A few months ago, I was on the Métro with an Estonian diplomat chatting about the lack of inspiration in Europe, which used to be a continent marked by utopian visions, when a Parisienne who had been quietly listening to our conversation suddenly announced: "Europe, a utopia? Get real! It's just a club of business tycoons who get rich on the backs of ordinary people".
Snippets of conversation like this, or a quick look in any major newspaper, are enough to show that Europe has a problem, and it is mainly a problem of self-perception. Every day, the media reports on the ongoing psychodrama of a Europe that is struggling to emerge from adolescence. Examined from a long-term perspective, the political entity of Europe is barely more than a child. Sixty years of history does not seem like much when you consider that Louis XIV ruled for more than seven decades. Now we have an adolescent Europe shocked by the sudden realisation of the immense physical change that has transformed it from a small six-state community into an entity with a global reach and global responsibilities. As a result, it has entered into a period of adolescent crisis marked by the divergence between the aspirations of its citizens and the European project.
Europe, which is uncomfortable with its new dimensions, has trouble liking itself. It did not really take a decision to grow, but was forced to change by history and the fall of the Berlin Wall. Today, it is convinced that it is too big and awkward. On the one hand, it is tempted to cancel this rapid enlargement. Certain French intellectuals such as Max Gallo advocate the idea of a "Franco-German putsch" and an alliance with Russia, which would sideline small member states. On the other, Europe has become embroiled in interminable quarrels on the number of diplomats to be included in its new External Action Service, instead of focusing on the missions the new service is expected to accomplish. Any debate about action to be taken quickly degenerates into a relentless argument over resources. The union seems to have lost confidence both in itself and any ambitions it may have for the future: to wit, the ongoing cacophony over Europe 2020.
It is a pity because Europe is virtually alone in perceiving itself as ugly. Elsewhere in the world, numerous intellectuals speak of their admiration for the European model and the role this continent should play in world governance. Here in Europe, our inward-looking lethargy has blocked all progress. China, India, the US and Africa have confidence in their future, while Europe appears to be paralysed by fear. It is almost as if it regrets its diminutive former self and the cosseted existence it enjoyed under the kindly protection of Uncle Sam while it played in the shadow of the Berlin Wall.
The twin motors of European construction – solidarity and the quest for greater efficiency – have ground to a halt under the strain of economic crisis. On the one hand, we have European leaders meeting in Brussels to discuss plans to help member states beset by difficulties. On the other, they insist that any such assistance be regulated by complicated mechanisms to preserve the independence of every organ in the European body politic. And in so doing they overlook the fact that when one organ is in danger the entire body is under threat.
While the head (the European council) wonders if it should intervene, the heart (the commission) seems to have ceased beating, and the flow of new ideas which is the lifeblood of Europe has come to a halt. In the midst of crisis, the single entity, the nous that was a marvel of political innovation, is on the verge of being replaced by an unhappy collection of 27 small-minded individuals.
Europe's troubled self-perception is reflected in its awkward relationship to others. And yet, there is no reason why it should be ashamed of itself, and in particular it should be more incisive in its response to those who knock on its door. Instead of timidly asking: "Who is it?", it should reply with an assertive: "What do you want?" The fact is that in its obsession with procedures and ongoing monetary problems, the current generation of European leaders has completely forgotten that it is perfectly possible to build a relationship with counterparts who are not exactly like us. But has anyone asked the Turks, the Serbs or the Icelanders what their dream of a European political entity might entail? What will be their priorities once they have been admitted to the club? How do they view Europe's role in 50 years' time?
What today's Europeans need is a major project, you might even say, a utopia. There are many goals we could set ourselves: we could bring peace to international relations like we brought peace to Europeans; we could be a leading force in sustainable development and set about the construction of a caring knowledge economy of the future. But if we are to make a realistic effort to achieve any of these objectives, we will first have to come to terms with growing up.
Philippe Perchoc teaches at the Sorbonne Nouvelle's Institute of European Studies, and is the chairman of the Nouvelle Europe thinktank.Translated from French by Mark McGovern. For this collaborative series Comment is free and Presseurop have asked several writers to share their thoughts on Europe.