The notion of ‘friendship’ in foreign policy is an elusive one. It is often stereotypical, yet publics and policy-makers often think in terms of ‘friendly’ and ‘less friendly’ countries. The notion of ‘friendship’ also often hides pretty unfriendly policies. It is almost conventional wisdom that countries like Germany, France, Spain or Austria are ‘friendly’ to Russia, and countries like Poland or Lithuania are not. Looking at the southern neighbourhood, France, Spain and Italy are key advocates and friends of countries like Morocco, Tunisia etc. Yet, such ‘friendships’ consist of lots of underwater currents. Many ‘friendships’ in form are pretty unfriendly in substance, and they vary hugely from one policy sector to another.
Sometimes, countries are ‘friendly’ because they don’t care that much. They have little to share in terms of geography, complicated history or trade flows – and they have little to argue about. This is the case of ‘friendships’ like the Spanish-Russian one. But most ‘friendships’ emerge because of inter-dependence. German-Russian trade, and the two nations’ complicated history, are at the basis of the German-Russian ‘friendship’. The need to manage (read reduce) migratory flows from the South to the EU is one of the pillars of the Franco-Italo-Spanish ‘friendship’ with Morocco-Tunisia-Libya. In many ways, friends are those who care. But often they care most in ways that are rather unfriendly.
Scratching below the surface, and looking at various policy areas, ‘friendships’ and actual policies often diverge. Take the issue of visa-free travel to the EU for Russian citizens. This is a key, perhaps the key, Russian priority in relations with the EU. On this specific issue though, traditional ‘friendships’ can quickly fall apart. Whereas countries like Poland and Lithuania would accept a visa-free regime with Russia relatively easily, Germany and France are much more reluctant because their domestic debates are much more anti-immigration. They might be Russia’s friends on energy deals, but not on visa-free travel. Similarly, most of the new member states might not be Russia’s friends on issues like energy or the conflicts in Georgia, but they are quite friendly to the idea of visa-free travel with Russia (and other eastern neighbours).
Looking to the south of the EU reveals a relatively similar picture. France, Spain and Italy might be the ‘best friends’ of the southern neighbourhood, but also they are the most unfriendly towards the southern member states on two key issues: immigration and trade, particularly in agricultural goods. To achieve sustainable economic growth and job creation, countries like Morocco and Tunisia need first and foremost trade, not aid. Yet, what France and Spain want to offer is mainly aid, rather than trade. The southern EU member states might have very good political relations with North Africa, and are pushing for more EU financial aid to the region (most of the cash comes from the Germany and northern EU member states, anyway). But they are most opposed to substantial trade liberalisation in the goods that matter most such as olives or tomatoes, since this would compete with what they produce. Normally, Sweden or the Netherlands, which are not seen as the advocates of North Africa in the EU, are much less protectionist on issues like trade and in essence ‘friendlier’ towards Morocco or Tunisia’s trade interests.
Needless to say there is also a link between the EU’s trade protectionism and immigration pressures. EU’s protectionism in agriculture diminishes the potential for economic development (and job creation) in the southern neighbourhood and is at least partly responsible for the huge prosperity gap between the southern and northern shores of the Mediterranean. And what do people without jobs in North Africa do? Of course they try to immigrate.
Analysing or planning foreign policies in terms of ‘friendly’ or ‘unfriendly’ countries is a pretty unhelpful way to go about it. The reality is that sometimes indifferent non-friends, or even ‘unfriendly’ countries can be as reliable as ‘friends’ on specific policy issues, and vice-versa.
21st April 2011 at 08:04am
As Palmerstone put it, “Nations have no permanent friends or allies, they only have permanent interests”
Your message will be submitted to a moderator before appearing online. Name and email address are required, all other fields are optional. Your email will not be displayed.
Hollande and Merkel should launch an ambitious EU reform programme
Why the emerging special relationship matters for Europe
How will Taiwan’s relationship with China evolve?
Europe should take a more assertive approach to political reform in Jordan
China is facing a choice between regress and reform
Europe can help Burma reform, but its help must be gradual
An end to the bloodshed may necessitate talks with the regime
Putin's return: why Europe should prepare for a weaker Putin
The thinking behind Germany's unpopular approach to the crisis
How well did European foreign policy perform over the last year?

1 comments