm wondering about the functioning of his faculties. Seriously? Has he not been paying attention to what the European project is all about? The man was an ambassador to the EU, for Christ's sake. Granted, he was an ambassador for George Bush, so that's a different level, but dear God. As for his basic information about the arguements within the EU? It's all there, but genealized, slanted to suit his point of view, and conservative. I've read it better elsewhere.
The one section I did find of value was a technical one near the end. He talks about the mechanisms for buisness people and lobbying within the EU and what sort of people go into the different jobs and why. He's worked in buisness for far longer than he's worked for government, so it is here where his expertise shows through. I'm able to take him more seriously here because he sounds far more pragmatic than dogmatic.
All in all? It's been done before and better elsewhere. Stick to Timothy Garton Ash. You might get a preachy lecture at one point, but at least the man knows what he's talking about and is not stuck in 1815.
But when you /do/ get to the substance of the book? It's basically the platform of the Republican party, except that this guy likes Europe. All of his arguements about the US-EU relations are based in a very Cold War mentality of "the West" and "we" versus an implicit "them". At one point, he talks about the fact that the "US and EU have only a few decades left to make the world operate the way that they want it to, before the Asians take over." ... like it's some kind of competition? Furthermore, he's very cynical and realist in the worst kind of way about US-EU relations about how we can twist EU integration to our own advantage and use the Europeans. I just think his way of thinking is again, very reactionary.
And when he isn't making his Cold War arguments about 'the West' he's turning his discussion of the EEC into an argument for the free market and the Wealth of Nations. He tries to state the case that the EU is moving away from the dirigiste French/German model towards a more "Anglo Saxon" model. Not only is this wishful thinking on his part, I'm wondering about the functioning of his faculties. Seriously? Has he not been paying attention to what the European project is all about? The man was an ambassador to the EU, for Christ's sake. Granted, he was an ambassador for George Bush, so that's a different level, but dear God. As for his basic information about the arguements within the EU? It's all there, but genealized, slanted to suit his point of view, and conservative. I've read it better elsewhere.
The one section I did find of value was a technical one near the end. He talks about the mechanisms for buisness people and lobbying within the EU and what sort of people go into the different jobs and why. He's worked in buisness for far longer than he's worked for government, so it is here where his expertise shows through. I'm able to take him more seriously here because he sounds far more pragmatic than dogmatic.
All in all? It's been done before and better elsewhere. Stick to Timothy Garton Ash. You might get a preachy lecture at one point, but at least the man knows what he's talking about and is not stuck in 1815.
February 1, 2013
This book is a real page turner, providing hours of laughs
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews