As Asia’s economic and geopolitical influence grows, a critical question emerges: should it model its future on the European example? While Europe has long been held up as a beacon of integration and liberal economics, recent history suggests that Asia should approach the European model with considerable caution.

Over the past 15 years, Europe’s trade frameworks have faltered, integration has stalled, and a number of its core political and economic ideas have failed under real-world pressure. Asia, with its unique diversity and dynamism, risks undermining its own potential by emulating a system that is increasingly marked by rigidity, dysfunction, and retreat from global leadership.

The myth of EU fair trade

The European Union has traditionally prided itself on being a trade powerhouse. But in practice, the EU’s trade architecture has grown bloated, unwieldy, and, at times, self-defeating. A case in point is the EU-Mercosur trade deal, which has been in negotiation since 1999. Though an agreement was reached “in principle” in 2019, ratification has stalled due to European domestic politics, particularly concerns from France and other countries about environmental and agricultural standards in Brazil. These repeated delays expose the fragility of EU trade commitments and its failure to act decisively in a multipolar world.

Similarly, the EU-India Free Trade Agreement, under discussion since 2007, remains elusive. India walked away from negotiations in 2013, citing protectionist tendencies and an EU approach that imposed values-based conditions on trade, such as human rights and environmental clauses. Talks were revived in 2022, but fundamental differences persist. For Asia, this sends a clear signal: Europe's trade approach is often inflexible, paternalistic, and burdened by ideological overreach that ignores economic pragmatism.

Brexit and the fracturing of unity

Brexit meanwhile serves as a profound example of the breakdown of European unity. Far from a mere political squabble, the UK’s departure from the EU on February 1, 2020 exposed deep structural and philosophical divisions within Europe. The union that was once seen as the pinnacle of post-national integration showed itself to be vulnerable to populist backlash, economic discontent, and identity politics; a concept that continues to blight the remaining countries in the Union.

The fallout has been significant: trade between the UK and EU has declined, supply chains have been disrupted, and political tensions continue over issues like the Northern Ireland Protocol.

For Asia, Brexit is a warning. Integration for its own sake—without accounting for national interests, cultural diversity, and political accountability—can backfire spectacularly.

The Eurozone crisis: a monetary union without fiscal sense

Perhaps the most damning indictment of the European model is the Eurozone crisis, which began in 2009 and dragged on for most of the following decade. Countries like Greece, Italy, Spain, and Portugal found themselves shackled by a monetary union that denied them the flexibility to devalue their currencies or engage in independent fiscal policy.

The EU’s response—austerity measures imposed by the so-called “Troika” (European Commission, European Central Bank, and IMF)—exacerbated unemployment, deepened recessions, and fuelled public resentment. Greece’s economy shrank by 25%, and unemployment exceeded 28% in 2013. The entire crisis revealed the structural flaws in Europe's grand economic architecture: a shared currency without shared fiscal policy is a recipe for long-term instability.

Asia, by contrast, has avoided such rigid regional integration in the form of initiatives like ASEAN maintaining cooperative frameworks while respecting national sovereignty.

The EU experience shows that premature monetary integration without political unity creates more problems than it solves.

Ideological overreach: the European green deal and energy crisis

Europe’s bold climate policies too, while admirable in ambition, have often overlooked economic and geopolitical realities. The European Green Deal, launched in 2019, aims to make the continent climate-neutral by 2050.

Yet, in pursuing rapid decarbonisation, Europe has undermined its own energy security.

The energy crisis of 2022, triggered by the ongoing war in Ukraine and sanctions on Russian gas, exposed Europe’s over-reliance on external energy supplies. Countries like Germany, which prematurely shut down nuclear plants while pushing renewables, found themselves scrambling to reopen coal-fired power stations. This contradiction—between ideological commitment and pragmatic needs—has led to soaring energy costs, inflation, and political backlash.

In Asia, however, where energy demand is rapidly growing, governments are already taking note. Overzealous policies detached from local economic realities can erode public support and undermine resilience. A transition to green energy must be balanced with energy security, affordability, and technological capacity.

Immigration and integration failures

Europe’s struggle with immigration is another cautionary tale and perhaps its most glaring.

The 2015 refugee crisis overwhelmed European asylum systems and exposed deep divisions within the bloc. Germany’s open-door policy, while humanitarian, provoked political backlash and contributed to the rise of far-right movements across the continent. 

The inability to forge a coherent migration policy has fuelled internal tensions. Countries in Eastern Europe refused to accept migrant quotas, while countries like Italy and Greece were left to shoulder the burden of border control. The Schengen system—once a symbol of borderless unity—was temporarily suspended in several countries. 

It is a pattern Asia, with its own complex migration patterns, must avoid. Importing a European-style model that ignores the need for cohesive policy, cultural sensitivity, and long-term integration strategies makes no sense.

A better path for Asia

As is, while Europe’s recent history offers valuable lessons, it does not offer a roadmap. From trade deals mired in ideology, to failed monetary experiments and crises in energy and migration, the European model has revealed deep systemic weaknesses; weaknesses Asia should work to avoid rather than emulate.

Asia’s future must encompass adaptive systems, not rigid unions. Asia must lead with its own strengths, not Europe’s broken promises.