Thus he notes: "Differences between America and Europe are serious and substantive. But the reason the results of recent U.S.-European diplomatic encounters have proved so disappointing -- despite serious efforts from both sides -- is that the historical evolutions underway on the two sides of the Atlantic are different."

 He goes on to argue that "The most important event in Europe is the progressive erosion of the nation-state," which is leading them to reject, as a matter of principle, the right of any nation to exercise national sovereignty, particularly when resorting to the use of military force.

 Rather, as they spend most of their time on issues of European unification, "these non-state attitudes toward international relations are becoming deeply embedded in European public opinion." Dr. Kissinger doubts whether these building attitudes "can ever be again fully reconciled with the experience of a country driven by state concepts or with the notion of alliance as traditionally conceived." Meanwhile, "by contrast, America remains (with such other countries as Russia, China, Japan and India) a traditional nation-state, insistent on sovereign freedom of action."

 If Dr. Kissinger's insights are right, the constant problems we are having with Europe (with the exception of Britain, which still sees itself as largely sovereign) over everything from Iraq to the Kyoto Treaty to the U.N. to the International Criminal Court will not go away in January 2005 under a notional President Kerry. Kerry will not be able to sweet talk or outsmart or charm the Europeans into compliance with American national interest. He will not be able to merely remind them of our half-century old alliance as a motivation to work with us.

 The only coin of the realm -- so to speak -- which the continental Europeans will accept will be American concession of some of our sovereign rights to the international order that the French-led Europeans are trying to bring to life. Assuming Senator Kerry is as smart, informed and nuanced of mind as he claims to be, he well understands this deeper reality.

 He should level with the electorate and discuss just how much of our sovereignty and national interest he is prepared to barter away in the interest of regaining European friendship and cooperation. It has become a matter of principle with the Europeans that they will not diplomatically barter with us in the traditional sovereign manner. What they want is our acquiescence in the new international, de-sovereigned order they are trying to bring into being. Where does Senator Kerry stand on this central international challenge?