JIM BENNETT ASKS: Who’s laughing now? He also suggests that Bush’s crew needs to be looking at relations with Europe as it tries to craft a “legacy:”

Bush and his team, once they are able to take a long view, should meditate on the fact that America’s relations with almost any given European nation are more amicable, cooperative, and productive on a bilateral basis than they are with Europe collectively, that is, with the European Union. A real legacy must treat a dogmatic devotion to the EU as one more fixed idea, such as past notions about litigation, taxation, or international organizations, that must be re-examined, and if needed, reversed.

If Europe is really to become the rival hegemon and power bloc its enthusiasts predict, it makes sense for America to blunt this rivalry by making a generous alternative offer to compatible nations such as Britain and Ireland. If, on the other hand, Europe is about to sink into a demographic, structural, and fiscal crisis, as analysis suggests, then it likewise makes sense for America to buffer itself from this catastrophe by rescuing the nations, again Britain and Ireland, that hold the lion’s share of American financial interests.

These European issues are likely to become most aggravated in the 2005-2009 time frame. Coincidentally, this is likely to be exactly the period in which the Bush team will be addressing its legacy issues.

Indeed. I think that we should also consider trying to draw Turkey into the NAFTA orbit as an alternative to Turkish EU membership.