The Crisis In The West

Washington must also confront its unfortunate past. Even most Republicans today acknowledge that the Bush administration has made big mistakes. Saying sorry isn't enough, but it's a good way for politicians to start a new chapter—and not too difficult if the mistakes you apologize for aren't your own.

The next U.S. president should also give up talk of the "War on Terror" in favor of "the long struggle." Words matter, and the "War on Terror" has become a discredited slogan—especially, though not only, in Europe—compromised beyond repair by the debacle of Iraq. Shifting from talk of war to struggle would underline the point often made by the U.S. armed services: that to defeat terrorists, insurgencies and Islamist radicals will require a policy mix that is only about 20 percent military. The other 80 percent must be political, social, cultural and economic.

On substance, the new administration must also be prepared to tackle global challenges beyond terrorism, Iraq and Afghanistan. Washington and the U.S. media often seem to suffer from attention-deficit disorder, as though they're capable of focusing on only one or two foreign stories at a time. Today's world is a whole lot more complex than that, making multi-tasking a necessity. Europeans would respond well to an administration that gave climate change, development, China and Russia prominence alongside current U.S. obsessions. Encouragingly, recent polls suggest that when you detach these issues from specific questions about Washington's policy on them, Europeans and Americans see them more similarly than you might expect. Remarkably, Europeans are now more supportive of long-term democracy promotion than Americans are, and there's increasingly common ground to be found on terrorism and Islamist extremism, not least due to the spate of recent attacks in Europe.

To capitalize on these shared sentiments, it is vital that Washington start consulting Europe before acting and try to share leadership. Even most Democrats still seem to think that the United States should first decide what it wants to do and then announce the blessings of its new approach to a grateful world. That must change. Well before the presidential election, the foreign-policy teams of the leading candidates should begin discreet but widespread consultations with key allies, and help work out new policies that could be announced as joint proposals.

The next president should also embrace the European Union. NATO is still important. So are individual European countries. But they're no longer the only important European actors. Ties to Brussels will never substitute for relations with London, Paris or Berlin, but the United States must start taking the EU seriously as a long-term partner on issues ranging from trade and climate change to the modernization and reform of the Middle East. Dealing with Europe always involves a conference call including key national capitals as well as Brussels. But working with the Union can also simplify transatlantic ties, since its mechanisms for foreign-policy coordination (due to be streamlined in the EU's new treaty) can bring along 20 or more other EU countries Washington may not have the time or inclination to woo directly.

In sum, the next president should aim to relaunch the overall strategic partnership with Europe—but at the end of his or her term, not the beginning. The transatlantic relationship needs to be fundamentally redesigned for the 21st century. This will mean going back to basics, asking, what are the real global challenges of our time? What are European and American interests? Where do they coincide and where do they diverge? In spite of everything, a majority of Europeans still favor such a partnership. But too often attempts have been made to relaunch the relationship on grandiose rhetoric alone, with little action. This time, the two sides should do something together first, then celebrate it afterward.