Argues that the United States should be wary of European integration. In the wake of World War II, there was no reason whatsoever for the U.S. to object to increased Western European integration, the expansion of intra-European trade, and the pacification of ancient conflicts. In fact, there were many good reasons to endorse and encourage increased European integration. But this analysis always obscured something at the heart of the European project. From the beginning, European unity was understood as a counterweight to the global hegemony of the United States. The United States of Europe (USE) would become a separate legal body, and member governments would be formally subordinate to it. The areas of competence for the new superstate range from public health to farming and fishing, from economics to social policy and civil rights. National governments would have no power to regulate these matters unless sanctioned by Brussels. The USE is the obvious next step for this essentially French project. And it couldn't come at a less propitious time for U.S.-European relations. Moreover, the future USE in some ways is designed specifically to avoid the larger entity dissolving into a loose federation of nation-states, some Atlanticist, some anti-American. One thing that could unify Europe is a clumsy U.S. intervention to prevent it.