The purpose of Europe is peace. What is the purpose of the USA, China, Russia, and India?

The public debate on a united Europe is increasingly drifting into directions I no longer understand.

I am amazed at what we in Europe can seriously talk about, argue over, and let divide us. And I guarantee you, when someone in the future looks back at what we are doing today, they will rightfully call us fools.

Please, let’s restart the public debate about Europe. From the ground up.

We understand the world first and foremost in practical terms. What affects us, we first grasp as something good, suitable for something — or, on the other hand, for example, as an obstacle.

So let’s remind ourselves: why did we start uniting in Europe? What is the purpose of Europe, and is it fulfilling that purpose?

The purpose of Europe is peace.

The Father of Europe, Robert Schuman, in the opening of his declaration that set European unification in motion, wrote:

“World peace cannot be safeguarded without the making of creative efforts proportionate to the dangers which threaten it.”

The entire declaration makes it explicitly clear that the purpose of European unification is peace. That the purpose of Europe is peace. And this peace is to be achieved by creating a system that makes armed conflict between its parts senseless:

“The solidarity in production thus established will make it plain that any war between France and Germany becomes not merely unthinkable, but materially impossible.”

Has it worked? Is the European Union fit and good for what it was created to achieve?

The answer is that armed conflict between EU member states is nonsensical and has never happened.

In this sense, Europe fulfills its purpose.

That’s why we celebrate Europe Day. That’s why I have a blue flag with yellow stars at home. I am proud of what we have achieved.

Are the debates that today appear in political struggles and divide Europe more important than this?

If not, why do we let ourselves be divided by them? Are we really so weak that we let ourselves be torn apart by some regulation or directive over absolute nonsense? If something bothers us, let’s argue, change it, win elections, and fix what truly needs fixing. But I cannot understand how anyone could even think of destroying the foundation on which Europe stands. That I will never understand.

World peace

When I return to the opening thoughts of the Father of Europe’s declaration, they went even further — toward world peace:

“World peace cannot be safeguarded without the making of creative efforts proportionate to the dangers which threaten it.”

And even though the official European anthem is purely instrumental — so that no single language is favored — its most widely sung version in Latin speaks clearly about world peace. The first stanza goes:

Est Europa nunc unita,
et unita maneat.
Una in diversitate,
pacem mundi augeat.

Which means:

Europe is united now,
and may it remain united.
United in diversity,
may it contribute to world peace.

Europe — at its very beginning and still today — was meant not just as a peace project within its own borders, but as a contribution to peace in the world. And in my view, that’s something we should remind ourselves of more often — especially today, when we are still very far from that, and world peace seems to be getting further away.

What seems obvious to me is that we cannot achieve it without broader cooperation, at the very least with other world powers. That is the real problem. That is what we should be discussing — that’s where we should focus our energy.

I would gladly listen to a debate about what strategies could bring at least the EU, USA, Russia, China, and India to the same table, and how to achieve at least a basic consensus that we will not shoot at each other as human beings.

I do not see such a debate. Maybe I’m not in the right intellectual circles, but in the public space, I don’t see it.

My view is that without some attempt at mutual understanding, we will get nowhere.

The question is: what were these powers founded on, what is their purpose? How are they fulfilling their existence today? Are they succeeding in living up to their purpose?

The first step is probably to understand the ideas on which these entities were built.

The purpose of the United States is freedom.

They were founded as the leader of the free world. The Declaration of Independence (1776) explicitly states:

“All men are created equal, endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

This must be seen in the context of breaking free from the British Empire and the European conservatism of the time.

The fact that they were founded as a leader points to a certain sense of exceptionalism.

The purpose of China is restoration.

The purpose of today’s China is restoration. It seeks to restore China’s historical greatness and pride after the “century of humiliation” (1839–1949), during which it suffered from colonial interventions, military defeats, loss of territories (Hong Kong, Macao), and internal chaos.

Xi Jinping uses the term the “Chinese Dream” = “the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation.”

The purpose of Russia is greatness.

The purpose of Russia, both historically and today, is greatness, understood in a broader sense. After the fall of Byzantium, Muscovite Russia began calling itself the Third Rome — heir to the true faith and moral mission. Around 1510–1520, the Moscow monk Philotheus wrote to Grand Prince Vasili III, stating:

“Two Romes have fallen, the third stands, and there will be no fourth.”

The word “Rome” clearly, among other things, symbolizes greatness, and the claim that there will be no fourth emphasizes uniqueness, an exclusive status.

Today, at first glance similar to China, a major role is played by the restoration of this sense of greatness. But both cases have their specific contexts.

The purpose of India is unity.

Modern India was founded as a democratic republic with the aim of holding together its enormous diversity of languages, religions, castes, and cultures.

You can already find unity stated in the preamble of its constitution.

Of course, this is a major simplification.

But:

The purpose of the USA, China, Russia, and India, as described here, is, of course, a major simplification. In the public debates of each of these countries, we would find many additional currents and ideas. But no one can deny that what I’ve outlined here plays a major role.

And we can ask: how can these ideas even be reconciled? How can we even begin to address this problem? And beyond that — do we even perceive today’s chaotic and divided world as a problem? Does anyone want to solve it?

From where I stand, I do not see an effort to even clearly name this problem, let alone an effort to solve it.

If you have any thoughts, questions, or feedback, feel free to drop me a message at mail@richardgolian.com.