Adrian Hamilton: Never has Europe been more needed

Europe's hour has come round at last. Or least it should have. If ever there was a time when a cohesive European response was needed, from climate change to recession, this is it. As for the leadership, it should be there in abundance with Angela Merkel of Germany, Nicolas Sarkozy of France and Gordon Brown – heavyweights all, with the skills and authority to lead Europe into a different chapter.

Of course the emphasis on anything to do with Europe is on the should rather than the will. Speak of the EU in this country and you will be met at best with disinterest and at worst with derision. And it is hard to argue with the critics who point to the failings of a grouping that has everything working for it, except leadership and direction. To the irritation of the Americans, the bewilderment of our trading partners and the frustration of the Union's would-be applicants, Europe never loses the chance to fail a challenge.

Take this week as example. There the EU is at the heart of the discussions in Poland on a successor to the Kyoto climate change treaty. Its leaders are meanwhile meeting in Brussels to discuss a co-ordinated response to the recession which is swamping them all. In Kosovo, a European security force has taken over from the UN; off the Horn of Africa, a European naval force has succeeded a Nato one. Even on the thorny question of Ireland's rejection of the Lisbon Treaty, there are indications of hope in Dublin that the matter could be put to a referendum again.

Yet only an extreme Europhile or a paid official in Brussels could view these issues as the subjects of opportunity rather than continued dissension. Having led the pack on climate change with the development of carbon trading and tight objectives, Europe is now fast faltering under the demands for industry exceptions to every rule championed by their respective governments – the car industry in Germany, aviation in Britain, petrochemicals in Italy.

When you look at the recession, Germany remains a whole world away from Britain and France in its reluctance to commit itself to grand reflationary schemes. As for the idea that the major three countries – Britain, France and Germany – are ready to take the reins of a resurgent Europe, the thought would seem merely laughable when you see how Gordon Brown and Nicolas Sarkozy seem intent on competing with each other at any cost. Only Angela Merkel acts with any restraint, or sense of wider community, and she is facing re-election next year in a contest that could force her into parochial concern.

So much for the negatives. There is no shortage of those. But politics is not just about what is, it is also about what should be and what could be. Take two steps back and you can see that all the trends and the demands of this time favour a regional European response rather than a nationalist one. Five years ago, even a year ago, that was not the case. The governments of France and Germany were weaker, the Britain of Blair was looking only west towards Washington, Europe was divided between "old" and "new" on US demands for a new world order and its war on terror.

Not all of this has changed, of course. Merkel, Sarkozy and Brown all ahve problems at home - although their popularity has been bosted by recession. There remain the divisions with Washington over Afghanistan, despite the election of a new president, as there is over trade and emissions.

What has changed is the environment. Look at virtually all the major issues now facing Europe, and troubling its populace, and there seems no other way to go than a regional response. For individual countries to expand their economies and increase their deficits in isolation from each other, invites disaster. So too with climate change. Individual governments may vie to proclaim their unique virtue in pursuing emission targets, but the only actions that make sense have to be undertaken on a continent-wide scale.

Whether this drive to co-ordination leads to Britain applying for membership of the euro is an open question. The value of a distinct currency and a separated monetary policy have undoubtedly diminished with the recession and the fall in sterling. But, given that Britain is going out on a limb in the extent of its deficit and borrowing, it is hard to see how it could qualify for membership in the near future. But the penalties of isolation are plain for all to see, for Britain as much as the new members. Having being widely written off only a year ago, the expansion of the euro is back in fashion.

And overarching all these trends to consolidation are the changing politics of today's world. The election of Barack Obama does not mean a revolution in US foreign policy. Anyone who thought that should have been quickly disabused of that idea by the appointment of Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State. But it does mean a radical change in tone and direction from the Bush era. Although Afghanistan may remain a contentious subject with America's European allies in Nato, the general thrust of Obama's policy is bound to be to move on from the "old-Europe-new-Europe" divisiveness of Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld in favour of a more collegiate approach.

If the US of Obama will represent any general theme in foreign policy, it will be tilted towards recognising a world of regions rather than a world of unique US dominance and bilateral relations. Gordon Brown may seek to renew the special relationship, particularly over Afghanistan, and Nicolas Sarkozy may wish to supplant it, but it is doubtful that this is what Obama wants. What he will seek is a relationship with Europe as whole on the key themes of trade, finance and the environment.

We're not there yet. I still doubt that Gordon Brown can lift his vision from that of domestic self-survival to one of European leadership any more than I trust that Sarkozy can outgrow the role of hyperactive child to become a statesman. But I do believe in Angela Merkel's clear-headedness and her ability to work with others. But above all I believe that the European public is changing its view. It needs the security of size and it wants the leadership of crisis. And some of that may be beginning to wash up on our shores.

a.hamilton@independent.co.uk

More from Adrian Hamilton