Why Western Europe needs the United States and NATO

Political Science Quarterly

Volumn 111, Issue 1, 1996, Pages 1-37

  Art, Robert J ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0030098710     PISSN: 00323195     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2307/2151926     Document Type: Article

References (151)

1. 1 The phrase "pluralistic security community" comes from Karl W. Deutsch et al., Political Community and the North Atlantic Area: International Organization in the Light of Historical Experience (New York: Greenwood Press, 1969), 5-8. For examplars about the changed nature of state relations in Western Europe and about the pacific effects of democracy, Richard H. Ullman, Securing Europe (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1991), chap. 2; Jacques Delors, "European Integration and Security,Survival 33 (March/April 1991): 99-109; and Bruce Russett, Grasping the Democratic Peace: Principles for a Post-Cold War World (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1993), chaps. 1, 2, 4.
2. 1 The phrase "pluralistic security community" comes from Karl W. Deutsch et al., Political Community and the North Atlantic Area: International Organization in the Light of Historical Experience (New York: Greenwood Press, 1969), 5-8. For examplars about the changed nature of state relations in Western Europe and about the pacific effects of democracy, Richard H. Ullman, Securing Europe (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1991), chap. 2; Jacques Delors, "European Integration and Security,Survival 33 (March/April 1991): 99-109; and Bruce Russett, Grasping the Democratic Peace: Principles for a Post-Cold War World (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1993), chaps. 1, 2, 4.
3. 1 The phrase "pluralistic security community" comes from Karl W. Deutsch et al., Political Community and the North Atlantic Area: International Organization in the Light of Historical Experience (New York: Greenwood Press, 1969), 5-8. For examplars about the changed nature of state relations in Western Europe and about the pacific effects of democracy, Richard H. Ullman, Securing Europe (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1991), chap. 2; Jacques Delors, "European Integration and Security,Survival 33 (March/April 1991): 99-109; and Bruce Russett, Grasping the Democratic Peace: Principles for a Post-Cold War World (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1993), chaps. 1, 2, 4.
4. 1 The phrase "pluralistic security community" comes from Karl W. Deutsch et al., Political Community and the North Atlantic Area: International Organization in the Light of Historical Experience (New York: Greenwood Press, 1969), 5-8. For examplars about the changed nature of state relations in Western Europe and about the pacific effects of democracy, Richard H. Ullman, Securing Europe (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1991), chap. 2; Jacques Delors, "European Integration and Security,Survival 33 (March/April 1991): 99-109; and Bruce Russett, Grasping the Democratic Peace: Principles for a Post-Cold War World (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1993), chaps. 1, 2, 4.
5. 2 For a Realist analysis applied to European Monetary Union, see Joseph M. Grieco, "State Interests and Institutional Rule Trajectories: A Neorealist Interpretation of the Maastricht Treaty and European Economic and Monetary Union," Security Studies 5 (Spring 1996): 176-22.
6. 3 Helmut Kohl, quoted in Alan Cowell, "Kohl Casts Europe's Economic Union as War and Peace Issue," New York Times, 17 October 1995. Kohl was addressing a party congress in Karlsruhe.
7. 4 Cited in John Tagliabue, "Europe's Union of Currencies in Anxiety Stage," New York Times, 2 November 1995; and Alan Cowell, "Bonn Admits Currency Plan for Europe Has Problems," New York Times, 7 February 1996.
8. 4 Cited in John Tagliabue, "Europe's Union of Currencies in Anxiety Stage," New York Times, 2 November 1995; and Alan Cowell, "Bonn Admits Currency Plan for Europe Has Problems," New York Times, 7 February 1996.
9. 5 See Francois Heisbourg, "The European-U.S. Alliance: Valedictory Reflections on Continental Drift in the Post-Cold War Era," International Affairs 60 (April 1992): 669.
10. 6 For evidence about the more nationalistic approach to defense matters in the early 1990s, see Jan Willem Honig, "The 'Renationalization' of Western European Defense," Security Studies 2 (Autumn 1992): 122-139.
11. 7 The analysis of political-military elite attitudes in this and succeeding sections is based in part on over one hundred interviews I conducted in Western Europe and Washington, DC periodically from 1990 to 1994. I also found especially useful the following published sources: Catherine Guicherd, A European Defense Identity: Challenge and Opportunity for NATO (Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress, 12 June 1991); Louise Richardson, "British State Strategies after the Cold War" and Stanley Hoffmann, "French Dilemmas and Strategies in the New Europe" both in Robert O. Keohane, Joseph S. Nye, and Stanley Hoffmann, After the Cold War: International Institutions and State Strategies in Europe, 1989-1991 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1993), 148-169 and 127-148, respectively; Elizabeth Pond, Beyond the Wall: Germany's Road to Unification (Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution, 1993); Philip Zelikow and Condoleezza Rice, Germany United and Europe Transformed: A Study in Statecraft (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1995); Paul R. S. Gebhard, The United States and European Security, Adelphi Paper #286 (London: International Institute of Strategic Studies, 1994); Michael R. Beschloss and Strobe Talbott, At the Highest Levels: The Inside Story of the End of the Cold War (Boston: Little, Brown, 1993); Diego Ruiz Palmer, French Strategic Options in the 1990s, Adelphi Paper #260 (London: International Institute of Strategic Studies, July 1991); Anand Menon, Anthony Forster, and William Wallace, "A Common European Defense?" Survival 34 (Autumn 1992): 98-119; Daniel Vernet, "The Dilemma of French Foreign Policy," International Affairs 68 (April 1992): 655-664; Richard Corbett, "The Intergovernmental Conference on Political Union," Journal of Common Market Studies 30 (September 1992): 271-298; David S. Yost, "Mitterrand and Defense and Security Policy," French Politics and Society 9 (Summer/Fall 1991): 141-158; David S. Yost, "France and West European Defense Identity," Survival 33 (July/August 1991): 327-352; Steven Philip Kramer, "The French Question," The Washington Quarterly 14 (Autumn 1991): 83-96; Ronald Tiersky, "Mitterrand, France, and Europe," French Politics and Society 9 (Winter 1991): 9-25; Ronald Tiersky, "France in the New Europe," Foreign Affairs 71 (Spring 1992): 131-147; Alexander Moens, "American Diplomacy and German Unification," Survival 33 (November/December 1991): 531-546; Catherine McArdle Kelleher, The Future of European Security: An Interim Assessment (Washington, DC: The Blockings Institution, 1995); Mathias Jopp, The Strategic Implications of European Integration, Adelphi Paper #290 (London: International Institute for Strategic Studies, 1994); and Laurence Martin and John Roper, eds., Towards a Common Defense Policy (Paris: The Institute for Security Studies, Western European Union, 1995).
12. 7 The analysis of political-military elite attitudes in this and succeeding sections is based in part on over one hundred interviews I conducted in Western Europe and Washington, DC periodically from 1990 to 1994. I also found especially useful the following published sources: Catherine Guicherd, A European Defense Identity: Challenge and Opportunity for NATO (Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress, 12 June 1991); Louise Richardson, "British State Strategies after the Cold War" and Stanley Hoffmann, "French Dilemmas and Strategies in the New Europe" both in Robert O. Keohane, Joseph S. Nye, and Stanley Hoffmann, After the Cold War: International Institutions and State Strategies in Europe, 1989-1991 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1993), 148-169 and 127-148, respectively; Elizabeth Pond, Beyond the Wall: Germany's Road to Unification (Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution, 1993); Philip Zelikow and Condoleezza Rice, Germany United and Europe Transformed: A Study in Statecraft (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1995); Paul R. S. Gebhard, The United States and European Security, Adelphi Paper #286 (London: International Institute of Strategic Studies, 1994); Michael R. Beschloss and Strobe Talbott, At the Highest Levels: The Inside Story of the End of the Cold War (Boston: Little, Brown, 1993); Diego Ruiz Palmer, French Strategic Options in the 1990s, Adelphi Paper #260 (London: International Institute of Strategic Studies, July 1991); Anand Menon, Anthony Forster, and William Wallace, "A Common European Defense?" Survival 34 (Autumn 1992): 98-119; Daniel Vernet, "The Dilemma of French Foreign Policy," International Affairs 68 (April 1992): 655-664; Richard Corbett, "The Intergovernmental Conference on Political Union," Journal of Common Market Studies 30 (September 1992): 271-298; David S. Yost, "Mitterrand and Defense and Security Policy," French Politics and Society 9 (Summer/Fall 1991): 141-158; David S. Yost, "France and West European Defense Identity," Survival 33 (July/August 1991): 327-352; Steven Philip Kramer, "The French Question," The Washington Quarterly 14 (Autumn 1991): 83-96; Ronald Tiersky, "Mitterrand, France, and Europe," French Politics and Society 9 (Winter 1991): 9-25; Ronald Tiersky, "France in the New Europe," Foreign Affairs 71 (Spring 1992): 131-147; Alexander Moens, "American Diplomacy and German Unification," Survival 33 (November/December 1991): 531-546; Catherine McArdle Kelleher, The Future of European Security: An Interim Assessment (Washington, DC: The Blockings Institution, 1995); Mathias Jopp, The Strategic Implications of European Integration, Adelphi Paper #290 (London: International Institute for Strategic Studies, 1994); and Laurence Martin and John Roper, eds., Towards a Common Defense Policy (Paris: The Institute for Security Studies, Western European Union, 1995).
13. 7 The analysis of political-military elite attitudes in this and succeeding sections is based in part on over one hundred interviews I conducted in Western Europe and Washington, DC periodically from 1990 to 1994. I also found especially useful the following published sources: Catherine Guicherd, A European Defense Identity: Challenge and Opportunity for NATO (Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress, 12 June 1991); Louise Richardson, "British State Strategies after the Cold War" and Stanley Hoffmann, "French Dilemmas and Strategies in the New Europe" both in Robert O. Keohane, Joseph S. Nye, and Stanley Hoffmann, After the Cold War: International Institutions and State Strategies in Europe, 1989-1991 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1993), 148-169 and 127-148, respectively; Elizabeth Pond, Beyond the Wall: Germany's Road to Unification (Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution, 1993); Philip Zelikow and Condoleezza Rice, Germany United and Europe Transformed: A Study in Statecraft (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1995); Paul R. S. Gebhard, The United States and European Security, Adelphi Paper #286 (London: International Institute of Strategic Studies, 1994); Michael R. Beschloss and Strobe Talbott, At the Highest Levels: The Inside Story of the End of the Cold War (Boston: Little, Brown, 1993); Diego Ruiz Palmer, French Strategic Options in the 1990s, Adelphi Paper #260 (London: International Institute of Strategic Studies, July 1991); Anand Menon, Anthony Forster, and William Wallace, "A Common European Defense?" Survival 34 (Autumn 1992): 98-119; Daniel Vernet, "The Dilemma of French Foreign Policy," International Affairs 68 (April 1992): 655-664; Richard Corbett, "The Intergovernmental Conference on Political Union," Journal of Common Market Studies 30 (September 1992): 271-298; David S. Yost, "Mitterrand and Defense and Security Policy," French Politics and Society 9 (Summer/Fall 1991): 141-158; David S. Yost, "France and West European Defense Identity," Survival 33 (July/August 1991): 327-352; Steven Philip Kramer, "The French Question," The Washington Quarterly 14 (Autumn 1991): 83-96; Ronald Tiersky, "Mitterrand, France, and Europe," French Politics and Society 9 (Winter 1991): 9-25; Ronald Tiersky, "France in the New Europe," Foreign Affairs 71 (Spring 1992): 131-147; Alexander Moens, "American Diplomacy and German Unification," Survival 33 (November/December 1991): 531-546; Catherine McArdle Kelleher, The Future of European Security: An Interim Assessment (Washington, DC: The Blockings Institution, 1995); Mathias Jopp, The Strategic Implications of European Integration, Adelphi Paper #290 (London: International Institute for Strategic Studies, 1994); and Laurence Martin and John Roper, eds., Towards a Common Defense Policy (Paris: The Institute for Security Studies, Western European Union, 1995).
14. 7 The analysis of political-military elite attitudes in this and succeeding sections is based in part on over one hundred interviews I conducted in Western Europe and Washington, DC periodically from 1990 to 1994. I also found especially useful the following published sources: Catherine Guicherd, A European Defense Identity: Challenge and Opportunity for NATO (Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress, 12 June 1991); Louise Richardson, "British State Strategies after the Cold War" and Stanley Hoffmann, "French Dilemmas and Strategies in the New Europe" both in Robert O. Keohane, Joseph S. Nye, and Stanley Hoffmann, After the Cold War: International Institutions and State Strategies in Europe, 1989-1991 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1993), 148-169 and 127-148, respectively; Elizabeth Pond, Beyond the Wall: Germany's Road to Unification (Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution, 1993); Philip Zelikow and Condoleezza Rice, Germany United and Europe Transformed: A Study in Statecraft (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1995); Paul R. S. Gebhard, The United States and European Security, Adelphi Paper #286 (London: International Institute of Strategic Studies, 1994); Michael R. Beschloss and Strobe Talbott, At the Highest Levels: The Inside Story of the End of the Cold War (Boston: Little, Brown, 1993); Diego Ruiz Palmer, French Strategic Options in the 1990s, Adelphi Paper #260 (London: International Institute of Strategic Studies, July 1991); Anand Menon, Anthony Forster, and William Wallace, "A Common European Defense?" Survival 34 (Autumn 1992): 98-119; Daniel Vernet, "The Dilemma of French Foreign Policy," International Affairs 68 (April 1992): 655-664; Richard Corbett, "The Intergovernmental Conference on Political Union," Journal of Common Market Studies 30 (September 1992): 271-298; David S. Yost, "Mitterrand and Defense and Security Policy," French Politics and Society 9 (Summer/Fall 1991): 141-158; David S. Yost, "France and West European Defense Identity," Survival 33 (July/August 1991): 327-352; Steven Philip Kramer, "The French Question," The Washington Quarterly 14 (Autumn 1991): 83-96; Ronald Tiersky, "Mitterrand, France, and Europe," French Politics and Society 9 (Winter 1991): 9-25; Ronald Tiersky, "France in the New Europe," Foreign Affairs 71 (Spring 1992): 131-147; Alexander Moens, "American Diplomacy and German Unification," Survival 33 (November/December 1991): 531-546; Catherine McArdle Kelleher, The Future of European Security: An Interim Assessment (Washington, DC: The Blockings Institution, 1995); Mathias Jopp, The Strategic Implications of European Integration, Adelphi Paper #290 (London: International Institute for Strategic Studies, 1994); and Laurence Martin and John Roper, eds., Towards a Common Defense Policy (Paris: The Institute for Security Studies, Western European Union, 1995).
15. 7 The analysis of political-military elite attitudes in this and succeeding sections is based in part on over one hundred interviews I conducted in Western Europe and Washington, DC periodically from 1990 to 1994. I also found especially useful the following published sources: Catherine Guicherd, A European Defense Identity: Challenge and Opportunity for NATO (Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress, 12 June 1991); Louise Richardson, "British State Strategies after the Cold War" and Stanley Hoffmann, "French Dilemmas and Strategies in the New Europe" both in Robert O. Keohane, Joseph S. Nye, and Stanley Hoffmann, After the Cold War: International Institutions and State Strategies in Europe, 1989-1991 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1993), 148-169 and 127-148, respectively; Elizabeth Pond, Beyond the Wall: Germany's Road to Unification (Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution, 1993); Philip Zelikow and Condoleezza Rice, Germany United and Europe Transformed: A Study in Statecraft (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1995); Paul R. S. Gebhard, The United States and European Security, Adelphi Paper #286 (London: International Institute of Strategic Studies, 1994); Michael R. Beschloss and Strobe Talbott, At the Highest Levels: The Inside Story of the End of the Cold War (Boston: Little, Brown, 1993); Diego Ruiz Palmer, French Strategic Options in the 1990s, Adelphi Paper #260 (London: International Institute of Strategic Studies, July 1991); Anand Menon, Anthony Forster, and William Wallace, "A Common European Defense?" Survival 34 (Autumn 1992): 98-119; Daniel Vernet, "The Dilemma of French Foreign Policy," International Affairs 68 (April 1992): 655-664; Richard Corbett, "The Intergovernmental Conference on Political Union," Journal of Common Market Studies 30 (September 1992): 271-298; David S. Yost, "Mitterrand and Defense and Security Policy," French Politics and Society 9 (Summer/Fall 1991): 141-158; David S. Yost, "France and West European Defense Identity," Survival 33 (July/August 1991): 327-352; Steven Philip Kramer, "The French Question," The Washington Quarterly 14 (Autumn 1991): 83-96; Ronald Tiersky, "Mitterrand, France, and Europe," French Politics and Society 9 (Winter 1991): 9-25; Ronald Tiersky, "France in the New Europe," Foreign Affairs 71 (Spring 1992): 131-147; Alexander Moens, "American Diplomacy and German Unification," Survival 33 (November/December 1991): 531-546; Catherine McArdle Kelleher, The Future of European Security: An Interim Assessment (Washington, DC: The Blockings Institution, 1995); Mathias Jopp, The Strategic Implications of European Integration, Adelphi Paper #290 (London: International Institute for Strategic Studies, 1994); and Laurence Martin and John Roper, eds., Towards a Common Defense Policy (Paris: The Institute for Security Studies, Western European Union, 1995).
16. 7 The analysis of political-military elite attitudes in this and succeeding sections is based in part on over one hundred interviews I conducted in Western Europe and Washington, DC periodically from 1990 to 1994. I also found especially useful the following published sources: Catherine Guicherd, A European Defense Identity: Challenge and Opportunity for NATO (Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress, 12 June 1991); Louise Richardson, "British State Strategies after the Cold War" and Stanley Hoffmann, "French Dilemmas and Strategies in the New Europe" both in Robert O. Keohane, Joseph S. Nye, and Stanley Hoffmann, After the Cold War: International Institutions and State Strategies in Europe, 1989-1991 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1993), 148-169 and 127-148, respectively; Elizabeth Pond, Beyond the Wall: Germany's Road to Unification (Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution, 1993); Philip Zelikow and Condoleezza Rice, Germany United and Europe Transformed: A Study in Statecraft (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1995); Paul R. S. Gebhard, The United States and European Security, Adelphi Paper #286 (London: International Institute of Strategic Studies, 1994); Michael R. Beschloss and Strobe Talbott, At the Highest Levels: The Inside Story of the End of the Cold War (Boston: Little, Brown, 1993); Diego Ruiz Palmer, French Strategic Options in the 1990s, Adelphi Paper #260 (London: International Institute of Strategic Studies, July 1991); Anand Menon, Anthony Forster, and William Wallace, "A Common European Defense?" Survival 34 (Autumn 1992): 98-119; Daniel Vernet, "The Dilemma of French Foreign Policy," International Affairs 68 (April 1992): 655-664; Richard Corbett, "The Intergovernmental Conference on Political Union," Journal of Common Market Studies 30 (September 1992): 271-298; David S. Yost, "Mitterrand and Defense and Security Policy," French Politics and Society 9 (Summer/Fall 1991): 141-158; David S. Yost, "France and West European Defense Identity," Survival 33 (July/August 1991): 327-352; Steven Philip Kramer, "The French Question," The Washington Quarterly 14 (Autumn 1991): 83-96; Ronald Tiersky, "Mitterrand, France, and Europe," French Politics and Society 9 (Winter 1991): 9-25; Ronald Tiersky, "France in the New Europe," Foreign Affairs 71 (Spring 1992): 131-147; Alexander Moens, "American Diplomacy and German Unification," Survival 33 (November/December 1991): 531-546; Catherine McArdle Kelleher, The Future of European Security: An Interim Assessment (Washington, DC: The Blockings Institution, 1995); Mathias Jopp, The Strategic Implications of European Integration, Adelphi Paper #290 (London: International Institute for Strategic Studies, 1994); and Laurence Martin and John Roper, eds., Towards a Common Defense Policy (Paris: The Institute for Security Studies, Western European Union, 1995).
17. 7 The analysis of political-military elite attitudes in this and succeeding sections is based in part on over one hundred interviews I conducted in Western Europe and Washington, DC periodically from 1990 to 1994. I also found especially useful the following published sources: Catherine Guicherd, A European Defense Identity: Challenge and Opportunity for NATO (Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress, 12 June 1991); Louise Richardson, "British State Strategies after the Cold War" and Stanley Hoffmann, "French Dilemmas and Strategies in the New Europe" both in Robert O. Keohane, Joseph S. Nye, and Stanley Hoffmann, After the Cold War: International Institutions and State Strategies in Europe, 1989-1991 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1993), 148-169 and 127-148, respectively; Elizabeth Pond, Beyond the Wall: Germany's Road to Unification (Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution, 1993); Philip Zelikow and Condoleezza Rice, Germany United and Europe Transformed: A Study in Statecraft (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1995); Paul R. S. Gebhard, The United States and European Security, Adelphi Paper #286 (London: International Institute of Strategic Studies, 1994); Michael R. Beschloss and Strobe Talbott, At the Highest Levels: The Inside Story of the End of the Cold War (Boston: Little, Brown, 1993); Diego Ruiz Palmer, French Strategic Options in the 1990s, Adelphi Paper #260 (London: International Institute of Strategic Studies, July 1991); Anand Menon, Anthony Forster, and William Wallace, "A Common European Defense?" Survival 34 (Autumn 1992): 98-119; Daniel Vernet, "The Dilemma of French Foreign Policy," International Affairs 68 (April 1992): 655-664; Richard Corbett, "The Intergovernmental Conference on Political Union," Journal of Common Market Studies 30 (September 1992): 271-298; David S. Yost, "Mitterrand and Defense and Security Policy," French Politics and Society 9 (Summer/Fall 1991): 141-158; David S. Yost, "France and West European Defense Identity," Survival 33 (July/August 1991): 327-352; Steven Philip Kramer, "The French Question," The Washington Quarterly 14 (Autumn 1991): 83-96; Ronald Tiersky, "Mitterrand, France, and Europe," French Politics and Society 9 (Winter 1991): 9-25; Ronald Tiersky, "France in the New Europe," Foreign Affairs 71 (Spring 1992): 131-147; Alexander Moens, "American Diplomacy and German Unification," Survival 33 (November/December 1991): 531-546; Catherine McArdle Kelleher, The Future of European Security: An Interim Assessment (Washington, DC: The Blockings Institution, 1995); Mathias Jopp, The Strategic Implications of European Integration, Adelphi Paper #290 (London: International Institute for Strategic Studies, 1994); and Laurence Martin and John Roper, eds., Towards a Common Defense Policy (Paris: The Institute for Security Studies, Western European Union, 1995).
18. 7 The analysis of political-military elite attitudes in this and succeeding sections is based in part on over one hundred interviews I conducted in Western Europe and Washington, DC periodically from 1990 to 1994. I also found especially useful the following published sources: Catherine Guicherd, A European Defense Identity: Challenge and Opportunity for NATO (Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress, 12 June 1991); Louise Richardson, "British State Strategies after the Cold War" and Stanley Hoffmann, "French Dilemmas and Strategies in the New Europe" both in Robert O. Keohane, Joseph S. Nye, and Stanley Hoffmann, After the Cold War: International Institutions and State Strategies in Europe, 1989-1991 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1993), 148-169 and 127-148, respectively; Elizabeth Pond, Beyond the Wall: Germany's Road to Unification (Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution, 1993); Philip Zelikow and Condoleezza Rice, Germany United and Europe Transformed: A Study in Statecraft (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1995); Paul R. S. Gebhard, The United States and European Security, Adelphi Paper #286 (London: International Institute of Strategic Studies, 1994); Michael R. Beschloss and Strobe Talbott, At the Highest Levels: The Inside Story of the End of the Cold War (Boston: Little, Brown, 1993); Diego Ruiz Palmer, French Strategic Options in the 1990s, Adelphi Paper #260 (London: International Institute of Strategic Studies, July 1991); Anand Menon, Anthony Forster, and William Wallace, "A Common European Defense?" Survival 34 (Autumn 1992): 98-119; Daniel Vernet, "The Dilemma of French Foreign Policy," International Affairs 68 (April 1992): 655-664; Richard Corbett, "The Intergovernmental Conference on Political Union," Journal of Common Market Studies 30 (September 1992): 271-298; David S. Yost, "Mitterrand and Defense and Security Policy," French Politics and Society 9 (Summer/Fall 1991): 141-158; David S. Yost, "France and West European Defense Identity," Survival 33 (July/August 1991): 327-352; Steven Philip Kramer, "The French Question," The Washington Quarterly 14 (Autumn 1991): 83-96; Ronald Tiersky, "Mitterrand, France, and Europe," French Politics and Society 9 (Winter 1991): 9-25; Ronald Tiersky, "France in the New Europe," Foreign Affairs 71 (Spring 1992): 131-147; Alexander Moens, "American Diplomacy and German Unification," Survival 33 (November/December 1991): 531-546; Catherine McArdle Kelleher, The Future of European Security: An Interim Assessment (Washington, DC: The Blockings Institution, 1995); Mathias Jopp, The Strategic Implications of European Integration, Adelphi Paper #290 (London: International Institute for Strategic Studies, 1994); and Laurence Martin and John Roper, eds., Towards a Common Defense Policy (Paris: The Institute for Security Studies, Western European Union, 1995).
19. 7 The analysis of political-military elite attitudes in this and succeeding sections is based in part on over one hundred interviews I conducted in Western Europe and Washington, DC periodically from 1990 to 1994. I also found especially useful the following published sources: Catherine Guicherd, A European Defense Identity: Challenge and Opportunity for NATO (Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress, 12 June 1991); Louise Richardson, "British State Strategies after the Cold War" and Stanley Hoffmann, "French Dilemmas and Strategies in the New Europe" both in Robert O. Keohane, Joseph S. Nye, and Stanley Hoffmann, After the Cold War: International Institutions and State Strategies in Europe, 1989-1991 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1993), 148-169 and 127-148, respectively; Elizabeth Pond, Beyond the Wall: Germany's Road to Unification (Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution, 1993); Philip Zelikow and Condoleezza Rice, Germany United and Europe Transformed: A Study in Statecraft (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1995); Paul R. S. Gebhard, The United States and European Security, Adelphi Paper #286 (London: International Institute of Strategic Studies, 1994); Michael R. Beschloss and Strobe Talbott, At the Highest Levels: The Inside Story of the End of the Cold War (Boston: Little, Brown, 1993); Diego Ruiz Palmer, French Strategic Options in the 1990s, Adelphi Paper #260 (London: International Institute of Strategic Studies, July 1991); Anand Menon, Anthony Forster, and William Wallace, "A Common European Defense?" Survival 34 (Autumn 1992): 98-119; Daniel Vernet, "The Dilemma of French Foreign Policy," International Affairs 68 (April 1992): 655-664; Richard Corbett, "The Intergovernmental Conference on Political Union," Journal of Common Market Studies 30 (September 1992): 271-298; David S. Yost, "Mitterrand and Defense and Security Policy," French Politics and Society 9 (Summer/Fall 1991): 141-158; David S. Yost, "France and West European Defense Identity," Survival 33 (July/August 1991): 327-352; Steven Philip Kramer, "The French Question," The Washington Quarterly 14 (Autumn 1991): 83-96; Ronald Tiersky, "Mitterrand, France, and Europe," French Politics and Society 9 (Winter 1991): 9-25; Ronald Tiersky, "France in the New Europe," Foreign Affairs 71 (Spring 1992): 131-147; Alexander Moens, "American Diplomacy and German Unification," Survival 33 (November/December 1991): 531-546; Catherine McArdle Kelleher, The Future of European Security: An Interim Assessment (Washington, DC: The Blockings Institution, 1995); Mathias Jopp, The Strategic Implications of European Integration, Adelphi Paper #290 (London: International Institute for Strategic Studies, 1994); and Laurence Martin and John Roper, eds., Towards a Common Defense Policy (Paris: The Institute for Security Studies, Western European Union, 1995).
20. 7 The analysis of political-military elite attitudes in this and succeeding sections is based in part on over one hundred interviews I conducted in Western Europe and Washington, DC periodically from 1990 to 1994. I also found especially useful the following published sources: Catherine Guicherd, A European Defense Identity: Challenge and Opportunity for NATO (Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress, 12 June 1991); Louise Richardson, "British State Strategies after the Cold War" and Stanley Hoffmann, "French Dilemmas and Strategies in the New Europe" both in Robert O. Keohane, Joseph S. Nye, and Stanley Hoffmann, After the Cold War: International Institutions and State Strategies in Europe, 1989-1991 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1993), 148-169 and 127-148, respectively; Elizabeth Pond, Beyond the Wall: Germany's Road to Unification (Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution, 1993); Philip Zelikow and Condoleezza Rice, Germany United and Europe Transformed: A Study in Statecraft (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1995); Paul R. S. Gebhard, The United States and European Security, Adelphi Paper #286 (London: International Institute of Strategic Studies, 1994); Michael R. Beschloss and Strobe Talbott, At the Highest Levels: The Inside Story of the End of the Cold War (Boston: Little, Brown, 1993); Diego Ruiz Palmer, French Strategic Options in the 1990s, Adelphi Paper #260 (London: International Institute of Strategic Studies, July 1991); Anand Menon, Anthony Forster, and William Wallace, "A Common European Defense?" Survival 34 (Autumn 1992): 98-119; Daniel Vernet, "The Dilemma of French Foreign Policy," International Affairs 68 (April 1992): 655-664; Richard Corbett, "The Intergovernmental Conference on Political Union," Journal of Common Market Studies 30 (September 1992): 271-298; David S. Yost, "Mitterrand and Defense and Security Policy," French Politics and Society 9 (Summer/Fall 1991): 141-158; David S. Yost, "France and West European Defense Identity," Survival 33 (July/August 1991): 327-352; Steven Philip Kramer, "The French Question," The Washington Quarterly 14 (Autumn 1991): 83-96; Ronald Tiersky, "Mitterrand, France, and Europe," French Politics and Society 9 (Winter 1991): 9-25; Ronald Tiersky, "France in the New Europe," Foreign Affairs 71 (Spring 1992): 131-147; Alexander Moens, "American Diplomacy and German Unification," Survival 33 (November/December 1991): 531-546; Catherine McArdle Kelleher, The Future of European Security: An Interim Assessment (Washington, DC: The Blockings Institution, 1995); Mathias Jopp, The Strategic Implications of European Integration, Adelphi Paper #290 (London: International Institute for Strategic Studies, 1994); and Laurence Martin and John Roper, eds., Towards a Common Defense Policy (Paris: The Institute for Security Studies, Western European Union, 1995).
21. 7 The analysis of political-military elite attitudes in this and succeeding sections is based in part on over one hundred interviews I conducted in Western Europe and Washington, DC periodically from 1990 to 1994. I also found especially useful the following published sources: Catherine Guicherd, A European Defense Identity: Challenge and Opportunity for NATO (Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress, 12 June 1991); Louise Richardson, "British State Strategies after the Cold War" and Stanley Hoffmann, "French Dilemmas and Strategies in the New Europe" both in Robert O. Keohane, Joseph S. Nye, and Stanley Hoffmann, After the Cold War: International Institutions and State Strategies in Europe, 1989-1991 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1993), 148-169 and 127-148, respectively; Elizabeth Pond, Beyond the Wall: Germany's Road to Unification (Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution, 1993); Philip Zelikow and Condoleezza Rice, Germany United and Europe Transformed: A Study in Statecraft (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1995); Paul R. S. Gebhard, The United States and European Security, Adelphi Paper #286 (London: International Institute of Strategic Studies, 1994); Michael R. Beschloss and Strobe Talbott, At the Highest Levels: The Inside Story of the End of the Cold War (Boston: Little, Brown, 1993); Diego Ruiz Palmer, French Strategic Options in the 1990s, Adelphi Paper #260 (London: International Institute of Strategic Studies, July 1991); Anand Menon, Anthony Forster, and William Wallace, "A Common European Defense?" Survival 34 (Autumn 1992): 98-119; Daniel Vernet, "The Dilemma of French Foreign Policy," International Affairs 68 (April 1992): 655-664; Richard Corbett, "The Intergovernmental Conference on Political Union," Journal of Common Market Studies 30 (September 1992): 271-298; David S. Yost, "Mitterrand and Defense and Security Policy," French Politics and Society 9 (Summer/Fall 1991): 141-158; David S. Yost, "France and West European Defense Identity," Survival 33 (July/August 1991): 327-352; Steven Philip Kramer, "The French Question," The Washington Quarterly 14 (Autumn 1991): 83-96; Ronald Tiersky, "Mitterrand, France, and Europe," French Politics and Society 9 (Winter 1991): 9-25; Ronald Tiersky, "France in the New Europe," Foreign Affairs 71 (Spring 1992): 131-147; Alexander Moens, "American Diplomacy and German Unification," Survival 33 (November/December 1991): 531-546; Catherine McArdle Kelleher, The Future of European Security: An Interim Assessment (Washington, DC: The Blockings Institution, 1995); Mathias Jopp, The Strategic Implications of European Integration, Adelphi Paper #290 (London: International Institute for Strategic Studies, 1994); and Laurence Martin and John Roper, eds., Towards a Common Defense Policy (Paris: The Institute for Security Studies, Western European Union, 1995).
22. 7 The analysis of political-military elite attitudes in this and succeeding sections is based in part on over one hundred interviews I conducted in Western Europe and Washington, DC periodically from 1990 to 1994. I also found especially useful the following published sources: Catherine Guicherd, A European Defense Identity: Challenge and Opportunity for NATO (Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress, 12 June 1991); Louise Richardson, "British State Strategies after the Cold War" and Stanley Hoffmann, "French Dilemmas and Strategies in the New Europe" both in Robert O. Keohane, Joseph S. Nye, and Stanley Hoffmann, After the Cold War: International Institutions and State Strategies in Europe, 1989-1991 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1993), 148-169 and 127-148, respectively; Elizabeth Pond, Beyond the Wall: Germany's Road to Unification (Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution, 1993); Philip Zelikow and Condoleezza Rice, Germany United and Europe Transformed: A Study in Statecraft (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1995); Paul R. S. Gebhard, The United States and European Security, Adelphi Paper #286 (London: International Institute of Strategic Studies, 1994); Michael R. Beschloss and Strobe Talbott, At the Highest Levels: The Inside Story of the End of the Cold War (Boston: Little, Brown, 1993); Diego Ruiz Palmer, French Strategic Options in the 1990s, Adelphi Paper #260 (London: International Institute of Strategic Studies, July 1991); Anand Menon, Anthony Forster, and William Wallace, "A Common European Defense?" Survival 34 (Autumn 1992): 98-119; Daniel Vernet, "The Dilemma of French Foreign Policy," International Affairs 68 (April 1992): 655-664; Richard Corbett, "The Intergovernmental Conference on Political Union," Journal of Common Market Studies 30 (September 1992): 271-298; David S. Yost, "Mitterrand and Defense and Security Policy," French Politics and Society 9 (Summer/Fall 1991): 141-158; David S. Yost, "France and West European Defense Identity," Survival 33 (July/August 1991): 327-352; Steven Philip Kramer, "The French Question," The Washington Quarterly 14 (Autumn 1991): 83-96; Ronald Tiersky, "Mitterrand, France, and Europe," French Politics and Society 9 (Winter 1991): 9-25; Ronald Tiersky, "France in the New Europe," Foreign Affairs 71 (Spring 1992): 131-147; Alexander Moens, "American Diplomacy and German Unification," Survival 33 (November/December 1991): 531-546; Catherine McArdle Kelleher, The Future of European Security: An Interim Assessment (Washington, DC: The Blockings Institution, 1995); Mathias Jopp, The Strategic Implications of European Integration, Adelphi Paper #290 (London: International Institute for Strategic Studies, 1994); and Laurence Martin and John Roper, eds., Towards a Common Defense Policy (Paris: The Institute for Security Studies, Western European Union, 1995).
23. 7 The analysis of political-military elite attitudes in this and succeeding sections is based in part on over one hundred interviews I conducted in Western Europe and Washington, DC periodically from 1990 to 1994. I also found especially useful the following published sources: Catherine Guicherd, A European Defense Identity: Challenge and Opportunity for NATO (Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress, 12 June 1991); Louise Richardson, "British State Strategies after the Cold War" and Stanley Hoffmann, "French Dilemmas and Strategies in the New Europe" both in Robert O. Keohane, Joseph S. Nye, and Stanley Hoffmann, After the Cold War: International Institutions and State Strategies in Europe, 1989-1991 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1993), 148-169 and 127-148, respectively; Elizabeth Pond, Beyond the Wall: Germany's Road to Unification (Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution, 1993); Philip Zelikow and Condoleezza Rice, Germany United and Europe Transformed: A Study in Statecraft (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1995); Paul R. S. Gebhard, The United States and European Security, Adelphi Paper #286 (London: International Institute of Strategic Studies, 1994); Michael R. Beschloss and Strobe Talbott, At the Highest Levels: The Inside Story of the End of the Cold War (Boston: Little, Brown, 1993); Diego Ruiz Palmer, French Strategic Options in the 1990s, Adelphi Paper #260 (London: International Institute of Strategic Studies, July 1991); Anand Menon, Anthony Forster, and William Wallace, "A Common European Defense?" Survival 34 (Autumn 1992): 98-119; Daniel Vernet, "The Dilemma of French Foreign Policy," International Affairs 68 (April 1992): 655-664; Richard Corbett, "The Intergovernmental Conference on Political Union," Journal of Common Market Studies 30 (September 1992): 271-298; David S. Yost, "Mitterrand and Defense and Security Policy," French Politics and Society 9 (Summer/Fall 1991): 141-158; David S. Yost, "France and West European Defense Identity," Survival 33 (July/August 1991): 327-352; Steven Philip Kramer, "The French Question," The Washington Quarterly 14 (Autumn 1991): 83-96; Ronald Tiersky, "Mitterrand, France, and Europe," French Politics and Society 9 (Winter 1991): 9-25; Ronald Tiersky, "France in the New Europe," Foreign Affairs 71 (Spring 1992): 131-147; Alexander Moens, "American Diplomacy and German Unification," Survival 33 (November/December 1991): 531-546; Catherine McArdle Kelleher, The Future of European Security: An Interim Assessment (Washington, DC: The Blockings Institution, 1995); Mathias Jopp, The Strategic Implications of European Integration, Adelphi Paper #290 (London: International Institute for Strategic Studies, 1994); and Laurence Martin and John Roper, eds., Towards a Common Defense Policy (Paris: The Institute for Security Studies, Western European Union, 1995).
24. 7 The analysis of political-military elite attitudes in this and succeeding sections is based in part on over one hundred interviews I conducted in Western Europe and Washington, DC periodically from 1990 to 1994. I also found especially useful the following published sources: Catherine Guicherd, A European Defense Identity: Challenge and Opportunity for NATO (Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress, 12 June 1991); Louise Richardson, "British State Strategies after the Cold War" and Stanley Hoffmann, "French Dilemmas and Strategies in the New Europe" both in Robert O. Keohane, Joseph S. Nye, and Stanley Hoffmann, After the Cold War: International Institutions and State Strategies in Europe, 1989-1991 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1993), 148-169 and 127-148, respectively; Elizabeth Pond, Beyond the Wall: Germany's Road to Unification (Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution, 1993); Philip Zelikow and Condoleezza Rice, Germany United and Europe Transformed: A Study in Statecraft (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1995); Paul R. S. Gebhard, The United States and European Security, Adelphi Paper #286 (London: International Institute of Strategic Studies, 1994); Michael R. Beschloss and Strobe Talbott, At the Highest Levels: The Inside Story of the End of the Cold War (Boston: Little, Brown, 1993); Diego Ruiz Palmer, French Strategic Options in the 1990s, Adelphi Paper #260 (London: International Institute of Strategic Studies, July 1991); Anand Menon, Anthony Forster, and William Wallace, "A Common European Defense?" Survival 34 (Autumn 1992): 98-119; Daniel Vernet, "The Dilemma of French Foreign Policy," International Affairs 68 (April 1992): 655-664; Richard Corbett, "The Intergovernmental Conference on Political Union," Journal of Common Market Studies 30 (September 1992): 271-298; David S. Yost, "Mitterrand and Defense and Security Policy," French Politics and Society 9 (Summer/Fall 1991): 141-158; David S. Yost, "France and West European Defense Identity," Survival 33 (July/August 1991): 327-352; Steven Philip Kramer, "The French Question," The Washington Quarterly 14 (Autumn 1991): 83-96; Ronald Tiersky, "Mitterrand, France, and Europe," French Politics and Society 9 (Winter 1991): 9-25; Ronald Tiersky, "France in the New Europe," Foreign Affairs 71 (Spring 1992): 131-147; Alexander Moens, "American Diplomacy and German Unification," Survival 33 (November/December 1991): 531-546; Catherine McArdle Kelleher, The Future of European Security: An Interim Assessment (Washington, DC: The Blockings Institution, 1995); Mathias Jopp, The Strategic Implications of European Integration, Adelphi Paper #290 (London: International Institute for Strategic Studies, 1994); and Laurence Martin and John Roper, eds., Towards a Common Defense Policy (Paris: The Institute for Security Studies, Western European Union, 1995).
25. 7 The analysis of political-military elite attitudes in this and succeeding sections is based in part on over one hundred interviews I conducted in Western Europe and Washington, DC periodically from 1990 to 1994. I also found especially useful the following published sources: Catherine Guicherd, A European Defense Identity: Challenge and Opportunity for NATO (Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress, 12 June 1991); Louise Richardson, "British State Strategies after the Cold War" and Stanley Hoffmann, "French Dilemmas and Strategies in the New Europe" both in Robert O. Keohane, Joseph S. Nye, and Stanley Hoffmann, After the Cold War: International Institutions and State Strategies in Europe, 1989-1991 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1993), 148-169 and 127-148, respectively; Elizabeth Pond, Beyond the Wall: Germany's Road to Unification (Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution, 1993); Philip Zelikow and Condoleezza Rice, Germany United and Europe Transformed: A Study in Statecraft (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1995); Paul R. S. Gebhard, The United States and European Security, Adelphi Paper #286 (London: International Institute of Strategic Studies, 1994); Michael R. Beschloss and Strobe Talbott, At the Highest Levels: The Inside Story of the End of the Cold War (Boston: Little, Brown, 1993); Diego Ruiz Palmer, French Strategic Options in the 1990s, Adelphi Paper #260 (London: International Institute of Strategic Studies, July 1991); Anand Menon, Anthony Forster, and William Wallace, "A Common European Defense?" Survival 34 (Autumn 1992): 98-119; Daniel Vernet, "The Dilemma of French Foreign Policy," International Affairs 68 (April 1992): 655-664; Richard Corbett, "The Intergovernmental Conference on Political Union," Journal of Common Market Studies 30 (September 1992): 271-298; David S. Yost, "Mitterrand and Defense and Security Policy," French Politics and Society 9 (Summer/Fall 1991): 141-158; David S. Yost, "France and West European Defense Identity," Survival 33 (July/August 1991): 327-352; Steven Philip Kramer, "The French Question," The Washington Quarterly 14 (Autumn 1991): 83-96; Ronald Tiersky, "Mitterrand, France, and Europe," French Politics and Society 9 (Winter 1991): 9-25; Ronald Tiersky, "France in the New Europe," Foreign Affairs 71 (Spring 1992): 131-147; Alexander Moens, "American Diplomacy and German Unification," Survival 33 (November/December 1991): 531-546; Catherine McArdle Kelleher, The Future of European Security: An Interim Assessment (Washington, DC: The Blockings Institution, 1995); Mathias Jopp, The Strategic Implications of European Integration, Adelphi Paper #290 (London: International Institute for Strategic Studies, 1994); and Laurence Martin and John Roper, eds., Towards a Common Defense Policy (Paris: The Institute for Security Studies, Western European Union, 1995).
26. 7 The analysis of political-military elite attitudes in this and succeeding sections is based in part on over one hundred interviews I conducted in Western Europe and Washington, DC periodically from 1990 to 1994. I also found especially useful the following published sources: Catherine Guicherd, A European Defense Identity: Challenge and Opportunity for NATO (Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress, 12 June 1991); Louise Richardson, "British State Strategies after the Cold War" and Stanley Hoffmann, "French Dilemmas and Strategies in the New Europe" both in Robert O. Keohane, Joseph S. Nye, and Stanley Hoffmann, After the Cold War: International Institutions and State Strategies in Europe, 1989-1991 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1993), 148-169 and 127-148, respectively; Elizabeth Pond, Beyond the Wall: Germany's Road to Unification (Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution, 1993); Philip Zelikow and Condoleezza Rice, Germany United and Europe Transformed: A Study in Statecraft (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1995); Paul R. S. Gebhard, The United States and European Security, Adelphi Paper #286 (London: International Institute of Strategic Studies, 1994); Michael R. Beschloss and Strobe Talbott, At the Highest Levels: The Inside Story of the End of the Cold War (Boston: Little, Brown, 1993); Diego Ruiz Palmer, French Strategic Options in the 1990s, Adelphi Paper #260 (London: International Institute of Strategic Studies, July 1991); Anand Menon, Anthony Forster, and William Wallace, "A Common European Defense?" Survival 34 (Autumn 1992): 98-119; Daniel Vernet, "The Dilemma of French Foreign Policy," International Affairs 68 (April 1992): 655-664; Richard Corbett, "The Intergovernmental Conference on Political Union," Journal of Common Market Studies 30 (September 1992): 271-298; David S. Yost, "Mitterrand and Defense and Security Policy," French Politics and Society 9 (Summer/Fall 1991): 141-158; David S. Yost, "France and West European Defense Identity," Survival 33 (July/August 1991): 327-352; Steven Philip Kramer, "The French Question," The Washington Quarterly 14 (Autumn 1991): 83-96; Ronald Tiersky, "Mitterrand, France, and Europe," French Politics and Society 9 (Winter 1991): 9-25; Ronald Tiersky, "France in the New Europe," Foreign Affairs 71 (Spring 1992): 131-147; Alexander Moens, "American Diplomacy and German Unification," Survival 33 (November/December 1991): 531-546; Catherine McArdle Kelleher, The Future of European Security: An Interim Assessment (Washington, DC: The Blockings Institution, 1995); Mathias Jopp, The Strategic Implications of European Integration, Adelphi Paper #290 (London: International Institute for Strategic Studies, 1994); and Laurence Martin and John Roper, eds., Towards a Common Defense Policy (Paris: The Institute for Security Studies, Western European Union, 1995).
27. 7 The analysis of political-military elite attitudes in this and succeeding sections is based in part on over one hundred interviews I conducted in Western Europe and Washington, DC periodically from 1990 to 1994. I also found especially useful the following published sources: Catherine Guicherd, A European Defense Identity: Challenge and Opportunity for NATO (Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress, 12 June 1991); Louise Richardson, "British State Strategies after the Cold War" and Stanley Hoffmann, "French Dilemmas and Strategies in the New Europe" both in Robert O. Keohane, Joseph S. Nye, and Stanley Hoffmann, After the Cold War: International Institutions and State Strategies in Europe, 1989-1991 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1993), 148-169 and 127-148, respectively; Elizabeth Pond, Beyond the Wall: Germany's Road to Unification (Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution, 1993); Philip Zelikow and Condoleezza Rice, Germany United and Europe Transformed: A Study in Statecraft (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1995); Paul R. S. Gebhard, The United States and European Security, Adelphi Paper #286 (London: International Institute of Strategic Studies, 1994); Michael R. Beschloss and Strobe Talbott, At the Highest Levels: The Inside Story of the End of the Cold War (Boston: Little, Brown, 1993); Diego Ruiz Palmer, French Strategic Options in the 1990s, Adelphi Paper #260 (London: International Institute of Strategic Studies, July 1991); Anand Menon, Anthony Forster, and William Wallace, "A Common European Defense?" Survival 34 (Autumn 1992): 98-119; Daniel Vernet, "The Dilemma of French Foreign Policy," International Affairs 68 (April 1992): 655-664; Richard Corbett, "The Intergovernmental Conference on Political Union," Journal of Common Market Studies 30 (September 1992): 271-298; David S. Yost, "Mitterrand and Defense and Security Policy," French Politics and Society 9 (Summer/Fall 1991): 141-158; David S. Yost, "France and West European Defense Identity," Survival 33 (July/August 1991): 327-352; Steven Philip Kramer, "The French Question," The Washington Quarterly 14 (Autumn 1991): 83-96; Ronald Tiersky, "Mitterrand, France, and Europe," French Politics and Society 9 (Winter 1991): 9-25; Ronald Tiersky, "France in the New Europe," Foreign Affairs 71 (Spring 1992): 131-147; Alexander Moens, "American Diplomacy and German Unification," Survival 33 (November/December 1991): 531-546; Catherine McArdle Kelleher, The Future of European Security: An Interim Assessment (Washington, DC: The Blockings Institution, 1995); Mathias Jopp, The Strategic Implications of European Integration, Adelphi Paper #290 (London: International Institute for Strategic Studies, 1994); and Laurence Martin and John Roper, eds., Towards a Common Defense Policy (Paris: The Institute for Security Studies, Western European Union, 1995).
28. 7 The analysis of political-military elite attitudes in this and succeeding sections is based in part on over one hundred interviews I conducted in Western Europe and Washington, DC periodically from 1990 to 1994. I also found especially useful the following published sources: Catherine Guicherd, A European Defense Identity: Challenge and Opportunity for NATO (Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress, 12 June 1991); Louise Richardson, "British State Strategies after the Cold War" and Stanley Hoffmann, "French Dilemmas and Strategies in the New Europe" both in Robert O. Keohane, Joseph S. Nye, and Stanley Hoffmann, After the Cold War: International Institutions and State Strategies in Europe, 1989-1991 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1993), 148-169 and 127-148, respectively; Elizabeth Pond, Beyond the Wall: Germany's Road to Unification (Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution, 1993); Philip Zelikow and Condoleezza Rice, Germany United and Europe Transformed: A Study in Statecraft (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1995); Paul R. S. Gebhard, The United States and European Security, Adelphi Paper #286 (London: International Institute of Strategic Studies, 1994); Michael R. Beschloss and Strobe Talbott, At the Highest Levels: The Inside Story of the End of the Cold War (Boston: Little, Brown, 1993); Diego Ruiz Palmer, French Strategic Options in the 1990s, Adelphi Paper #260 (London: International Institute of Strategic Studies, July 1991); Anand Menon, Anthony Forster, and William Wallace, "A Common European Defense?" Survival 34 (Autumn 1992): 98-119; Daniel Vernet, "The Dilemma of French Foreign Policy," International Affairs 68 (April 1992): 655-664; Richard Corbett, "The Intergovernmental Conference on Political Union," Journal of Common Market Studies 30 (September 1992): 271-298; David S. Yost, "Mitterrand and Defense and Security Policy," French Politics and Society 9 (Summer/Fall 1991): 141-158; David S. Yost, "France and West European Defense Identity," Survival 33 (July/August 1991): 327-352; Steven Philip Kramer, "The French Question," The Washington Quarterly 14 (Autumn 1991): 83-96; Ronald Tiersky, "Mitterrand, France, and Europe," French Politics and Society 9 (Winter 1991): 9-25; Ronald Tiersky, "France in the New Europe," Foreign Affairs 71 (Spring 1992): 131-147; Alexander Moens, "American Diplomacy and German Unification," Survival 33 (November/December 1991): 531-546; Catherine McArdle Kelleher, The Future of European Security: An Interim Assessment (Washington, DC: The Blockings Institution, 1995); Mathias Jopp, The Strategic Implications of European Integration, Adelphi Paper #290 (London: International Institute for Strategic Studies, 1994); and Laurence Martin and John Roper, eds., Towards a Common Defense Policy (Paris: The Institute for Security Studies, Western European Union, 1995).
29. 7 The analysis of political-military elite attitudes in this and succeeding sections is based in part on over one hundred interviews I conducted in Western Europe and Washington, DC periodically from 1990 to 1994. I also found especially useful the following published sources: Catherine Guicherd, A European Defense Identity: Challenge and Opportunity for NATO (Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress, 12 June 1991); Louise Richardson, "British State Strategies after the Cold War" and Stanley Hoffmann, "French Dilemmas and Strategies in the New Europe" both in Robert O. Keohane, Joseph S. Nye, and Stanley Hoffmann, After the Cold War: International Institutions and State Strategies in Europe, 1989-1991 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1993), 148-169 and 127-148, respectively; Elizabeth Pond, Beyond the Wall: Germany's Road to Unification (Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution, 1993); Philip Zelikow and Condoleezza Rice, Germany United and Europe Transformed: A Study in Statecraft (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1995); Paul R. S. Gebhard, The United States and European Security, Adelphi Paper #286 (London: International Institute of Strategic Studies, 1994); Michael R. Beschloss and Strobe Talbott, At the Highest Levels: The Inside Story of the End of the Cold War (Boston: Little, Brown, 1993); Diego Ruiz Palmer, French Strategic Options in the 1990s, Adelphi Paper #260 (London: International Institute of Strategic Studies, July 1991); Anand Menon, Anthony Forster, and William Wallace, "A Common European Defense?" Survival 34 (Autumn 1992): 98-119; Daniel Vernet, "The Dilemma of French Foreign Policy," International Affairs 68 (April 1992): 655-664; Richard Corbett, "The Intergovernmental Conference on Political Union," Journal of Common Market Studies 30 (September 1992): 271-298; David S. Yost, "Mitterrand and Defense and Security Policy," French Politics and Society 9 (Summer/Fall 1991): 141-158; David S. Yost, "France and West European Defense Identity," Survival 33 (July/August 1991): 327-352; Steven Philip Kramer, "The French Question," The Washington Quarterly 14 (Autumn 1991): 83-96; Ronald Tiersky, "Mitterrand, France, and Europe," French Politics and Society 9 (Winter 1991): 9-25; Ronald Tiersky, "France in the New Europe," Foreign Affairs 71 (Spring 1992): 131-147; Alexander Moens, "American Diplomacy and German Unification," Survival 33 (November/December 1991): 531-546; Catherine McArdle Kelleher, The Future of European Security: An Interim Assessment (Washington, DC: The Blockings Institution, 1995); Mathias Jopp, The Strategic Implications of European Integration, Adelphi Paper #290 (London: International Institute for Strategic Studies, 1994); and Laurence Martin and John Roper, eds., Towards a Common Defense Policy (Paris: The Institute for Security Studies, Western European Union, 1995).
30. 7 The analysis of political-military elite attitudes in this and succeeding sections is based in part on over one hundred interviews I conducted in Western Europe and Washington, DC periodically from 1990 to 1994. I also found especially useful the following published sources: Catherine Guicherd, A European Defense Identity: Challenge and Opportunity for NATO (Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress, 12 June 1991); Louise Richardson, "British State Strategies after the Cold War" and Stanley Hoffmann, "French Dilemmas and Strategies in the New Europe" both in Robert O. Keohane, Joseph S. Nye, and Stanley Hoffmann, After the Cold War: International Institutions and State Strategies in Europe, 1989-1991 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1993), 148-169 and 127-148, respectively; Elizabeth Pond, Beyond the Wall: Germany's Road to Unification (Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution, 1993); Philip Zelikow and Condoleezza Rice, Germany United and Europe Transformed: A Study in Statecraft (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1995); Paul R. S. Gebhard, The United States and European Security, Adelphi Paper #286 (London: International Institute of Strategic Studies, 1994); Michael R. Beschloss and Strobe Talbott, At the Highest Levels: The Inside Story of the End of the Cold War (Boston: Little, Brown, 1993); Diego Ruiz Palmer, French Strategic Options in the 1990s, Adelphi Paper #260 (London: International Institute of Strategic Studies, July 1991); Anand Menon, Anthony Forster, and William Wallace, "A Common European Defense?" Survival 34 (Autumn 1992): 98-119; Daniel Vernet, "The Dilemma of French Foreign Policy," International Affairs 68 (April 1992): 655-664; Richard Corbett, "The Intergovernmental Conference on Political Union," Journal of Common Market Studies 30 (September 1992): 271-298; David S. Yost, "Mitterrand and Defense and Security Policy," French Politics and Society 9 (Summer/Fall 1991): 141-158; David S. Yost, "France and West European Defense Identity," Survival 33 (July/August 1991): 327-352; Steven Philip Kramer, "The French Question," The Washington Quarterly 14 (Autumn 1991): 83-96; Ronald Tiersky, "Mitterrand, France, and Europe," French Politics and Society 9 (Winter 1991): 9-25; Ronald Tiersky, "France in the New Europe," Foreign Affairs 71 (Spring 1992): 131-147; Alexander Moens, "American Diplomacy and German Unification," Survival 33 (November/December 1991): 531-546; Catherine McArdle Kelleher, The Future of European Security: An Interim Assessment (Washington, DC: The Blockings Institution, 1995); Mathias Jopp, The Strategic Implications of European Integration, Adelphi Paper #290 (London: International Institute for Strategic Studies, 1994); and Laurence Martin and John Roper, eds., Towards a Common Defense Policy (Paris: The Institute for Security Studies, Western European Union, 1995).
31. 7 The analysis of political-military elite attitudes in this and succeeding sections is based in part on over one hundred interviews I conducted in Western Europe and Washington, DC periodically from 1990 to 1994. I also found especially useful the following published sources: Catherine Guicherd, A European Defense Identity: Challenge and Opportunity for NATO (Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress, 12 June 1991); Louise Richardson, "British State Strategies after the Cold War" and Stanley Hoffmann, "French Dilemmas and Strategies in the New Europe" both in Robert O. Keohane, Joseph S. Nye, and Stanley Hoffmann, After the Cold War: International Institutions and State Strategies in Europe, 1989-1991 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1993), 148-169 and 127-148, respectively; Elizabeth Pond, Beyond the Wall: Germany's Road to Unification (Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution, 1993); Philip Zelikow and Condoleezza Rice, Germany United and Europe Transformed: A Study in Statecraft (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1995); Paul R. S. Gebhard, The United States and European Security, Adelphi Paper #286 (London: International Institute of Strategic Studies, 1994); Michael R. Beschloss and Strobe Talbott, At the Highest Levels: The Inside Story of the End of the Cold War (Boston: Little, Brown, 1993); Diego Ruiz Palmer, French Strategic Options in the 1990s, Adelphi Paper #260 (London: International Institute of Strategic Studies, July 1991); Anand Menon, Anthony Forster, and William Wallace, "A Common European Defense?" Survival 34 (Autumn 1992): 98-119; Daniel Vernet, "The Dilemma of French Foreign Policy," International Affairs 68 (April 1992): 655-664; Richard Corbett, "The Intergovernmental Conference on Political Union," Journal of Common Market Studies 30 (September 1992): 271-298; David S. Yost, "Mitterrand and Defense and Security Policy," French Politics and Society 9 (Summer/Fall 1991): 141-158; David S. Yost, "France and West European Defense Identity," Survival 33 (July/August 1991): 327-352; Steven Philip Kramer, "The French Question," The Washington Quarterly 14 (Autumn 1991): 83-96; Ronald Tiersky, "Mitterrand, France, and Europe," French Politics and Society 9 (Winter 1991): 9-25; Ronald Tiersky, "France in the New Europe," Foreign Affairs 71 (Spring 1992): 131-147; Alexander Moens, "American Diplomacy and German Unification," Survival 33 (November/December 1991): 531-546; Catherine McArdle Kelleher, The Future of European Security: An Interim Assessment (Washington, DC: The Blockings Institution, 1995); Mathias Jopp, The Strategic Implications of European Integration, Adelphi Paper #290 (London: International Institute for Strategic Studies, 1994); and Laurence Martin and John Roper, eds., Towards a Common Defense Policy (Paris: The Institute for Security Studies, Western European Union, 1995).
32. 8 Stephen Van Evera was the first, as far as I know, to use the phrase "security competition," although he did not define it. I am indebted to him for suggesting the phrase to me and for urging me to flesh it out. See Stephen Van Evera, "Why Europe Matters, Why the Third World Doesn't: American Grand Strategy After the Cold War," The Journal of Strategic Studies 13 (June 1990): 11.
33. 9 Joanne Gowa argues that a state cannot be indifferent to the effects that trade has on the military power of the state(s) with which it is trading. The gains from trade are increased efficiency and increased wealth. Both can be turned to military advantage. Thus, Gowa argues that free trade is more likely within than across alliances and more likely in bipolar than in multipolar systems. See Joanne Gowa, Allies, Adversaries, and International Trade (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1994), especially chaps. 3 and 4, for the argument and the evidence. The beneficial effects that trade has on a state's military power is, of course, not a new insight. Albert Hirschman made the above point long ago when he argued that "foreign trade enhances the potential military force of a country," which he called the "supply effect" of foreign trade. See Albert O. Hirschman, National Power and the Structure of Foreign Trade (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1980), 14. See also: R. G. Hawtrey, Economic Aspects of Sovereignty, 2nd ed. (New York: Longman, Green, 1952); and Jacob Viner, "Power versus Plenty as Objectives of Foreign Policy in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries," in Jacob Viner, The Long View and the Short (Glencoe, IL: The Free Press, 1958), 277-306.
34. 9 Joanne Gowa argues that a state cannot be indifferent to the effects that trade has on the military power of the state(s) with which it is trading. The gains from trade are increased efficiency and increased wealth. Both can be turned to military advantage. Thus, Gowa argues that free trade is more likely within than across alliances and more likely in bipolar than in multipolar systems. See Joanne Gowa, Allies, Adversaries, and International Trade (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1994), especially chaps. 3 and 4, for the argument and the evidence. The beneficial effects that trade has on a state's military power is, of course, not a new insight. Albert Hirschman made the above point long ago when he argued that "foreign trade enhances the potential military force of a country," which he called the "supply effect" of foreign trade. See Albert O. Hirschman, National Power and the Structure of Foreign Trade (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1980), 14. See also: R. G. Hawtrey, Economic Aspects of Sovereignty, 2nd ed. (New York: Longman, Green, 1952); and Jacob Viner, "Power versus Plenty as Objectives of Foreign Policy in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries," in Jacob Viner, The Long View and the Short (Glencoe, IL: The Free Press, 1958), 277-306.
35. 9 Joanne Gowa argues that a state cannot be indifferent to the effects that trade has on the military power of the state(s) with which it is trading. The gains from trade are increased efficiency and increased wealth. Both can be turned to military advantage. Thus, Gowa argues that free trade is more likely within than across alliances and more likely in bipolar than in multipolar systems. See Joanne Gowa, Allies, Adversaries, and International Trade (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1994), especially chaps. 3 and 4, for the argument and the evidence. The beneficial effects that trade has on a state's military power is, of course, not a new insight. Albert Hirschman made the above point long ago when he argued that "foreign trade enhances the potential military force of a country," which he called the "supply effect" of foreign trade. See Albert O. Hirschman, National Power and the Structure of Foreign Trade (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1980), 14. See also: R. G. Hawtrey, Economic Aspects of Sovereignty, 2nd ed. (New York: Longman, Green, 1952); and Jacob Viner, "Power versus Plenty as Objectives of Foreign Policy in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries," in Jacob Viner, The Long View and the Short (Glencoe, IL: The Free Press, 1958), 277-306.
36. Joanne Gowa argues that a state cannot be indifferent to the effects that trade has on the military power of the state(s) with which it is trading. The gains from trade are increased efficiency and increased wealth. Both can be turned to military advantage. Thus, Gowa argues that free trade is more likely within than across alliances and more likely in bipolar than in multipolar systems. See Joanne Gowa, Allies, Adversaries, and International Trade (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1994), especially chaps. 3 and 4, for the argument and the evidence. The beneficial effects that trade has on a state's military power is, of course, not a new insight. Albert Hirschman made the above point long ago when he argued that "foreign trade enhances the potential military force of a country," which he called the "supply effect" of foreign trade. See Albert O. Hirschman, National Power and the Structure of Foreign Trade (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1980), 14. See also: R. G. Hawtrey, Economic Aspects of Sovereignty, 2nd ed. (New York: Longman, Green, 1952); and Jacob Viner, "Power versus Plenty as Objectives of Foreign Policy in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries," in Jacob Viner, The Long View and the Short (Glencoe, IL: The Free Press, 1958), 277-306.
37. 10 Josef Joffe, "Europe's American Pacifier," Foreign Policy 54 (Spring 1984): 74.
38. 11 The Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE) played almost no role in the debate over Western Europe's security. For a view that maintains that institutions bound states more tightly than the one I present, see Robert O. Koehane and Stanley Hoffmann, After the Cold War, 381-404.
39. 12 My source for the early thinking of the Bush administration is Philip Zelikow, who dealt with European affairs on the National Security Council from January 1989 until March 1991. Interview with Philip Zelikow, 31 December 1991, Cambridge, MA. For full accounts of the policy planning that took place from January through May 1989, see Bechloss and Talbott, Highest Levels, chaps. 2-4; and Zelikow and Rice, Germany United, chaps. 1 and 2; and Moens, "American Diplomacy and German Unification."
40. 12 My source for the early thinking of the Bush administration is Philip Zelikow, who dealt with European affairs on the National Security Council from January 1989 until March 1991. Interview with Philip Zelikow, 31 December 1991, Cambridge, MA. For full accounts of the policy planning that took place from January through May 1989, see Bechloss and Talbott, Highest Levels, chaps. 2-4; and Zelikow and Rice, Germany United, chaps. 1 and 2; and Moens, "American Diplomacy and German Unification."
41. 12 My source for the early thinking of the Bush administration is Philip Zelikow, who dealt with European affairs on the National Security Council from January 1989 until March 1991. Interview with Philip Zelikow, 31 December 1991, Cambridge, MA. For full accounts of the policy planning that took place from January through May 1989, see Bechloss and Talbott, Highest Levels, chaps. 2-4; and Zelikow and Rice, Germany United, chaps. 1 and 2; and Moens, "American Diplomacy and German Unification."
42. 13 Zelikow interview.
43. 14 "Proposals for a Free and Peaceful Europe" (address by President George Bush at Rheingoldhalle, Mainz, Federal Republic of Germany, 31 May 1989), United States Department of State, Bureau of Public Affairs, Current Policy No. 1179. A month earlier, in an interview in April with the Washington Times, Bush explicitly backed German unification (Pond, Beyond the Wall, 163).
44. 15 See Secretary of State James Baker, "A New Europe, A New Atlanticism: Architecture for a New Era," (speech before the Berlin Press Club, 11 December 1989), United States Department of State, Bureau of Public Affairs, Current Policy No. 1233.
45. 16 For previously published and fuller accounts of American thinking, see Moens, "American Diplomacy"; Pond, Beyond the Wall, chaps 12-14; Beschloss and Talbott, Highest Levels, 163-195; and Zelikow and Rice, Germany United, chaps. 4 and 6.
46. 16 For previously published and fuller accounts of American thinking, see Moens, "American Diplomacy"; Pond, Beyond the Wall, chaps 12-14; Beschloss and Talbott, Highest Levels, 163-195; and Zelikow and Rice, Germany United, chaps. 4 and 6.
47. 16 For previously published and fuller accounts of American thinking, see Moens, "American Diplomacy"; Pond, Beyond the Wall, chaps 12-14; Beschloss and Talbott, Highest Levels, 163-195; and Zelikow and Rice, Germany United, chaps. 4 and 6.
48. 16 For previously published and fuller accounts of American thinking, see Moens, "American Diplomacy"; Pond, Beyond the Wall, chaps 12-14; Beschloss and Talbott, Highest Levels, 163-195; and Zelikow and Rice, Germany United, chaps. 4 and 6.
49. 17 The phrases in quotes are taken from The London Declaration of a Transformed North Atlantic Alliance, 6 July 1990, NATO Press Office, Brussels (mimeo).
50. 18 Moens, "American Diplomacy," 531; Pond, Beyond the Wall, 158-160.
51. 18 Moens, "American Diplomacy," 531; Pond, Beyond the Wall, 158-160.
52. 19 These were the four conditions under which Bush supported unification. See Moens, "American Diplomacy," 533.
53. 20 Margaret Thatcher, The Downing Street Years (New York: HarperCollins, 1993), 796-98. (Em-phasis added.)
54. 21 Ibid., 798.
55. 22 For the analysis of French motives regarding EMU, I have relied heavily on Joseph M. Grieco, "State Interests and Institutional Rule Trajectories." See also Wayne Sandholtz, "Monetary Politics and Maastricht" International Organization 47 (Winter 1993): 1-41; Patrick McCarthy, "France Looks at Germany, or How to Become German (and European) while Remaining French" in Patrick McCarthy, ed., France-Germany, 1983-1993 (New York: St. Martin's, 1993), 57-63; and Derek W. Urwin, The Community of Europe: A History of European Integration Since 1945 (London: Longman, 1991), 243-44.
56. 22 For the analysis of French motives regarding EMU, I have relied heavily on Joseph M. Grieco, "State Interests and Institutional Rule Trajectories." See also Wayne Sandholtz, "Monetary Politics and Maastricht" International Organization 47 (Winter 1993): 1-41; Patrick McCarthy, "France Looks at Germany, or How to Become German (and European) while Remaining French" in Patrick McCarthy, ed., France-Germany, 1983-1993 (New York: St. Martin's, 1993), 57-63; and Derek W. Urwin, The Community of Europe: A History of European Integration Since 1945 (London: Longman, 1991), 243-44.
57. 22 For the analysis of French motives regarding EMU, I have relied heavily on Joseph M. Grieco, "State Interests and Institutional Rule Trajectories." See also Wayne Sandholtz, "Monetary Politics and Maastricht" International Organization 47 (Winter 1993): 1-41; Patrick McCarthy, "France Looks at Germany, or How to Become German (and European) while Remaining French" in Patrick McCarthy, ed., France-Germany, 1983-1993 (New York: St. Martin's, 1993), 57-63; and Derek W. Urwin, The Community of Europe: A History of European Integration Since 1945 (London: Longman, 1991), 243-44.
58. 22 For the analysis of French motives regarding EMU, I have relied heavily on Joseph M. Grieco, "State Interests and Institutional Rule Trajectories." See also Wayne Sandholtz, "Monetary Politics and Maastricht" International Organization 47 (Winter 1993): 1-41; Patrick McCarthy, "France Looks at Germany, or How to Become German (and European) while Remaining French" in Patrick McCarthy, ed., France-Germany, 1983-1993 (New York: St. Martin's, 1993), 57-63; and Derek W. Urwin, The Community of Europe: A History of European Integration Since 1945 (London: Longman, 1991), 243-44.
59. 23 Quoted in David Marsh, "Final March of the Old Guard," Financial Times, 25 April 1994, 17.
60. 24 Joseph Grieco terms this integrationist policy the "voice opportunities" strategy. It is the policy that a weaker power follows toward a stronger one when it is unable itself to balance against the stronger power. In this sense, integration is strategy of balancing through institutional binding. See Grieco, "State Interests and Institutional Rule Trajectories," 202-205.
61. 25 See George Graham, David Marsh, and Phillip Stephens, "Bonn and Paris Move to Speak European Unity," Financial Times, 20 April 1990, 1.
62. 26 Daniel Vernet, "France in a New Europe - Vive le Difference?" The National Interest 29 (Fall 1992): 32. A high official of the French Ministry of Foreign Affairs spoke in strikingly similar terms when describing France's ardor for political integration: "The only choice we have is to speed up the European integration process very rapidly. There is no other solution. It is not that we are more European than others; we are very nationalistic and understand the British position." Interview at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Paris, 14 January 1992. What makes these sentiments all the more interesting is that they come from an avowed Gaullist.
63. 27 See David Marsh, "Bonn Initiative behind Ambitious Target," Financial Times, 20 April 1990, 4; and Harald Muller, "German Foreign Policy After Unification" in Paul B. Stares, ed., The New Germany and the New Europe (Washington, DC: Brookings Institution, 1992), 159. I discuss Kohl's motives more fully shortly.
64. 27 See David Marsh, "Bonn Initiative behind Ambitious Target," Financial Times, 20 April 1990, 4; and Harald Muller, "German Foreign Policy After Unification" in Paul B. Stares, ed., The New Germany and the New Europe (Washington, DC: Brookings Institution, 1992), 159. I discuss Kohl's motives more fully shortly.
65. 28 For a good review of Mitterrand's policy toward Europe, see Elizabeth Haywood, "The European Policy of Francois Mitterrand," Journal of Common Market Studies 31 (June 1993): 279; and McCarthy, "France Looks at Germany."
66. 28 For a good review of Mitterrand's policy toward Europe, see Elizabeth Haywood, "The European Policy of Francois Mitterrand," Journal of Common Market Studies 31 (June 1993): 279; and McCarthy, "France Looks at Germany."
67. 29 The institutions of the European Community (and now Union) are of two types. The two prime intergovernmental institutions are the Council of Ministers and the European Council. The former is where national governments meet to make joint decisions on the basis of pooled sovereignty. The type of minister present varies according to the particular issue being considered. The European Council consists of the heads of states of all the governments. The Council has retained ultimate control over the nature and pace of political integration. In both these institutions, decisions are made by national governments sitting together. The European Court of Justice, the European Parliament, and the Commission are more supranational or federal in nature. The first interprets EU law on a community-wide basis; the second is the EU-wide legislature; and the third is the Union's executive arm. The point about the Union is that it contains both intergovernmental and federal strands. Foreign, security, and defense policies, however, are still very much intergovernmental.
68. 30 Anne-Marie Le Gloannec, "The Implications of German Unification for Western Europe" in Stares, ed., The New Germany and the New Europe, 266.
69. 31 Philip H. Gordon, A Certain Idea of France: French Security Policy and the Gaullist Legacy (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1993), 175. For further analysis of Franco-German security and defense cooperation, see Philip Gordon, "The Franco-German Security Partnership," in McCarthy, ed., France-Germany, 1983-1993; and David G. Haglund, Alliance Within the Alliance? Franco-German Military Cooperation and the European Pillar of Defense (Boulder, CO: Westview, 1991), esp. chaps. 3 and 7.
70. 31 Philip H. Gordon, A Certain Idea of France: French Security Policy and the Gaullist Legacy (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1993), 175. For further analysis of Franco-German security and defense cooperation, see Philip Gordon, "The Franco-German Security Partnership," in McCarthy, ed., France-Germany, 1983-1993; and David G. Haglund, Alliance Within the Alliance? Franco-German Military Cooperation and the European Pillar of Defense (Boulder, CO: Westview, 1991), esp. chaps. 3 and 7.
71. 31 Philip H. Gordon, A Certain Idea of France: French Security Policy and the Gaullist Legacy (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1993), 175. For further analysis of Franco-German security and defense cooperation, see Philip Gordon, "The Franco-German Security Partnership," in McCarthy, ed., France-Germany, 1983-1993; and David G. Haglund, Alliance Within the Alliance? Franco-German Military Cooperation and the European Pillar of Defense (Boulder, CO: Westview, 1991), esp. chaps. 3 and 7.
72. 32 The only exception was the brief revival of the Western European Union in 1987, which was due primarily to French efforts. The French, and to a lesser extent the Germans, were disturbed about the unilateralist actions of the Reagan administration, especially the proposals at the Reykjavik summit. It was the fear of a superpower condominium and U.S. abandonment that briefly revived the WEU.
73. 33 For the early 1990s, see Hoffmann, "French Dilemmas and Strategies," After the Cold War, Tiersky, "France in the New Europe"; Kramer, "The French Question"; Tiersky, "Mitterrand, France and Europe"; and Haywood, The European Policy of Mitterrand." For the early 1950s, see John Gillingham, Coal, Steel, and the Rebirth of Europe, 1945-1955: The Germans and French from Ruhr Conflict to Economic Community (Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 1991), esp. chaps. 5, 6, and conclusion; and Ernst B. Haas, The Uniting of Europe: Political, Social, and Economic Forces, 1950-1957 (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1958), chaps 1-3 and 7.
74. 33 For the early 1990s, see Hoffmann, "French Dilemmas and Strategies," After the Cold War, Tiersky, "France in the New Europe"; Kramer, "The French Question"; Tiersky, "Mitterrand, France and Europe"; and Haywood, The European Policy of Mitterrand." For the early 1950s, see John Gillingham, Coal, Steel, and the Rebirth of Europe, 1945-1955: The Germans and French from Ruhr Conflict to Economic Community (Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 1991), esp. chaps. 5, 6, and conclusion; and Ernst B. Haas, The Uniting of Europe: Political, Social, and Economic Forces, 1950-1957 (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1958), chaps 1-3 and 7.
75. 33 For the early 1990s, see Hoffmann, "French Dilemmas and Strategies," After the Cold War, Tiersky, "France in the New Europe"; Kramer, "The French Question"; Tiersky, "Mitterrand, France and Europe"; and Haywood, The European Policy of Mitterrand." For the early 1950s, see John Gillingham, Coal, Steel, and the Rebirth of Europe, 1945-1955: The Germans and French from Ruhr Conflict to Economic Community (Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 1991), esp. chaps. 5, 6, and conclusion; and Ernst B. Haas, The Uniting of Europe: Political, Social, and Economic Forces, 1950-1957 (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1958), chaps 1-3 and 7.
76. 33 For the early 1990s, see Hoffmann, "French Dilemmas and Strategies," After the Cold War, Tiersky, "France in the New Europe"; Kramer, "The French Question"; Tiersky, "Mitterrand, France and Europe"; and Haywood, The European Policy of Mitterrand." For the early 1950s, see John Gillingham, Coal, Steel, and the Rebirth of Europe, 1945-1955: The Germans and French from Ruhr Conflict to Economic Community (Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 1991), esp. chaps. 5, 6, and conclusion; and Ernst B. Haas, The Uniting of Europe: Political, Social, and Economic Forces, 1950-1957 (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1958), chaps 1-3 and 7.
77. 33 For the early 1990s, see Hoffmann, "French Dilemmas and Strategies," After the Cold War, Tiersky, "France in the New Europe"; Kramer, "The French Question"; Tiersky, "Mitterrand, France and Europe"; and Haywood, The European Policy of Mitterrand." For the early 1950s, see John Gillingham, Coal, Steel, and the Rebirth of Europe, 1945-1955: The Germans and French from Ruhr Conflict to Economic Community (Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 1991), esp. chaps. 5, 6, and conclusion; and Ernst B. Haas, The Uniting of Europe: Political, Social, and Economic Forces, 1950-1957 (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1958), chaps 1-3 and 7.
78. 33 For the early 1990s, see Hoffmann, "French Dilemmas and Strategies," After the Cold War, Tiersky, "France in the New Europe"; Kramer, "The French Question"; Tiersky, "Mitterrand, France and Europe"; and Haywood, The European Policy of Mitterrand." For the early 1950s, see John Gillingham, Coal, Steel, and the Rebirth of Europe, 1945-1955: The Germans and French from Ruhr Conflict to Economic Community (Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 1991), esp. chaps. 5, 6, and conclusion; and Ernst B. Haas, The Uniting of Europe: Political, Social, and Economic Forces, 1950-1957 (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1958), chaps 1-3 and 7.
79. 33 For the early 1990s, see Hoffmann, "French Dilemmas and Strategies," After the Cold War, Tiersky, "France in the New Europe"; Kramer, "The French Question"; Tiersky, "Mitterrand, France and Europe"; and Haywood, The European Policy of Mitterrand." For the early 1950s, see John Gillingham, Coal, Steel, and the Rebirth of Europe, 1945-1955: The Germans and French from Ruhr Conflict to Economic Community (Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 1991), esp. chaps. 5, 6, and conclusion; and Ernst B. Haas, The Uniting of Europe: Political, Social, and Economic Forces, 1950-1957 (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1958), chaps 1-3 and 7.
80. 34 This account of Britain's strategy is based on interviews with British officials in the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and in the Ministry of Defense (MOD) held in June and November of 1991 and January of 1992. See also Louise Richardson in Keohane, Nye, and Hoffmann, After the Cold War.
81. 35 For two good descriptions of the integrated military institutions of NATO, see E. Vandevanter, Jr., Studies on NATO: An Analysis of Integration, Memorandum RM-5506-PR (Santa Monica: RAND, 1966); and Douglas L. Bland, The Military Committee of the North Atlantic Alliance: A Study of Structure and Strategy (New York: Praeger, 1991), chap. 7.
82. 35 For two good descriptions of the integrated military institutions of NATO, see E. Vandevanter, Jr., Studies on NATO: An Analysis of Integration, Memorandum RM-5506-PR (Santa Monica: RAND, 1966); and Douglas L. Bland, The Military Committee of the North Atlantic Alliance: A Study of Structure and Strategy (New York: Praeger, 1991), chap. 7.
83. 36 For a brief analysis of how a European entity and NATO could compliment rather than duplicate one another, see Heisbourg, "The European-US Alliance," 674-675.
84. 37 Interview with British MOD assistant secretary, 27 November 1991; and Guicherd, A European Defense Identity, 46-47.
85. 38 Interview with a deputy undersecretary of defense, Ministry of Defense, London, 7 January 1992.
86. 39 Ullman, Securing Europe, 48-53. Three useful surveys of the WEU are WEU Primer, mimeo (undated), U.S. Mission to NATO: Ian D. Dawson, "Adaptation in an International Organization: The Case of the Western European Union," Center for International Affairs, Harvard University, June 1991, mimeo; and Willem F. van Eekelen, "Future European Defense Cooperation: The Role of WEU," European Strategy Group, ESG Occasional Paper, September 1989, mimeo.
87. 39 Ullman, Securing Europe, 48-53. Three useful surveys of the WEU are WEU Primer, mimeo (undated), U.S. Mission to NATO: Ian D. Dawson, "Adaptation in an International Organization: The Case of the Western European Union," Center for International Affairs, Harvard University, June 1991, mimeo; and Willem F. van Eekelen, "Future European Defense Cooperation: The Role of WEU," European Strategy Group, ESG Occasional Paper, September 1989, mimeo.
88. 40 The phrase is Willem van Eekelen's. See van Eekelen. "Future European Defense Cooperation," 7.
89. 41 See Willem van Eekelen, "The WEU and the Gulf Crisis," Survival 32 (November/December 1990): 519-532.
90. 42 The Brussels Treaty can be found in John A. Reed, Jr., Germany and NATO (Washington, DC: National Defense University Press, 1987), 204. (Emphasis added.)
91. 43 My analysis of German motives is based on interviews held in Brussels in January 1992 with members of the German delegation and in Bonn in January 1992 with officials in the Chancellory, the Foreign Office, and the Ministry of Defense. In addition, I also relied on the perceptions of American, British, and French officials whom I interviewed for their interpretations of German actions. Where possible, I have supplemented interview data with published sources.
92. 44 Interview with an official in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Bonn, 17 January 1992. An adviser to the minister of Defense in France echoed French fears of Germany: "We need now to control rather than cooperate with German power. It is bad but a reality." Interview at the Ministry of Defense, Paris, 13 January 1992.
93. 45 Helmut Kohl, "An Anchor in an Unstable Europe," Financial Times, 4 January 1993, 46.
94. 46 Wolfgang F. Schlor, German Security Policy, Adelphi Paper #277 (London: International Institute of Strategic Studies, 1993), 5.
95. 47 A long-time official in the French Ministry of Foreign Affairs, with strong Gaullist leanings, described the French view of Kohl's concern: "The European choice is the realpolitik choice. The alternative is Germany in the center, with a fragmented Europe, with France and the United Kingdom going their own ways. If we want to preserve stability in Europe, there is no choice but the Europeanization of the German issue. Kohl sees the unification of Europe as good for Germany and is afraid of the other possibility, though he never speaks of it." Interview held in Paris at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs on 14 January 1992.
96. 48 Pond, Beyond the Wall, 201-209.
97. 49 The phrase is Harald Muller's. See Muller, "German Foreign Policy After Unification" in Stares, ed., The New Germany, 158.
98. 50 Interview with Ambassador Hans von Ploetz, the German ambassador to NATO, Brussels, 10 January 1992. Germany has traditionally sent the best in its diplomatic corps to NATO headquarters because of the importance it has attached to NATO. As a consequence, they are unusually well informed about political thinking at the highest levels of their government.
99. 51 Interview with an official on the foreign policy and security staff in the Chancellory, Bonn, 16 January 1992.
100. 52 The proposal was succinct: "The German-French military cooperation will be strengthened beyond the currently existing brigade. These enhanced German-French units could therefore become the core of a European Corps, in which the armed forces of other WEU member states could be absorbed. This new structure could in turn become the model for closer military cooperation between all WEU member states." Text in Department of State cable from the U.S. Military Mission to NATO to U.S. Secretary of State, 18 October 1991.
101. 53 Interview with a German military official at NATO Headquarters, Brussels, 9 January 1992; with a French adviser to the minister of Defense, Paris, 13 January 1992; with a high level official in the U.S. embassy in Paris, 13 January 1992; and with two officials in the Ministry of Defense, London, 6 and 7 January 1992. See also Senior, German Security Policy, 8 and 18; and Muller, "German Foreign Policy," 155.
102. 53 Interview with a German military official at NATO Headquarters, Brussels, 9 January 1992; with a French adviser to the minister of Defense, Paris, 13 January 1992; with a high level official in the U.S. embassy in Paris, 13 January 1992; and with two officials in the Ministry of Defense, London, 6 and 7 January 1992. See also Senior, German Security Policy, 8 and 18; and Muller, "German Foreign Policy," 155.
103. 54 Interview with an official of the British Foreign Office, 6 January 1992. Confirmed with a British deputy under secretary of Defense, 7 January 1992.
104. 55 The phrase is that of an official in the State Department interviewed on 17 June 1992.
105. 56 The phrase in quotes is from the Press Statement on the Eurocorps, to be found in the Department of State cable of 18 October 1991. The press statement on the double-hatting of German troops read: "For the German troop component, this would not involve a change in their previous commitment (assignment) to the Atlantic Alliance. Rather this would entail that this troop component would take over an additional task in the framework of German-French cooperation."
106. 57 Phone interview with an official in the British Embassy, Washington, DC, 9 November 1992; interview with an official of the State Department, Washington, DC, 13 January 1993; interview with an official in the British Foreign Office, 13 December 1993; and Schlor, German Security Policy, 38.
107. 58 Author interview with Ambassador von Ploetz.
108. 59 During these four years, while NATO and the EDI were working out their relationship, NATO was also in the process of transforming itself so as to be relevant to the new security environment within Europe, especially with respect to Central Europe.
109. 60 Article J.4 of the Treaty on European Union (the Maastricht Treaty) contains the two passages, the first of which justifies the French view; the second, the British view. The first passage: "The [European] Union requests the Western European Union, which is an integral part of the development of the Union, to elaborate and implement decisions and actions of the Union which have defense implications." The second passage: "The policy of the [European] Union . . . shall not prejudice the specific character of the security and defense policy of certain Member States, and shall respect the obligations of certain Member States under the North Atlantic Treaty and be compatible with the common security and defense policy established within that framework."
110. 61 Rome Declaration of Peace and Cooperation, Issued by the Heads of State and Government participating in the meeting of the North Atlantic Council in Rome on 7th-8th November, 1991. NATO Review 39 (December 1991): 19-20. NATO's North Atlantic Council communiques can be found in NATO Review, usually during the month the meeting took place, or in the next issue.
111. 62 Yost, "France and West European Defense Identity," 344-347.
112. 63 Interview with an official of the British Foreign Office, London, 13 December 1993; and interviews with an official of the U.S. State Department, 13 January 1993 and 17 March 1993. The agreement is mentioned, but not described, in "Communique Issued by the Ministerial Meeting of the North Atlantic Council," Brussels, 17 December 1992," to be found in NATO Review 40 (December 1992): 29-30.
113. 64 Partnership for Peace: Declaration of the Heads of State and Government, January 10, 1994, NATO Review 42 (February 1994): 31.
114. 65 The phrase appears in paragraph 7 Final Communique of the Minsterial Meeting of the North Atlantic Council in Copenhagen, June 7, 1991, NATO Review 39 (June 1991): 31; and paragraph 6 of the Rome Declaration.
115. 66 Interview with an official of the British Foreign Office, London, 13 December 1993.
116. The phrase is from Partnership for Peace: Declaration of the Heads of State and Government, paragraph 6
117. 68 Interviews with an official in the British Foreign Office, London, 13 January 1994; and with a deputy undersecretary, Ministry of Defense, London, 14 January 1994.
118. 69 Partnership for Peace Declaration, paragraph 6.
119. 70 Gebhard, United States and European Security, 75-76; interview with John Chipmann, director. International Institute of Strategic Studies, London, 14 January 1993; David White, "Europe Undergoes Change in Defence Identity," Financial Times, 12 January 1994, 2; Michale Putzel, "US Seems Unsure of Its NATO Clout," Boston Globe, 12 January 1994; David White, "UK Calls EU Defense Talks," Financial Times, 24 January 1994, 2; and Kelleher, Future of European Security, 67-73.
120. 70 Gebhard, United States and European Security, 75-76; interview with John Chipmann, director. International Institute of Strategic Studies, London, 14 January 1993; interview with an official in the British Embassy, Washington, DC, 31 March 1994; Steven Greenhouse, "NATO Clears Plan for Task Forces," New York Times, 6 January 1994; interview with an official in the British Embassy, Washington, DC, 31 March 1994; Michale Putzel, "US Seems Unsure of Its NATO Clout," Boston Globe, 12 January 1994; David White, "UK Calls EU Defense Talks," Financial Times, 24 January 1994, 2; and Kelleher, Future of European Security, 67-73.
121. 70 Gebhard, United States and European Security, 75-76; interview with John Chipmann, director. International Institute of Strategic Studies, London, 14 January 1993; interview with an official in the British Embassy, Washington, DC, 31 March 1994; Steven Greenhouse, "NATO Clears Plan for Task Forces," New York Times, 6 January 1994; David White, "Europe Undergoes Change in Defence Identity," Financial Times, 12 January 1994, 2; Steven Greenhouse, "NATO Clears Plan for Task Forces," New York Times, 6 January 1994; David White, "UK Calls EU Defense Talks," Financial Times, 24 January 1994, 2; and Kelleher, Future of European Security, 67-73.
122. 70 Gebhard, United States and European Security, 75-76; interview with John Chipmann, director. International Institute of Strategic Studies, London, 14 January 1993; interview with an official in the British Embassy, Washington, DC, 31 March 1994; Steven Greenhouse, "NATO Clears Plan for Task Forces," New York Times, 6 January 1994; David White, "Europe Undergoes Change in Defence Identity," Financial Times, 12 January 1994, 2; Michale Putzel, "US Seems Unsure of Its NATO Clout," Boston Globe, 12 January 1994; David White, "Europe Undergoes Change in Defence Identity," Financial Times, 12 January 1994, 2; and Kelleher, Future of European Security, 67-73.
123. 70 Gebhard, United States and European Security, 75-76; interview with John Chipmann, director. International Institute of Strategic Studies, London, 14 January 1993; interview with an official in the British Embassy, Washington, DC, 31 March 1994; Steven Greenhouse, "NATO Clears Plan for Task Forces," New York Times, 6 January 1994; David White, "Europe Undergoes Change in Defence Identity," Financial Times, 12 January 1994, 2; Michale Putzel, "US Seems Unsure of Its NATO Clout," Boston Globe, 12 January 1994; David White, "UK Calls EU Defense Talks," Financial Times, 24 January 1994, 2; Michale Putzel, "US Seems Unsure of Its NATO Clout," Boston Globe, 12 January 1994; David White, "UK Calls EU Defense Talks," Financial Times, 24 January 1994, 2; and Kelleher, Future of European Security, 67-73.
124. 70 Gebhard, United States and European Security, 75-76; interview with John Chipmann, director. International Institute of Strategic Studies, London, 14 January 1993; interview with an official in the British Embassy, Washington, DC, 31 March 1994; Steven Greenhouse, "NATO Clears Plan for Task Forces," New York Times, 6 January 1994; David White, "Europe Undergoes Change in Defence Identity," Financial Times, 12 January 1994, 2; Michale Putzel, "US Seems Unsure of Its NATO Clout," Boston Globe, 12 January 1994; David White, "UK Calls EU Defense Talks," Financial Times, 24 January 1994, 2; and Kelleher, Future of European Security, 67-73.
125. 70 Gebhard, United States and European Security, 75-76; interview with John Chipmann, director. International Institute of Strategic Studies, London, 14 January 1993; interview with an official in the British Embassy, Washington, DC, 31 March 1994; Steven Greenhouse, "NATO Clears Plan for Task Forces," New York Times, 6 January 1994; David White, "Europe Undergoes Change in Defence Identity," Financial Times, 12 January 1994, 2; Michale Putzel, "US Seems Unsure of Its NATO Clout," Boston Globe, 12 January 1994; David White, "UK Calls EU Defense Talks," Financial Times, 24 January 1994, 2; and Kelleher, Future of European Security, 67-73.
126. 71 For example, the French and Germans announced their intention to develop a new military transport and satellite observation system. If procured, both would enhance the WEU's ability to rely less on the United States for airlift and intelligence. See David Buchan, "Kohl and Mitterrand Make Pact Over EU Presidency," Financial Times, 1 June 1994, 1.
127. 72 David Buchan, "Paris to Strengthen Its Role within NATO," Financial Times, 6 January 1994, 2; David Buchan, "France Goes on the Defence Offensive," Financial Times, 24 January 1994, 2.
128. 72 David Buchan, "Paris to Strengthen Its Role within NATO," Financial Times, 6 January 1994, 2; David Buchan, "France Goes on the Defence Offensive," Financial Times, 24 January 1994, 2.
129. 73 Interview with Jan Krzksztof Bielecki, prime minister of Poland from January-December 1991, Warsaw, 8 July 1992.
130. 74 For analyses of the impact that the Yugoslav crisis had on NATO and Western Europe, see Roger Cohen, "Over There: Why the Yanks Are Going Yet Again," New York Times, 26 November 1995; Kelleher, Future of European Security, chap. 5; and Ted Galen Carpenter, Beyond NATO: Staying Out of Europe's Wars (Washington, DC: The Cato Institute, 1994), chap. 5.
131. 74 For analyses of the impact that the Yugoslav crisis had on NATO and Western Europe, see Roger Cohen, "Over There: Why the Yanks Are Going Yet Again," New York Times, 26 November 1995; Lionel Barber, "European Union States Forced to Confront the Limits of Action," Financial Times, 22 November 1995, 2; Pavel Baev et al., The Implications of the Yugoslav Crisis for Western Europe's Foreign Relations, Chaillot Papers #17 (Paris: Institute for Security Studies, Western European Union, October 1994); Lionel Barber, "European Union States Forced to Confront the Limits of Action," Financial Times, 22 November 1995, 2; and Ted Galen Carpenter, Beyond NATO: Staying Out of Europe's Wars (Washington, DC: The Cato Institute, 1994), chap. 5.
132. 74 For analyses of the impact that the Yugoslav crisis had on NATO and Western Europe, see Roger Cohen, "Over There: Why the Yanks Are Going Yet Again," New York Times, 26 November 1995; Lionel Barber, "European Union States Forced to Confront the Limits of Action," Financial Times, 22 November 1995, 2; Pavel Baev et al., The Implications of the Yugoslav Crisis for Western Europe's Foreign Relations, Chaillot Papers #17 (Paris: Institute for Security Studies, Western European Union, October 1994); Kelleher, Future of European Security, chap. 5; and Ted Galen Carpenter, Beyond NATO: Staying Out of Europe's Wars (Washington, DC: The Cato Institute, 1994), chap. 5.
133. 74 For analyses of the impact that the Yugoslav crisis had on NATO and Western Europe, see Roger Cohen, "Over There: Why the Yanks Are Going Yet Again," New York Times, 26 November 1995; Lionel Barber, "European Union States Forced to Confront the Limits of Action," Financial Times, 22 November 1995, 2; Pavel Baev et al., The Implications of the Yugoslav Crisis for Western Europe's Foreign Relations, Chaillot Papers #17 (Paris: Institute for Security Studies, Western European Union, October 1994); Kelleher, Future of European Security, chap. 5; and Ted Galen Carpenter, Beyond NATO: Staying Out of Europe's Wars (Washington, DC: The Cato Institute, 1994), chap. 5.
134. 74 For analyses of the impact that the Yugoslav crisis had on NATO and Western Europe, see Roger Cohen, "Over There: Why the Yanks Are Going Yet Again," New York Times, 26 November 1995; Lionel Barber, "European Union States Forced to Confront the Limits of Action," Financial Times, 22 November 1995, 2; Pavel Baev et al., The Implications of the Yugoslav Crisis for Western Europe's Foreign Relations, Chaillot Papers #17 (Paris: Institute for Security Studies, Western European Union, October 1994); Kelleher, Future of European Security, chap. 5; and Ted Galen Carpenter, Beyond NATO: Staying Out of Europe's Wars (Washington, DC: The Cato Institute, 1994), chap. 5.
135. 75 Interview with an official of the State Department, Washington, DC, 17 March 1993; interview with an official at the British Embassy, Washington, DC, 17 March 1993; interview with a member of British Foreign Minister John Hurd's personal staff, held in Cambridge, MA, 12 December 1995; Alan Riding, "Its Competitors Distracted, France Gets to Be Power," New York Times, 27 June 1993; Lionel Barber, "Concern at Weak EU Foreign Policy," Financial Times, 19 January 1994, 2; Gebhard, United States and European Security, 21-23.
136. 75 Interview with an official of the State Department, Washington, DC, 17 March 1993; interview with an official at the British Embassy, Washington, DC, 17 March 1993; interview with a member of British Foreign Minister John Hurd's personal staff, held in Cambridge, MA, 12 December 1995; Alan Riding, "Its Competitors Distracted, France Gets to Be Power," New York Times, 27 June 1993; Lionel Barber, "Concern at Weak EU Foreign Policy," Financial Times, 19 January 1994, 2; Gebhard, United States and European Security, 21-23.
137. 75 Interview with an official of the State Department, Washington, DC, 17 March 1993; interview with an official at the British Embassy, Washington, DC, 17 March 1993; interview with a member of British Foreign Minister John Hurd's personal staff, held in Cambridge, MA, 12 December 1995; Alan Riding, "Its Competitors Distracted, France Gets to Be Power," New York Times, 27 June 1993; Lionel Barber, "Concern at Weak EU Foreign Policy," Financial Times, 19 January 1994, 2; Gebhard, United States and European Security, 21-23.
138. 75 Interview with an official of the State Department, Washington, DC, 17 March 1993; interview with an official at the British Embassy, Washington, DC, 17 March 1993; interview with a member of British Foreign Minister John Hurd's personal staff, held in Cambridge, MA, 12 December 1995; Alan Riding, "Its Competitors Distracted, France Gets to Be Power," New York Times, 27 June 1993; Lionel Barber, "Concern at Weak EU Foreign Policy," Financial Times, 19 January 1994, 2; Gebhard, United States and European Security, 21-23.
139. 76 See Roger Cohen, "France to Rejoin Military Command of NATO Alliance, New York Times, 6 December 1995; and Bruce Clark, "France Aims to Apply Oil to NATO's Squeaky Wheels," Financial Times, 6 December 1995, 2.
140. 76 See Roger Cohen, "France to Rejoin Military Command of NATO Alliance, New York Times, 6 December 1995; and Bruce Clark, "France Aims to Apply Oil to NATO's Squeaky Wheels," Financial Times, 6 December 1995, 2.
141. 77 Sources for the British position are interview with a member of British Foreign Minister John Hurd's personal staff, 12 December 1995; David White, "Britain Isolated over EU Defense Merger," Financial Times, 15 November 1995, 2; and Ronald Tiersky, The Minerand Legacy and the Future of French Security, The McNair Paper 43 (Washington, DC: National Defense University, August 1995), 44-48.
142. 77 Sources for the British position are interview with a member of British Foreign Minister John Hurd's personal staff, 12 December 1995; David White, "Britain Isolated over EU Defense Merger," Financial Times, 15 November 1995, 2; and Ronald Tiersky, The Minerand Legacy and the Future of French Security, The McNair Paper 43 (Washington, DC: National Defense University, August 1995), 44-48.
143. 77 Sources for the British position are interview with a member of British Foreign Minister John Hurd's personal staff, 12 December 1995; David White, "Britain Isolated over EU Defense Merger," Financial Times, 15 November 1995, 2; and Ronald Tiersky, The Minerand Legacy and the Future of French Security, The McNair Paper 43 (Washington, DC: National Defense University, August 1995), 44-48.
144. 78 Quoted in Ian Davidson, £Kohl Calls the Tune,£ Financial Times, 24 May 1995, 12; The source is not identified. See also Michael Lindemann, "Germans Outline Plans to Draw EU Nations Closer on Defence," Financial Times, 8 June 1995, 2.
145. 78 Quoted in Ian Davidson, £Kohl Calls the Tune,£ Financial Times, 24 May 1995, 12; The source is not identified. See also Michael Lindemann, "Germans Outline Plans to Draw EU Nations Closer on Defence," Financial Times, 8 June 1995, 2.
146. 79 See, for example, Carpenter, Beyond NATO, chap. 7.
147. 80 I develop this argument more fully in my forthcoming Selective Engagement, chap. 6.
148. 81 Interview with a Western European ambassador to NATO, Brussels, 10 January 1992.
149. 82 The fire insurance analogy is not quite exact, because American homeowners who have mortgages have no choice but to carry fire insurance, because their lenders require it.
150. 83 The phrase "night watchman" is in John J. Mearsheimer, "Back to the Future: Instability in Europe After the Cold War," International Security 15 (Summer 1990): 47.
151. 84 The argument developed here parallels the one made by Van Evera, "Why Europe Matters," 8-12.