Article

2005-01-18 Europe

CIA gives grim warning on European prospects

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by tipper 2005-01-18 10:24|| || Front Page|| [5 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 But they have the Superjumbo Airbus now. Won't that do the trick?

Posted by nada 2005-01-18 10:31:48 AM|| 2005-01-18 10:31:48 AM|| Front Page Top

#2 Interesting. Playing seer is a risky gig, but some of this rings true - even given the many wiggles that will likely occur en route. I believe China will have more grief than implied - hell, I hope we supply it. Interesting regards India and Brazil.

The Europeans have several hardcore moments of truth approaching, and speechifying, grandstanding anti-Americanism, and hair dye won't help. Nor will dragging all down to the lowest common denominator. Better re-invigorate capitalism, and do it fast, or sink under the weight of those PC policies.

Posted by .com 2005-01-18 10:36:12 AM|| 2005-01-18 10:36:12 AM|| Front Page Top

#3 20 years ago, the CIA said that the Soviet Economy was growing at a good clip.

Posted by jackal 2005-01-18 11:51:41 AM|| [http://home.earthlink.net/~sleepyjackal/index.html] 2005-01-18 11:51:41 AM|| Front Page Top

#4 Do we have to wait 15 years?

Posted by gromgorru 2005-01-18 1:20:08 PM|| 2005-01-18 1:20:08 PM|| Front Page Top

#5 C'mon, the CIA has been wrong so much lately, I'd be more inclined to think that the EU is actually viable.

Posted by Desert Blondie 2005-01-18 1:23:37 PM|| 2005-01-18 1:23:37 PM|| Front Page Top

#6 I'm in Germany and I'm surprised that they give them THAT long. Must be hedging their bets.
The unions here make the stateside unions like kindergarten kids. In Germany, you'll have to pry their benefits from their cold dead fingers. In all fairness, it seems like the German economy is what has kept the EU sputtering along this long.

Posted by 98zulu 2005-01-18 2:09:50 PM|| 2005-01-18 2:09:50 PM|| Front Page Top

#7 the report predicts that Europeâs Muslim population is set to increase from around 13% today to between 22% and 37% of the population by 2025

HELP! Watch out!

Posted by John Q. Citizen 2005-01-18 2:23:35 PM|| 2005-01-18 2:23:35 PM|| Front Page Top

#8 A CIA prediction has about as much validity as Henry Blodgett's investment picks.

The EU's science and technology base is excellent, and there has been so much transatlantic investment in both directions that, at least at the level of large corporate activity (eg ~50% of GDP), we and they are joined at the hip. And of course we will continue to cooperate closely on intel-sharing and cross-border judicial-police coordination.

The really interesting question is the EU's relationships with the failing state that is Russia and the only superpower rival on the horizon, China. To the extent EU energy sources, esp natural gas, derive increasingly from Russia and EU exports are devoted increasingly to China, it would seem that the EU has significantly less leverage over those nations than we do. Not much of a superpower if you can't exercise leverage over China and Russia...

Posted by lex 2005-01-18 2:58:03 PM|| 2005-01-18 2:58:03 PM|| Front Page Top

#9 More room for Richard Rieds and company. Can't wait for these flying buses to get sent back to base due to loading known terrorists.

Even your screaming Euros.

Posted by Captain America 2005-01-18 3:06:00 PM|| 2005-01-18 3:06:00 PM|| Front Page Top

#10 The $64 question is: "And then what happens?" Now, accepting the notion that the EU is functionally dead as a continental government, does NOT mean that it will go away. As evidenced by the Holy Roman Empire (962-1806), which after its founder, Charlamagne, died, became a paper exercise but remained so for almost a thousand years. Powerless, meaningless, yet surviving endless internal clashes, the invasions of the Ottomans and even the Protestant Reformation. And yet, modernism has swept away many of the regional and local differences in the continent, so it is doubtful Europe will return to its ultra-fragmentary 19th century state. Most likely, it will devolve into large, competing blocs with independant states playing the middle--suggestions of which we've already seen with the "Frankenreich" vs. the Britain-Italy-and-a-few-others-bloc. The divisions will be based on subtle but important differences, such as those nations under Roman Law vs those under Common Law, with tiny Brussels pretending to still be of consequence, though living on the handouts of whoever throws a few coppers their way to get a de jure ruling in their favor.

Posted by Anonymoose 2005-01-18 5:13:18 PM|| 2005-01-18 5:13:18 PM|| Front Page Top

#11 Desert Blondie nailed it for me. But...good thought provoking posts, all.

Posted by 2b 2005-01-18 5:19:21 PM|| 2005-01-18 5:19:21 PM|| Front Page Top

#12 My sentiments are shared. EU = one seriously dysfunctional family

Posted by Captain America 2005-01-18 5:24:38 PM|| 2005-01-18 5:24:38 PM|| Front Page Top

#13 The divisions will be based on subtle but important differences, such as those nations under Roman Law vs those under Common Law,

I don't think there's 1 person in 10 that even knows the differences between the two systems, let alone considers them significant.

No other division either is either significant enough or will interfere with EU's current map too much. Orthodox vs Western Christian would only remove Greece and Cyprus from the EU -- a rich-North vs continent, would only remove UK, Ireland and Denmark. A loss to be sure, but not crippling by far, and would probably increase the integration in the rest of the continent.

The only future division I'm concerned about, is a possible Eurasian vs Euro-atlanticist division, to divide Europe again between the poles of Kremlin and Washington. But it seems to me it'd need a significantly stronger Russia than now for it to become a huge issue, and Ukraine's Orange Revolution put a significant blow to that.

Posted by Aris Katsaris 2005-01-18 6:08:49 PM|| [http://www.livejournal.com/~katsaris/] 2005-01-18 6:08:49 PM|| Front Page Top

#14 But they have the Superjumbo Airbus now. Won't that do the trick?

Not when its development was subsidized to the tune of $6.5B.

Posted by Bomb-a-rama 2005-01-18 6:57:23 PM|| 2005-01-18 6:57:23 PM|| Front Page Top

#15 The Airbus will be a nice large tempting terrorist target with half a k population on it. I hope that they made more robust vertical stabilizers and rudders on it than they did with their sister airbus ship off of NYC.

Posted by Alaska Paul 2005-01-18 10:40:23 PM|| 2005-01-18 10:40:23 PM|| Front Page Top

16:52 poliglot
16:36 pem
16:16 sibilla
16:25 bill
16:24 bill
16:15 sibilla ecumenica
12:23 trailing wife
12:23 trailing wife
11:00 2b
11:00 2b
01:42 Thraique Creater6527
01:42 Thraique Creater6527
01:41 Shomosh Gloluper5394
01:41 Shomosh Gloluper5394
01:39 Slolump Ebbart9448
01:39 Slolump Ebbart9448
01:37 Gloluth Snugum8942
01:37 Gloluth Snugum8942
01:34 Jeth Flomoter3969
01:34 Jeth Flomoter3969
00:00 3dc
23:54 AJackson
23:46 Barbara Skolaut
23:46 3dc