ABSTRACT
The crisis in Iraq undoubtedly signalled one of the lowest points in transatlantic relations. This is particularly evident when looking at public opinion polls that, besides showing European disapproval towards the current American administration, highlight a dramatic decrease in European support towards American leadership in international affairs. 1 Although the negative trend cannot be said to be typical of only the European region, 2 the rhetoric embedded in the usage of terms such as ‘old Europe’ to refer to European countries not willing to align with American positions, or ‘imperialist’ and ‘unilateralist’ to refer to America was not a great help in transatlantic political communication 3 as it heightened the impact of negative expectations on perceptions 4 and it increased the risk of misperceptions. 5 Even before the Iraq war, though, the high number of transatlantic disputes in all fields of the relationship that occurred since the end of the Cold War had led some scholars and analysts to issue warnings about a widening of the gap between Americans and Europeans. The transatlantic relationship has been often characterized in terms of a drifting apart of the two partners, and the estrangement process has been often attributed to the end of the common threat provided by the Soviet Union. It has been said that what is lacking is the glue that kept allies together during the Cold War, to use an expression that was fashionable in the 1990s and has become a hallmark of the political rhetoric on transatlantic relations after the crisis over Iraq during 2003–2004. The absence of a common threat has highlighted such a radical estrangement that the hypothesis has been advanced that Americans come from Mars while Europeans are from Venus. 6 In Paradise and Power, Kagan starts by saying that it is time to stop pretending that Europeans and Americans still see the world in the same way because they differ on the essential question of power: how effective, moral, and desirable it is. Kagan affirms that Europe is turning its back on power as it has entered into a post-historical world of peace and relative wealth: a Kantian world. However, the US still exerts power in an anarchic world in which laws and international rules are not dependable and security still depends on the use of force: a Hobbesian world. According to this analysis, divergences are not the result of a temporary situation, but they have to be considered as a structural phenomenon. Other scholars have pointed to responsibilities of the current political leaders, but even in that case the main question has been whether the transatlantic relationship could survive.
