Issues Navigator

Global Challenges

Strategic Regions

Domestic Debates

Tag cloud

See All Tags

July 14, 2011 |  3 comments |  Print | E-Mail Your Opinion  

Joschka Fischer

Does Europe Have a Death Wish?

Joschka Fischer: Europeans must forge ahead with the political union now; otherwise the euro and EU integration will be undone. Europe would then lose nearly everything it has gained over a half-century from transcending nationalism. In the light of the emerging new world order, this would be a tragedy.

From the start of the Greek debt crisis in 2010, the major European players should have understood the risks and consequences that it posed for the European Union. They certainly don't give that impression to onlookers.

The crisis was always about much more than Greece: a disorderly insolvency there would threaten to pull other economies on the EU's southern periphery, including some very big ones, into the fiscal abyss, along with major European banks and insurers. That could plunge the global economy into another financial crisis, delivering a shock equivalent to the autumn of 2008. It would also mean a eurozone failure that would not leave the Common Market unharmed.

For the first time in its history, the very continuance of the European project is at stake. And yet the behavior of the EU and its most important member states has been irresolute and dithering, owing to national egotism and a breathtaking absence of leadership.

States can go bust just like companies, but, unlike companies, they don't disappear when that happens. That is why states should not be punished, and why their ongoing interests should not be underestimated. Insolvent states need help with restructuring, both in the financial sector and well beyond it, so that they can work their way out of crisis.

This is certainly true of Greece, whose structural problems are much more sweeping than even its financial difficulties. Thus far, the EU and the Greek government have failed to address Greece's structural problems. But they need to develop (and fund) an appropriate strategy for economic reconstruction, in order to make clear to the Greeks - and to skittish financial markets - that there is light at the end of the tunnel.

Everyone knows that Greece will be unable to work its way out of crisis without massive debt relief. The only question is whether the country's debt restructuring will be orderly and controlled or chaotic and contagious.

Either way, Germany's internal debate about whether to pay for the Greek debt is risible. Refusing to pay is not a viable option, because Germany and all other eurozone members are in the same boat. A Greek default would threaten to sink them, too, for it would raise immediate concerns about the solvency of Europe's systemically important banks and insurance companies.

So what are the eurozone's heads of government waiting for? Are they reluctant to come clean with their people out of fear for their own political futures?

The European financial crisis is really a political crisis, because EU leaders are unable to decide on the necessary measures. Instead, time is lost on secondary issues largely rooted in domestic policy concerns.

It is certainly right, in principle, to argue that the banks should participate in financing the resolution of the debt crisis. But it makes little sense to insist on it as long as losses by banks that remain "too big to fail" could trigger a renewed financial crisis. Any chance to make this work would have required overhauling the financial system early in 2009, but that opportunity was largely wasted.

As long as the EU's life-threatening political crisis continues, its financial crisis will continue to destabilize it. At the heart of resolving the crisis lies the certainty that the euro - and with it the EU as a whole - will not survive without greater European political unification.

If Europeans want to keep the euro, we must forge ahead with political union now; otherwise, like it or not, the euro and European integration will be undone. Europe would then lose nearly everything it has gained over a half-century from transcending nationalism. In the light of the emerging new world order, this would be a tragedy for Europeans.

Unfortunately, when the outgoing president of the European Central Bank, Jean-Claude Trichet, proposed a step in this direction by suggesting that a "European Secretary of the Treasury" be created, heads of state and government dismissed the idea out of hand. Hardly anyone on the European Council seems willing even to acknowledge the depth of the EU crisis.

Resolving this crisis requires more Europe and more integration, not less. And yes: the rich economies - first and foremost Germany - will have to pay for the way out.

Germany and France, the two crucial players in this crisis, will have to devise a joint strategy, because only they, working together, can push through a solution. The problem is that the French referendum on the EU constitution in 2005 vetoed further political integration, while further economic integration may now fail because of Germany.

What is required, therefore, is an open bilateral French-German dialogue about a comprehensive realignment of the monetary union. Treaty changes are impossible; therefore, different methods will need to be found, which makes the Franco-German partnership all the more important.

Regardless of the EU's political crisis and paralysis, Europeans should not forget how important its existence is and will continue to be. One has only to look back to the first half of the twentieth century to understand why.

Joschka Fischer, Germany's foreign minister and vice-chancellor from 1998 to 2005, was a leader in the German Green Party for almost 20 years. Republished with permission from Project Syndicate.

  • 4
  •  
  •  
  • No rating possible
  • No rating possible
I like this Article! What's this?

 
 
Comments
Unregistered User

July 16, 2011

  • 2
  •  
  •  
  • No rating possible
  • No rating possible
I like this comment! What's this?
Asking for " Europe's Death Wish" sounds like unlimited "Schadenfreude". With all due respect, this, I feel, is not becoming of any Secretary of State. After all, if only part time,
he was one of the architects of the EU.
After the fall of the Soviet Union, NATO should not have been
promoted to a political entity over Europe while expanding the military blanket over
the country. The EU was basically demoted to a simple trade union, with a common
"Sparkasse" and the rest is almost history.
As a start, before companies go bankrupt, they reorganize, sometimes through chapter 11.
The reason, you dispose off non core and non profitable assets, ....and you need somebody who is willing to buy them.
What do we have:
An almost unnoticed and unlimited $ supply looking for a investment base........
Fortunately the $ accumulation is almost country specific...........
Our "Euro Company" controls the two companies, Portugal and Greece, which have hardly a chance to survive........
Capitalization of the two companies is partially achieved through IMF and People's Republic of China...........
...To the extent that about 50% of all Chinese merchandise is shipped through
Greek ships, and famous Piraeus Harbor is under control of the People's Republic,
in addition to a about 5 billion $ loan to Greek companies to built additional ships.....
Any default by Greece or Portugal is not an option.......

....therefore, one needs to allow Greece and Portugal to be bought out from the
Euro Zone by perhaps The People's Republic of China and managed to prosperity,
as Greece and Portugal will not be kept hostage by "socialistic management."

But for Europe and the Euro Zone to flourish and thrive, NATO needs to return to its
barracks.

HRF
Tags: | tx |
 
Greg Randolph Lawson

July 16, 2011

  • 2
  •  
  •  
  • No rating possible
  • No rating possible
I like this comment! What's this?
The European integration project is having challenges of unprecedented scale. Whether Europe can transcend nationalism and the Westphalian system does seem to be the ultimate question as it struggles with the Greek and Portuguese crises.

I suspect nationalism wins in the end. Humanity, at least until mankind transcends itself, seems to still be largely tribal. Granted, the concept of "tribe" is now vastly expanded from its hunter-gatherer days to include "nations," yet differences still elicit fear and evoke a desire to stay with what one really understands- family, friends, neighbors, ethnic group, etc.

So long as this exists, even if temporarily obscured by good times, history will persist. There will be no Kojeve-like universal, homogeneous state. Nor will there be a permanent Kantian League of democracies.

There will, at best, be approximations that can exist for a time, but when stressed enough, will revert back.

The more things change, the more they stay the same and will continue to do so until something amazing happens, possibly something that alters the very notion of what it means to be human. Something along the lines of the Kurzweilian "Singularity", but at that point, only science fiction can be a guide.
 
Joerg  Wolf

July 19, 2011

  • 0
  •  
  •  
  • No rating possible
  • No rating possible
I like this comment! What's this?
FYI: Hans F. Bellstedt responded to this article with an op-ed of his own:

EU Crisis: Return to the Language of Truth
http://www.atlantic-community.org/index/articles/view/EU_Crisis%3A_...

 

Create Comment

Type the characters shown in the image below into the textfield.
Captcha

What are tags?

Community

Jobs / Internships

Call for Papers

Atlantic Events

Partners

User of the day

Anna  Przybyll
Anna Przybyll
"A wise old owl lived in an oak The more he..."

Poll

Should NATO intervene in Syria?