George Orwell wrote the novel 1984 between 1947 and 1948 and published it in 1949. The novel features the character of Big Brother, who monitors everything in a world where information is manipulated. This world is divided into three large areas: Oceania, with all of America, the United Kingdom, Ireland, Iceland, Australia, New Zealand, and South Africa; Eurasia, with the Soviet Union and continental Europe; and East Asia, with China, Japan, and Korea, among others. These areas fight to exploit other parts of the world, but maintain a balance. It's a world of spheres of influence similar to the current one after the recent evolution of the United States, as John Authers of Bloomberg has pointed out.
The United States maintained a multilateral world after World War II, providing public goods such as security in the Western world and a safe asset, the dollar, which has allowed the expansion of international trade and economic growth, while maintaining control and benefiting from being at the center of the system. Now the US is reasserting its sphere of influence with territorial claims in Canada, Greenland, and Panama, for example, and implicitly leaving Ukraine within the Russian sphere of influence (Soviet in Orwell's time). Certainly, after 1945, Russia did not dominate Europe because of the defense umbrella provided by the US, but it did dominate the East after Yalta. This umbrella is now in question, and the specter of Orwell's world returns. US dependence on defense has repercussions across the board. It puts the European Union (EU) in a weak position to negotiate tariffs, as we have seen, and explains the greater accumulation of dollar reserves by countries like Germany and Japan relative to France, which has an independent defense capability.
The question is what the EU can do in this situation to have its own voice in a world of spheres of influence tending toward autarky (such as 1984). How can Europe free itself, even partially, from US tutelage, avoid threats from Russia, and establish itself as an influential bloc without falling into dependence on China? The program seems clear and has been spelled out in several reports (Draghi, Letta, Niinistö, among others): strengthening itself by acquiring autonomous defense capabilities; completing the single market in goods and services (eliminating the remaining barriers), including the banking and financial market; issuing common debt with eurobonds; strengthening the euro and promoting it as an international reserve currency; boosting innovation and productivity; and streamlining public administrations. The EU is not adapted to the speed of change in today's world and needs a more agile and centralized structure for decision-making. It has significant assets, both in economic weight and in the development of the welfare state. Perhaps the most important aspect today is respect for the rule of law, in contrast to other blocs, which can translate into an advantage for attracting investment and consolidating the euro with the help of the European Central Bank's independence (now that the Federal Reserve is threatened). The EU should not try to imitate other blocs. For example, it should not fall into protectionism and blithely participate in an industrial policy competition with a subsidy war that it cannot win against the US and China. The trade agreement with Mercosur is a positive example, but it took 26 years to achieve it after the initial talks began. The EU should not be afraid to exercise its negotiating power. For example, it should not be reluctant to use the anti-coercion procedures proposed in negotiations with the US. Brussels cannot abandon regulation of European digital markets due to pressure from other blocs, but it must establish flexible regulations that promote competition and open markets.
This entire program will not pass without greater political and action unity and a surrender of sovereignty by the Member States. This "more Europe" will encounter the formidable obstacle of national populism, which is gaining adherents everywhere. This is a consequence of the lack of effectiveness of traditional parties in providing solutions to citizens' problems, hiding conflicts in society. In France, the movement New indignones, tout bloquons, and before them yellow vests, fueled by political extremes, are an indicator of the malaise. François Bayrou, the captain who sees a leak in the ship, has resigned after losing the vote of confidence; he had intended to present a budget to reduce the deficit from the 5.4% projected for 2025 to 4.6% in one year, and thus stabilize the debt. France has been in deficit for 51 years. Its economic weakness and ungovernability are very harmful to the European project. We are still in time to avoid the Orwellian world of 1984, but you have to get started even if the task is very difficult.
