My initial response (or sarcastic LMAO) was in regards to the notion of Europe ever "uniting", even economically for the greater good. As the last three paragraphs of Monbiot's article clearly states, that Great Britain isn't a part of Europe yet.

Here's one paragraph that I find extemely entertaining...

The global justice movement, of which I consider myself a member, has, by and large, opposed accession to the euro, arguing that it accelerates the concentration of economic and political power, reduces people's ability to influence monetary policy and threatens employment in the poorest nations and regions. Much of the movement will have drawn comfort from the new opinion polls suggesting that almost 70% of British voters now oppose the single currency, and from the hints dropped by the Treasury last week that British accession may be delayed until 2010.

From a historical perspective, the only time that Europe has been "united" is the brief periods after conquest (ie Charlemagne, Napoleon, Hitler, etc) Perhaps he is defining a unified Europe as the former Roman Empire plus the former Holy Roman Empire plus Scandivia? For a cartel to work (must I?) there must be a great degree of trust between the cartel members (I'm laughing as I type this)... ah, nevermind... I think you see my point. I can't help it, I just find it humorous.

That said, what other countries can "do" about the American "problem" is to stop themselves from being bought out (lock, stock and barrel) by American landlords (major corporations). American empirialism is economic, not military. The Europeans (British not included) are only now waking up to this. It is interesting that the loudest opponents of American empirialism are countries such as Great Britain, France, Russia, etc. Former empiricist who no longer are in control. IMHO, at least part of this "anger" can be attributed to sour grapes. YMMV.

We (the US) need to find a way to keep our "capitalist pigs" in line. We need to oversee who "we" do business with, even if it means pain and suffering for America. Of course, if we elect politicians who cause us pain, we will reward them by electing others who won't. If we actually refused protection for pigs doing bness in Saudi Arabia for example, a place where women are still treated as cattle, then perhaps we could have the moral high ground to insist that they change. And of course, we would have to trust that Saudi Arabia's other "trading partners" (such as France, Great Britain, Russia, etc) would do the same for it to be effective... Oh shoot, now I'm getting depressed.