The future of Europe

MacGuffin

Forum Addict
Joined
Mar 29, 2008
Messages
8,329
Location
Wilhelmshaven, Germany
Car(s)
'17 Ford Mustang GT Fastback
I don't see it nearly as gloomy as this commentator but I'd like to post this article here as a starting point for a general thread about the future of Europe and the European Union:
Opinion

If the Euro Fails, Germany Will Be Responsible

By Henrik M?ller

Given that Germany is shouldering risk to the tune of hundreds of billions for a life-threatening euro crisis, it may seem absurd that Berlin is perceived abroad as 'euro Nazis' rather than as a benevolent leader. But should the common currency fail, Berlin will be to blame.

It is a surreal scenario. Gigantic risks. Staggering sums of money. The degree to which the political debate has become polarized is likewise unbelievable -- both among European Union member states and within those societies themselves.

In the Greece of today, the government has to be protected from its own people. In the Netherlands and Finland, right-wing populist parties have made huge gains on terrain normally held by large, centrist parties. In Germany, Chancellor Angela Merkel isn't even certain of a parliamentary majority when a second bailout package for Greece comes up for a vote.

It is the kind of escalation that would have been unthinkable only a few years ago.

Rescue efforts have been underway for three years now -- first the banks and then the countries. But instead of coming together in times of crisis, Europeans have become divided. And there is a lot at stake. A break-up of the European currency union has now become a realistic scenario. Indeed, the political climate has become so toxic that a collapse of the European Union and of the idea of European unity -- and the entire European postwar order -- also seems possible.

Governments across the Continent are currently working feverishly to prevent such a disaster. On Friday, French President Nicolas Sarkozy and German Chancellor Angela Merkel met in Berlin -- where they reached the smallest-possible compromise. And on Thursday and Friday of this week, European Union leaders will meet at an EU summit. There are still chances for the European project to succeed, but they are becoming increasingly limited -- as main actors in this drama have begun admitting in confidential discussions.

Germany Is Missing an Historic Opportunity


If the euro fails, the Germans will be seen in the end as having been the primary culprits. And rightfully so.

In 2009 and 2010, Germany suddenly found itself in the position of being akin to a European hegemony. It was the only large euro-zone member state that was economically healthy and had more competitive economic structures and less public debt than the others. Germany could have acted as a "benevolent hegemony" -- indeed should have. Similar to the United States after World War II, Germany should have been prepared to provide generous amounts of money very early on -- tied to the creation of new, more powerful European institutions, including a new European Union treaty. Merkel could have -- and should have -- led Europe towards a common future.

Instead, national politics in Germany became transfixed by state elections with leaders making populist claims that there was no money for feeble southern European countries. Rather than continuing the traditions established as far back as the times of former Chancellor Konrad Adenauer in the 1950s -- a period which saw European countries anchored ever more firmly in a European framework -- we are now returning to a balance-of-power approach. The common fate of the Europeans is no longer the top priority. Instead we are juggling national interests.

Or rather, what some consider to be their national interests. Just take the German government's wish that private creditors also be made to pay for part of the debt crisis. At the end of the day, it is little more than symbolism. Debt forgiveness wouldn't help Greece at all. On the contrary, it would remove Greece from the capital markets for many years to come and it would eliminate any possibility for the country to ensure its own credit for the foreseeable future.

Greek Bashing Is More Popular than Action

The German government also seems to care little that the European Central Bank is slipping into serious distress. Speculation is heating up, further exacerbating the crisis. Nevertheless, Berlin is still insisting on a haircut: as a matter of principle, but also because there are many in the government who would like to show the financial markets (and the Greeks) that they mean business.

Throughout the crisis, the German government has behaved as if we were still living in the 1990s, as if there were a serious alternative to today's currency club. And it has ignored the fact that our financial system is so tightly interwoven that if part of it fails, we could all fall. From the very start of the crisis, there was no other choice but to expand transfers within the euro zone. The same held true for a deepening of political union within the common currency area. Unfortunately, Greece bashing is more popular.

Now payback time has come. Germany is in the impossible situation of having ponied up hundreds of billions of euros but is nevertheless being pilloried. Some Greek newspapers refer to Germans as "euro Nazis," and not as a benevolent leading power. The fact that the situation has deteriorated so far does not speak well for statesmanship in Berlin -- and that is putting it mildly.

Instead of showing steadfast solidarity, the markets are testing the potential collapse of the euro. And that scenario is becoming increasingly likely -- not because anybody wants it to but because so many different players must come together to find a solution and it is quite possible they will not succeed in doing so.

If the euro-zone breaks apart, it is Germany that will be blamed -- because it was the country that could have saved the euro but didn't do so out of short-sighted self-interest. The damage, should it come to that, will be much more than monetary.

Source: http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/0,1518,769888,00.html

Where I agree with him, though, is that we currently lack leadership in Europe.

I'm not sure if Germany should lead the way (for historical considerations) but there is a general lack of charismatic politicians with a vision throughout Europe. They are all fixed on their local problems, the voters, the next elections and have lost the view for the greater idea. Instead everybody's acting very selfish.

The fission fungus is already growing under the surface in Europe, maybe also a result of us having become too comfortable and convenient in our lives and take the peaceful, friendly relations for granted.

But as I expressed earlier on this forum: I'm not convinced that it will last forever. And I don't want to imagine the consequences.
 
Last edited:
Well ... you don?t know what a marriage is worth when it?s only seen good days ... I think it?s the same with the european union. Those who really want it and believe in it will stick together, even when times are rough. Those who just joined because they thought it was a good idea at the time will part (and won?t be missed).
 
Let it fail.

Failure doesn't spell irreversible disaster - on the opposite, it is a chance to rebuild a rotten system. There are two possible outcomes - it may become a lot better, or become even more rotten than it is now.

The main problem lies in one of the fundamental ideas of the EU - the concept of need and help. Certain countries are provided with funding not based on their merits, but based on their need. Why? Yes, it is humanitarian but why is this a good thing. The whole idea that equality is a good thing is misguided. Our world is balanced by the fact that there are rich and poor entities. Equalizing them, as the EU is trying to achieve, will disrupt the entire balance. As a matter of fact, it's kind of happening right now.

(My thoughts are influenced a lot by Atlas Shrugged. I believe everyone in the EU especially should read the book, and while it should not followed to the letter, since it is fiction, it is very eye-opening)
 
Certain countries are provided with funding not based on their merits, but based on their need. Why? Yes, it is humanitarian but why is this a good thing. [...]
It is very far from humanitarian. On the contrary,economically healthy and prosporous states like Germany have achieved huge profits from the whole EU-buisness while States like Portugal have not been able to profit like that while on paper getting a lot of money from the EU. The EU is foremost an economic-collaboration in wich the strong prosper and the weak struggle (just like Ayn Rand would have loved it). Money wich is handed to the "poor states" is to ensure the markets within the EU get closer together, thus creating bigger markets for the big players ...
Your perception of the EU seems to be as far off as it can be IMO.
 
Last edited:
I realize it is primarily an economic organization, but I fail to grasp the benefit of economic bailouts sent to the New Member countries.

I hold the opinion that the requirements for entry in the EU should have been a lot stricter and certain countries, such as Bulgaria, Greece and Romania shouldn't have been allowed to enter. I can certainly speak for Bulgaria and what I have seen - entering the EU was done because it was "fashionable" and because we expected economic bailouts and funding. We never had any intention of bringing anything to the table, except burden.

Money wich is handed to the "poor states" is done so to ensure the markets within the EU get closer together, thus creating bigger markets for the big players ...

I admit, I don't fully understand what you mean here, and would appreciate some elaboration. I understand what you mean, but I don't see how it could actually work. It's not like the markets didn't exist before the EU. Germany in particular has been exporting goods to Eastern Europe (and other areas) for years. The EU probably made the process easier (from a legal standpoint), but I don't think it opened new markets.
 
I realize it is primarily an economic organization, but I fail to grasp the benefit of economic bailouts sent to the New Member countries. [...]
... and neither do I. This is all a big mess and the concept "fail and rebuild" does have it?s charme. Make no mistake, I?m not arguing that everything about the EU is good, nor that there needen?t be change. My point is only that this isn?t some kind of wealth-re-distribution ...
[...]I hold the opinion that the requirements for entry in the EU should have been a lot stricter and certain countries
And again I agree. Personally I think it might have been just out of politeness ... being afraid a "no" might have caused a stirr ... we would have needed some people with the Balls just to say "no".
I understand what you mean, but I don't see how it could actually work. It's not like the markets didn't exist before the EU. Germany in particular has been exporting goods to Eastern Europe (and other areas) for years. The EU probably made the process easier (from a legal standpoint), but I don't think it opened new markets.
Not new markets. The whole trade and no-import-tax-stuff just strenghens inner EU-trade and weakens outside trade. Why import something from (let?s just say) Russia when the (otherwise more expenise) French product is cheaper while the EU also provides regulations and legal-obligations that make these products safer (in a sense of accountability). A lot of outside-EU countries have been very upset since it all began because they want european markets to open up again for their products ... and of course the EU now has a lot more influence on markets woldwide than as single players. Europe calls some new rules for products, everybody complains ... but if they want a piece of that delicious European Cake, they?ll comply. Also another way to selfishly favour european products ... just set standarts that your products already have ... ??? (translates as: $$$). :D
 
I want to know how we ended stumping up for the Euro given we are not in it?

It seems to me that to gain entry to the Euro the bar was set very, very, low. Er no one in Ukania is clamouring to get in now.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-13856580

"Like an overladen container lorry labouring up a steep hill, the European project is close to stalling. If it stalls, even the emergency brake may not stop it running back down the hill, out of control, until it jackknifes off the road. Two of the lads are wrestling over the steering wheel; others lie comatose in the sleeping area at the back of the cab. We need a woman to come and sort them out. And her name is Angela.

Greece and the eurozone is the most urgent part of this crisis. Between the fury on the streets of Athens and the continued disunity of decision-makers in Brussels, Berlin, Frankfurt and Luxembourg (where the eurogroup huddles again this Sunday and Monday), the lorry could stall any day. But it's not just Greece. In Ireland, Portugal and Spain the anger is boiling over, as people feel that the young, the poor and the unemployed are being forced to pay for the selfish improvidence of their politicians ? and of French and German bankers, who lent profusely where they should not have lent at all. Across the continent the legions of the indignados, as they are called in Spain, and the aganaktismenoi (the outraged), as they say in Greece, are growing. Well-educated children of Portuguese friends despair of job opportunities at home, instead seeking employment in Mozambique or Angola."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/jun/15/european-project-new-german-engine

And really putting the boot in to Europe. ?

"The Greek predicament is a system failure. Democracy works only where accountability bites, where taxing and spending within a given timeframe are related to voting for party representatives. It arose in Greek city states, where people knew and could discipline each other in the arts of war and peace. It is thus within Britain's "united kingdom". No one talks about a Northern Irish budgetary crisis because that budget is subsumed under a general consensus. However economically rotten parts of the UK may be, London always pays.

European union requires richer nations to subsidise poorer ones. This includes Britain because, whatever David Cameron says, it signed up to "ever closer union" with Greece. These cross-subsidies, especially those supporting sovereign debts in Greece, Portugal and Ireland, enjoy no democratic accountability. They are the creation of banks and browbeaten ministers at late-night meetings. The ministers are the Fifa of high finance, an oligarchy in thrall to lobbies and special interests, floating on national subscriptions.

I assumed that one day Germany would get fed up with having its 20th-century war guilt exploited by a spendthrift Europe. But that day is not today. German and other banks need Europe's taxpayers to bail out their Greek and other loans. Debt must be indulged and subsidised again, whatever the political spin that covers it."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/jun/21/eurozone-greece-debt-crisis
 
Last edited:
I've been bitching about the Euro for years - it was a bad idea from the beginning. It was an even worse idea to let Greece in (in retrospect, at least) - they didn't meet the criteria iirc. Props to England for not joining. Also props to Germany for doing the bailing and not being the one being bailed out.
 
Props to England for not joining.

They are in. They just kept their currency. There will be another economic crisis, I doubt the EU will weather it. Closer to home I doubt the American Republic will manage it unmolested (the president is emperor).
 
I'm hardly bothered by the future of political Europe. Whatever the rejects from our national parties do once they've been sent to "where they can do us no harm" will always be whinged and moaned and complained about, simply (mostly) because the EU is an easy scapegoat. But still, the continue their work which IMHO is good most of the time.

What I care loads about is the Europe of the people(s), and that will only get closer-knit as time passes. There are better livelihoods to be made in a cooperating Europe, there are more personal friendships to be made and there is an incredible amount of things and knowledge and traditions to be discovered. Considering the closeness we have - a war between two EU countries is at this point unimaginable - I am confident that we will keep it alive and well. The EU as an entity is very important for much of this cooperation, but not essential to all of it.
 
Closer to home I doubt the American Republic will manage it unmolested (the president is emperor).

Of course it'll affect us. But the old saying, "The US Economy has a cold, the world economy has a heart attack" still applies.
 
We always thought it'd be us against the Russians. Figures that Germany's gonna be the bad guy again.
 
No worries. Even if we wanted to, everything our military has that's close to work properly is halfway around the world in Afghanistan.
 
Well, in all this discussions it shouldn't be forgotten, where and how the economical crisis started. If you look at the numbers, the USA is currently in a worse state than Greece (they have much better chances to get out of it again, though).

We're currently still sweeping together the debris, trying to figure out, how to fix the damage and decide on what can and needs to be fixed first.

And while we do that, I hope the big idea isn't lost or sacrificed for short-term solutions. Yes, the Euro was flawed from the beginning and the EU is currently stretched to its limits. But so far it holds and I believe it isn't unable to reform itself.

If there is a will for it. And that's my greatest worry at the moment: People drawing the wrong conclusions, thinking that we need to turn around, when actually only a course correction is needed.

But you need a captain on the bridge for that...
 
Last edited:
We're currently still sweeping together the debris, trying to figure out, how to fix the damage and decide on what can and needs to be fixed first.
Our politicians seem to believe there isn't enough bashing of "lazy southern Europeans" going on as of now. :wall:

But you need a captain on the bridge for that.
Now why might that be a problem... :cry:
 
Well, in all this discussions it shouldn't be forgotten, where and how the economical crisis started. If you look at the numbers, the USA is currently in a worse state than Greece (they have much better chances to get out of it again, though).

the US could build itself out of a crash and US citizens are generally quite good at paying their taxes, both things Greece doesn't excel at.

I would buy the Parthenon for ?10 and a bag of crisps though.
 
Of course it'll affect us. But the old saying, "The US Economy has a cold, the world economy has a heart attack" still applies.

You misread me. Yes it will affect the U.S. We'll keep empowering the Executive Branch in the name of efficiency. Democracy by its nature if inefficient, despots are the most efficient.
 
 
Do people forget that the Pound fell out of the snake in the early 90s and we begged Germany to assist us and they told to get stuffed - as they were entitled to do.

But that is not a good track record, and if I were in one of the failing EURO economies I would think to myself that I would be foolish to rely on Germany and I know that the French are not going to help anyone.

Not a nice time to be Portugese, Spanish, Irish, Italian (Possibly) or Greek. Still we will see - I do hope I am wrong. One thing did no one audit the books before letting some of these countries in? They seemed to have lied on their economie's performance.
 
Top