Allison, who said “Europe is totally preoccupied with the self-development of Europe,” cited the fall of the Soviet Union, Europe’s lack of power in comparison to the United States, and differences over cultural issues like religion.

“There are big style problems with the Bush administration and President Bush in particular for Europeans, but if it were President Gore, the fundamental issues would still be significant strains,” he said.

Regardless of the sources of tension, most professors said the U.S. has a tough road to travel in mending relations.

“There’s nothing automatic in international politics, and so whereas it may appear that the Europeans and the Americans really have no choice but to cooperate against common international problems, this could go either way—toward a renewal of our relationship or toward further unraveling,” Ford Foundation Professor of Science and International Affairs Ashton Carter said.

Carter said the key to improving relations lies in a shared sense of a new common enemy.

“I think an objective look at the world would indicate that we do face huge threats, especially from terrorism in the future, and that they are threats to both sides of the Atlantic,” he said.

Professor of Government Andrew Kydd said that while the North Atlantic Treaty Organization is now more fragile than it was in the 1990s, its rationale remains, and is expanding.

“I don’t think it’s in that great a danger even now despite people like Kagan,” Kydd said. “NATO has weathered a lot of crises in one form or another.”

Cederman said he could not predict the outcome of the Summers-Kissinger task force, but said he doubted that the current American political climate would allow for change.

“I’m fairly pessimistic that as long as the neoconservatives continue to dominate this administration and continue to actively undermine international institutions that it is in the power of any specific individuals to build bridges,” he said. “This is so diametrically opposed to what Europe stands for.”

Professor of Government Andrew Moravcsik, the director of Harvard’s European Union Center, suggested several ways to improve relations.

First, he wrote in an e-mail, Europe and America should “insulate areas of positive cooperation” on terrorism and create structures to regulate policy on “out of area” places like Iraq.

He added that Europe and America should “agree to disagree” in the case of another U.S. invasion of a Middle East country.

“Europeans must accept that distinctively American military forces can be a cost-effective mode of regime change,” he wrote.

At the same time, “Americans must accept that the distinctive ‘civilian power’ controlled by Europeans—E.U. trade and membership, aid, peacekeeping, international monitoring, and multilateral legitimation—makes a unique contribution to global peace and security,” he wrote.