من أجل رؤية متجددة في أوروبا

May 3, 2016 Joschka Fischer

برلين - منذ عام 2009، بعدما هزت الأزمة المالية التي بدأت في أمريكا عام 2008 منطقة اليورو، أصبح الوضع الطبيعي الجديد في أوروبا يتسم بإدارة الأزمات. في الحقيقة، توالت الأزمات في أوروبا بعد ذلك، ومن غير المحتمل أن تتغير الأحوال قريبا.

فقد واجهت أوروبا أزمة مالية، وأزمة اليونان، وأزمة أوكرانيا، وفي أواخر صيف عام 2015، واجهت أزمة اللاجئين. والآن، ستقوم المملكة المتحدة التي تعتبر واحدة من أقوى الدول الأعضاء في الاتحاد الأوروبي اقتصاديا وعسكريا، بإجراء استفتاء في 23 يناير/حزيران بشأن ما إذا كانت ستخرج من الاتحاد الأوروبي (ما يسمى ببريكست)، ويحتمل أن تواجه أوروبا أزمة الانفصال قريبا.

وتفاقمت أزمة الثقة على نطاق واسع في أوروبا ومؤسساتها في معظم الدول الأعضاء في الاتحاد الأوروبي، الأمر الذي أدى إلى إحياء الأحزاب والأفكار السياسية القومية وتراجع التضامن الأوروبي. كما أن إعادة تأميم أوروبا في تصاعد، مما يجعل هذه الأزمة أخطر من كل شيء، ويهدد بالتفكك الداخلي.

To continue reading, register now.

As a registered user, you can enjoy more PS content every month – for free.

Subscribe now for unlimited access to everything PS has to offer.

Already have an account? Log in

Subscribe to Project Syndicate

Enjoy unlimited access to the ideas and opinions of the world's leading thinkers, including weekly long reads, book reviews, topical collections, and interviews; The Year Ahead annual print magazine; the complete PS archive; and more. All for less than $9 a month.

Subscribe Now

new comment has been posted. new comments have been posted.

0 Comments on this paragraph, 28 Comments on this article

Antoine Cahen May 13, 2016

Thank you Joschka Fischer for this very welcome food for thought: it is very relevant to ask where the EU strategy lies (if there is any?) which could help put an end to so many crises at the same time.
A focus on methods, on how to approach problems, how to "solve" them instead of "managing" them, is healthy and much too neglected.
You write: "The EU’s political leaders – the heads of state and government of the member states and the leaders of the European Council and the European Commission – made a fateful decision in the wake of the financial crisis. They placed their trust in crisis-mode management, rather than developing a vision for Europe and a strategy to achieve it."
Rightly said: the underlying promise of crisis management is that after some time (hopefully short) the (stupid) crisis will be overcome, life will just be like the day before the (damned) crisis started: stable, happy and predictable!

But - though it may be sad and hard to accept - neither Europe nor the world will ever be the same as before the multi-layer financial-debt-economic-social-political-ecological-geopolitical so-called "crises" we are experiencing... not least because of genuine wars (not "crises") on the eastside.

So, what can we do to change the current ineffective and inefficient EU "crisis management" and put forward a proper strategy?
Could not a group of volunteers develop a few key structuring proposals for such a plan? Why wouldn't you steer such a strategy project?

One possible first example to consider is Greece: the Greek financial and debt situation has been considered and negotiated month after month, years after years, in total isolation from the Greek border and migration situation! Just as if it wasn't about the same country, but two different unrelated ones... the so-called "silo approach" at its best, or better said, at its worst: different Commission DGs, different Council of Ministers (Ecofin/JHA), no interaction, no global view, no comprehensive strategy. Clear deficit of governance and statecraft (should we say "europecraft"?). Isn't it possible to conceive a plan reflecting all necessary dimensions (financial, economic, social, geopolitical, border and migration related ones?), involving the Greek authorities, the EU institutions and the Member States, in a deal that would open avenues for the 10 years to come, instead of having to react to problems, perceived threats and risks in an uncoordinated manner?
Couldn't it bring benefits both for Greece and for the EU at large, restoring European credibility (via some sense and perspective of a shared future)?
One could ia pay attention to several EU Treaty instruments which are not being used. Where needed creative solutions should be developed.

With no time and resources spent on methods, no surprise if EU results are, to say the least, disappointing.
Few months after the 2008 financial crisis started, several leaders said it would not last long. Eight years later we are still not out of it. How could European citizens and voters trust national governments and the EU?

If times are changing, our methods should change too. With so many referendum and elections in 2016-2017, time has come for rethinking Europe inside-out - and for a European reset.
If not ...
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Léonard Lovallo May 13, 2016

Well yes Herr Fischer good points and especially the recognition that the the gap between Germany and most other euro-zone countries is widening. However, I would argue that the common currency is neither the foundation stone nor essential to the European project but rather it has become the root cause of the fracturing thereof. The German economy is doing quite nicely, thank you very much. The public finances are in the excellent shape, Angela has achieved her 'black zéro' and unemployment is low. The German economy exhibits a high degree of economic efficiency and productivity, other EU countries though less so. The normal mechanism for rectifying economic efficiency and productivity imbalances is the currency exchange rate. This mechanism is absent in a common currency zone and is the essential problem here exacerbated by the fact that the German economy cannot internally consume more than 50% of its economic output No amount of political integration and/or fiscal policy convergence will rectify efficiency and productivity imbalances nor ameliorate the problem of the German export imperative. Over the past 10 years, in the very round numbers, the German DAX is up over 95%, the French CAC40 is down around 15%, the Spanish IBEX35 is down by a third and the Italian FTSE MIB is down over half. The common currency appears a zero-sum game and Germany has most of what is on the plus side of the zero sum.
Back in the 1992 American Presidential election the political consultant James Carville famously stated: "it's the economy, stupid". Another American saying: All politics are local. A common currency composed of nations of disparate efficiency and productivity is not sustainable. I would argue that the dismantling of the Euro will not cause the collapse of the European project but rather will begin the process of pulling it back together by leveling the economic playing field currently tilted in Germany's favor. Berlin, of course, will not be loathe to surrender its current disparate economic advantage.
- jagjeet sinha May 15, 2016
  
  @ Lovallo
  
  +1
  Indeed - recall these from one of your earlier comments last year on the subject.
  
  WITHOUT INVESTMENT EQUALIZATION - UNLIMITED MIGRATIONS INEVITABLE, BUT INCREASINGLY UNTENABLE.
  The evidence of Creditor and Debtor "Provinces" is equally untenable - within One Currency Union.
  Even within United States or United Kingdoms - Unions with One Language - such differences have to be levelled.
  Either by movement of money or movement of people - Without One Language, all the more necessary.
  
  Equity market index changes for Eurozone countries
  In the ten year period from July 1 2005 to June 30,2015
  In local currency (Euro):
  Germany DAX: up 125%
  France CAC40: up 10%
  Spain IBEX35: up 5%
  Italy FTSE MIB: down 32%
  Adjusted for currency depreciation (EUR v USD):
  Germany DAX: up 93%
  France CAC40: down 5%
  Spain IBEX35: down 10%
  Italy FTSE MIB: down 41%
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Peter Schaeffer May 9, 2016

What Fischer calls "Europe" is really German oppression of the rest of Europe. Actually, is it just the corrupt alliance of identity politics left (Fisher) and the economic right (Schäuble) with Merkel combining both evils in one person.

When Germany declared that it would take an unlimited number of "refugees" (illegal economic migrants in real life), Germany violated several European agreements (notably the Dublin Regulation). Now Germany wants to impose its unilateral policy disaster on the rest of Europe. Not surprisingly the rest of Europe isn’t interested.

Germany under Merkel choose to attack the rest of Europe. Europe (and many Germans) are fighting back. No one in Europe should be subject to the EuroReich’s tyranny and oppression. Merkel’s vision of paradise is clearly a (German) jackboot stomping on the face humanity forever (while prattling on about “human rights”, Open Europe, “we can do it”, etc.)

What does the Soros/Merkel EuroReich offer to the people of Europe? Sadly, we know the answer all too well. It is Bataclan, Charlie Hebdo, banlieues, tournantes, Cologne, Molenbeek, Rosengård, etc. forever. If anyone does to challenge the EuroReich/EuroElite they can expect a “hate” crimes trial in short order. Sadly, the EUSSR and the USSR are becoming ever more alike.

Of course, the evil of the EUSSR doesn’t end with Cologne and Bataclan. The Euro has brought devastation to much of Europe with no hope of recovery (or debt relief) as long Herr Merkel is in charge. Yet another (German) jackboot stomping on the face humanity forever.

Fischer has always been an advocate of violent terrorism (he was a founder of the Putzgruppe, the "Proletarian Union for Terror and Destruction"). Back then he used fire bombs and clubs as instruments of terror. Now he uses the German state.
- M M May 10, 2016
  
  Peter, this is a surprising blog coming from you? The culprits are very well known (you forgot to mention Mr Schultz in Brussels), the question is how to uproot them when they are so well entrenched?
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
marc ménard May 9, 2016

“When the wise man points at the Moon, the idiot looks at the finger.” ― Confucius
Several comments posted above are appalling by the lack of understanding of the big changes taking place in our societies, that need a new vision of the future. Several arguments are centered on details rather than raising the strategic ideas that Europeans citizen need to develop and implement to eventually establish a politically unified European entity. Thinking about what political organization should be built 'either confederation or federation', is far more constructive than criticize the technocracy, which have been implemented by the politicians, elected by 'we the people' of Europe.
Mean nationalism brings us back to the damned 30's. Is it what we want again : concentration camps? fascism? destructions? 40 million displaced persons?
We need progressive statesmen with a vision, and courage to promote their strategy. That will happen only if the European look forward and not backward.
Future can't be built looking at the REAR VIEW MIRROR!
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Brett Williams May 9, 2016

Mr Fischer is right in saying that Europe needs to make big changes.
However, he makes vague statements about "vision and real solutions" without recommending anything in particular.
Some of the big changes that are necessary are :
1. end the Common Agricultural Policy - let farmers take out their own insurance against price falls. Then the EU's effort to negotiate foreign policy and trade issues will not longer be hamstrung by clinging to the this 1960s policy.
2. withdraw from the Refugee convention. It originated in a day when there was no such thing as the UNHCR and no UNHCR refugee camps. The EU should propose massive increases in contributions to the UNHCR and sponsor UNGA resolutions to establish peace keeping forces to protect UNHCR camps including with air support to create no fly zones over them.
3. Swap back from the Euro to national currencies. Let Greece's creditors take a bigger haircut. The EU can continue without the Euro.
It is a shame that the UK is proposing an exit when what it could be doing is taking leadership on the big changes that are necessary. Since the UK is not in the Euro zone, it should be easier for it to see what needs to be done. It really is a shame that the UK is seeing it as a stay in or get out decision when it could be leading on change. The existing EU leadership is just not capable of making these big and necessary decisions.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Barry Rosenfeld May 8, 2016

There is a persistence among EU leaders yo ignore the basic flaw in the Euro, that inability of nations within the Euro to have their currencies automatically adjust to trade imbalances. In the better old days, the German currency would have appreciated and those of many other countries depreciated. This can't happen under a monetary union. Period. The "brave" choice for the EU was to have developed a fiscal union, as is the case in federal states, but this step was one too many for the EU leaders. So, now wring one's hands and ... .
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Wim Roffel May 8, 2016

"And yet it is clear that if the euro fails, the whole European project will fail with it. "

If you believe that the whole European experiment should be stopped today, as it is clear that the euro isn't working.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
joey jay May 8, 2016

When you were part of the Realos of the Green party and became a minister, you had no idea of what you were doing and did a lot of $hit to get Europe where Europe is today. You should be the last one talking about vision for Europe, because you and other minions of the banksters, cooperated to bring the chaos by :

http://germanhistorydocs.ghi-dc.org/sub_document.cfm?document_id=3723
and

http://www.esiweb.org/pdf/esi_picture_story_-_joschka_fischer_the_german_greens_and_the_balkans_-_january_2008.pdf

You already envisioned some mighty sheize and you have the gall to write about a new vision?

You gotta be kidding. Some of us remember the struggle inside the green party. Remember Eva Quistorp? Petra Kelly? You took the side of war and disaster that brought about the collapse of integration in Europe, then the support for the banksters...Some of us have long memories. You should hide behind some rock and stop embarrassing us all.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
David Draper May 8, 2016

I think many people need to think about why Europe has embarked on a ONE Europe or EU pathway for the past 40-50 years. It was in response to TWO World Wars, where Germany, and the Austro-Hungarian Empire in WWI, embarked on war with most of the other nations, particularly France. Yet because the ended up on the losing side, they actually prospered in the long run as the USA combined with NATO fronted their defense budget for almost 40 years. Germany flourished post reconstruction. The Soviets/Russians also paid a large portion of the defense bills for Germany and its allies. Japan similarly flourished economically. Then we had a Cold War which once again gave rise to the idea that a European Union was necessary for peace and prosperity as well as some form of defense, which is about as effective as United Nations forces.

In essence the very idea of the need for a grand Europian Union was necessitated by fears of German dominance and worries about Russia. Well regardless you have German economic dominance once again and the implied treats from Russia are back once again.

Politics and human memory are very, very short, which is why humans are doomed to repeated the same types of follies that have plagued mankind since the beginning.

As Steve and others have pointed out, the large quantity of wealth in the world is controlled by a very few. It's been that way since history has been recorded. It's not fair. We, the masses or as referred to earlier as the unrepresented peasants, are bound to be upset and frustrated as this affects our daily lives, be it bringing food to the table or feeling over-taxed or feeling the ever rising prices of goods and the need for more and more costlier educations.

Sadly, the few make their wealth and or keep it through banking and using their media outlets to stir the populist into creating political decision based on very short careers in politics. Remember that war and arms races are very profitable, especially for those that control and receive public tax monies to maintain their state of armed readiness as well as a strengthened police presence.

The same currency that is spent arming the world and going back into the pockets of the few, could be cut in half where these funds could go back into restoring a countries crumbling infrastructure, but that money would end up in the hands of people building and restoring everything from roads and bridges, to waterways, irrigation and sewage systems. Much of the monies would be diverted from getting back to the few and end up in the hands of laborers and professionals, which is why the few create and spin crises around the globe.

This is sad but again like the conflicts between Germany/Germanic people's living outside the borders of Germany, and the same said for Russians living within Russia or the former Soviet Union, this discrepancy of where publicly collected tax dollars are spent is as old as time itself. Sadly is humans didn't have the inherent traits of... call it selfishness and greed or a built in psychological drive to survive at others expense, both pure socialism or pure capitalism would work perfectly in theory. Unfortunately we are stuck with the traits of humans and those are not to make every decision because it's the morally right or humane decision.

The human dilemma is what it is. It's also why smaller groups of clans and tribes have survived longer than any civilization or grand plan.

The EU will not last. The same can be said about the existing state of the United States, but that may last longer as those living in the USA are keenly aware that the federal government has gone to war over any attempted succession and it was the costliest war in human lives known within America.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
David Olson May 7, 2016

When the author J.F. wrote about Brexit and rising re-nationalization I could not help thinking of the old Czechoslovakia and what was said in the run up to Slovakia's secession. Now, is central Europe worse off because Czechoslovakia broke up? (For that matter, what would have been needed in any effort to hold Yugoslavia together?)
.
Europe's nations do need good relations between themselves, as good as they can manage, but how is that EU framework working out for them?
.
Also not mentioned by anyone is that the winds of change are blowing. In a few decades several European nations will have Muslim majorities, and the national-people who had established those nations will be a minority in their own nations. That will be 'The mother of all crises', to borrow a phrase from the immigrants' part of the world.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Walter Winkler May 6, 2016

Pompous & pedantic nonsense of an otherwise smart man: "And yet it is clear that if the euro fails, the whole European project will fail with it." No, that is NOT clear at all. The European project has functioned pretty damned well for over four decades WITHOUT the Euro. In all likelyhood, it's the Euro itself that's taking DOWN the European project, since the currency acts as a de facto gold standard from which the periphery countries aren't allowed to break free, while they are getting poorer and poorer due to wealth and efficiency accumulating in the (German) center. The Euro is total madness and the blindness by an intelligent guy like Fischer to see it almost beggars belief. There is absolutely NO need for the Euro in the EU. The latter can and will –again– do just fine without the former.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Steve Hurst May 5, 2016

I am sorry Joschka but the tide has started to come in and the sand castle is crumbling as the water rises.

As for -
'...the European Council and the European Commission – made a fateful decision in the wake of the financial crisis. They placed their trust in crisis-mode management, rather than developing a vision for Europe and a strategy to achieve it.'

The reason for this is simple - Only in a crisis is deviation from the frozen imperialist construct of the EU possible. In every other case at least one of the 28 members will attempt to block action in order to maintain their perception of a benefit whether that benefit is real or not, and whether it is sustainable long term or not.

This is the fundamental problem with the EU. The most brilliant feature of democracy is its ability to respond to changing need, the EU structure reduces that response capability. As needs become more pressing local democracy demands local response and conflict with the central federalist structure increases. This is a natural democratic response.

Long term the EU has to change or collapse.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
jagjeet sinha May 5, 2016

A revealing insight into priorities of the mindset that crafts the Union.
Analogy that best portrays the grotesque predicament - America waiting for a Texit or Florexit to craft the Union.
Especially acute if 50% of the internal migrants are flocking to Texas and Florida.
The attractiveness of Texas and Florida needs to be replicated - not jettisoned.

The Union instead should be creating the economics that attracts migration - a Macroeconomic Magnet.
The Union instead should be democratically distributing wealth in all regions - Investment Equalization.
The Union instead should be financing European Infrastructure that binds all - The New Europe.
The Union instead ought to be facilitating perfect mobility n migration - One Language that assimilated all.

The author grotesquely bares all that is wrong with the Frankenstein that the FrancoGerman mindset has created.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Alex Lab May 4, 2016

Europa braucht eine neue Vision - darin ist sich Fischer mit der Schrifstellerin Julie Zeh einig, die selbiges kürzlich in einem Interview sehr prägnant auf den Punkt brachte. (Schmidt´s Ausspruch "Wer Visionen hat, sollte zum Arzt gehen." mag zu seiner Zeit politisch partiell gegolten haben, aber menschlich ist Visionslosigkeit nicht. Wir alle brauchen Visionen, Ziele und bisweilen auch Träume.) Die EU bzw. ihre Vertreter entwerfen keine Zukunftsvision eines modernen Europas. Das Vakuum wird jetzt von Nationalisten gefüllt.

Worum geht es? Unter anderem ums Sparen. Ich, als Normalbürger, muss bei Glühbirnen sparen und bei der Wattzahl beim Staubsauger, die Südländer sollen sparen und Griechenland ja sowieso. Derweilen tauchen #luxleaks und #panamaleaks und #ttipleaks auf.. die EU Politiker verbandeln sich mit Lobbyisten und Hr. Schäuble schiebt mal eben, gegen jedwede ökonomische Vernunft, Hr. Draghi für alles finanzpolitisch Böse in der EU die Schuld in die Schuhe (er spart nicht). Frau Merkel laviert sich hochpragmatisch, im Grunde roboterhaft, durch die Politik. Gestaltung liegt ihr fern. Haltung (siehe #boehmermann + #refugees) anscheinend auch.

Als Deutsche + Eurpäerin bin ich diesen Zustand überdrüssig. Visionslos, Haltungslos, verlogen. Und nebenbei gesagt: ich wähle keine AfD.
- joey jay May 8, 2016
  
  Sie vergessen haben, die, die aus der Lagarde-Liste, die HSBC ihre krank geworden, Geld zu verstecken geholfen.
  Auch gibt es mehr zu den Panama-Papiere, die das ja erfüllen.
  
  http://www.rense.com/general96/panpapBRICS.html#sthash.wCKp4hbg.dpuf
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
j. von Hettlingen May 3, 2016

Joschka Fischer urges the EU leadership to get out of "crisis mode" and respond decisively to "our continent in a world of rapid change." He says "a renewed vision of Europe and an effective approach to dealing with crises" are urgently needed. Or else "new (and old) nationalists will continue to gain in strength and jeopardize the entire project of peaceful integration on the basis of the rule of law."
The current refugee crisis has been a litmus for the unity of Europe; which has been disappointing so far. For too long, EU leaders have simply responded to unfolding events - the financial crisis, the Greek bailout, the Russia-Ukraine conflict, the refugee crisis, and a possible "secession crisis" with Britain leaving the EU - rather than directly confronting the root causes of them all. The problem is that it needs a long-term commitment to get to the bottom of a problem. Leaders depend on their constituents to get re-elected. Given a limited tenure, they are often bent on putting national interests ahead of the EU agenda.
Fischer says, a "crisis-mode" management dealing with problems on an ad hoc basis, "rather than developing a vision for Europe and a strategy to achieve it" has led to a "slackening of European solidarity." It has also created confusion and "a massive crisis of trust vis-à-vis Europe and its institutions" among citizens across Europe. The EU needs to change this approach and restore political leadership to prevent a "disintegration from within" after "almost six decades of successful integration." Unfortunately "this is unlikely to change anytime soon."
Indeed, the international community is concerned about the current state of politics within the EU and its long-term viability. Only a confident leadership can bring back lasting trust in the stability of the continent and the future of a closer union. Yet EU leaders face daunting tasks ahead. Whatever Britons decide in June, either way the outcome will have an impact on Brussels. And Europe’s numerous crises will still "need to be addressed."
Fischer says the financial crisis is "anything but over; it has only taken on a new political guise." He points out that people in Portugal, Spain, and Ireland "are no longer willing to endure the cure-or-kill treatment of austerity politics," which many say, will not restore confidence and economic and social sustainability. But it is difficult to work out a new plan for the future of a prosperous and united eurozone without economic reform and addressing the institutional deficiencies.
The Greek bailout crisis may be "coming to a boil again," as Europe is not yet out of the woods. He fears the "euro might not survive," because the single currency is "still anything but crisis-proof." Besides, "the gap between Germany and most other eurozone countries is widening and deepening." The danger is that "if the euro fails, the whole European project will fail with it." The break-up of the eurozone would produce unpredictable political and economic costs. Monetary union requires "deeper political integration" and closer co-ordination of fiscal policies. But for the moment there is little appetite for them.
The refugee crisis has laid bare the lack of a EU "joint security, protection of external borders, and a reformed European refugee policy." It is not too late to act firmly, and to live up to the challenges. Fischer says, "nationalism is not the answer. Only genuine Europeans can ensure a peaceful, prosperous future for Europe." Hence it is important not to sleepwalk into a disintegrating EU, but to bring forth "a renewed vision for a united Europe in the twenty-first century."
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Peter Schneider May 3, 2016

This work collects the old arguments that have caused the multiple crises we are now facing: ever closer union - pushing through political union against the public will - if the euro fails then Europe will fail (the old Merkel slogan) - Europe and the EU are identical - the only solution is more Europe (actually, they mean more EU) - critics are automatically either nationalists or fascists and so on and so forth. To call the project a "peaceful integration on the basis of the rule of law" is ridiculuos and in total contradiction to what we observe in reality.

Visionaries can become dangerous when trapped in their ideological assumptions they turn a blind eye to reality and start ignoring problematic developments contradicting their ideology or come to wrong conclusions that aggrevate problematic developments.

A realistic view on Europe can only show that although in many respects we share the same culture (the three hills: Capitol, Acropolis, Golgatha), at the same time we are also very different (different languages, different mentalities, different socities, different historical experience etc.). That's why we want to cooperate with each other but a majority does not want political union. As a consequence: if the euro fails (and it has already failed because the breakup can only be prevented by illegal and unconstitutional means), then an audacious, ill-advised, undemocratic experiment (they call it "the European project") might fail - but Europe will not fail. If the EU in its current state fails and democracy, the separation of powers and the rule of law are restored then it will rather be a liberation for Europe, it will be rather a return to what we once had.

Those who negate the fact that we are different and instead push for political integration cannot call themselves "genuine Europeans" as this would be the one who accepts in spite of many commonalities our differences. Based on this conviction he would strive for cooperation but not for union. He would aim for the possible not for the impossible.
- Steve Hurst May 4, 2016
  
  @Peter
  
  I have to say that is a very sound structured response
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Christopher williams May 3, 2016

I agree with virtually everything in this article - apart from the role of the euro. I am far more positive as to how the EU can move forward subsequent to what will be a strong majority for the UK to remain. There is every hope this will create a coming together of the Member States, looking anew at how to address the issues, including the way to resolve the euro before much more harm is done by it.
I think everyone understands that it cannot continue as it is; what we need is a face-saver, which I feel sure is available through the use of far greater electronic transaction processing for everything other than the simplest, smallest cash payments.
Euro notes, maximum 20 euros, can still be used across the continent, but as a double pricing versus the domestic currency of EU country ... too long to explain here but there is a bright future for a more modern, progressive EU.
- joey jay May 8, 2016
  
  Some of us a old enough to remember another Europe and how Fischer helped to destroy lives and sabotaged many initiatives.
  Some of us didn't drink the Kool Aid, like he did.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
- Steve Hurst May 3, 2016
  
  @Christopher
  Yes digital transactions removes the advantage of a common currency and allows FX movements to address economic weakness. It doesnt overcome the physical movement slowdown with Schengen in gridlock but could be v effective
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Bernhard Kopp May 3, 2016

The Euro will not survive in its present set-up unless Maastricht is effectively and credibly repaired. Hard rules, constitutional requirements in ever member country, are the only way to go, together with real harmonizations of economic and social policies. Centralization is wrong-headed. It will not be. The EU-28 can only survive if an effectiv way to a Confederation is found. This requires constitutional and organzational inventions not just empty headlines. My suggestion continues to be to turn the present EU-parliament into a representation of countries, a senat, with no more than 5 directly elected senators, and, dedicate the first-level legislation, lower house, to a network of 'European Committees' within the natioanl parliaments. There is no transnational constituency, there is no transnational identiy. We need an inventively modernized 'Europe des Patries'.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
stephan Edwards May 3, 2016

Maybe just maybe people are tired of being ruled by unelected technocrats who don't give a damn for anyone who didn't go to the right schools or is of the right class? The total lack of accountability in Brussels combined with the attitude that if you are not of the the elite you are a peasant whose opinion and needs are not worthy of thought or consideration really grates on people. The fact is a blatantly unelected and unresponsive to the "Peasants" my cause a level of dislike in the commoners views of the EU.
- joey jay May 8, 2016
  
  Hear, hear, remember the German peasantry war in the 1400s something? There is a book in German by Zimmermann that describe that....
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Steve Hurst May 3, 2016

No man is an Iland, intire of it selfe; every man is a peece of the Continent, a part of the maine; if a Clod bee washed away by the Sea, Europe is the lesse, as well as if a Promontorie were, as well as if a Mannor of thy friends or of thine owne were; any mans death diminishes me, because I am involved in Mankinde; And therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; It tolls for thee. John Donne 1572 - 1631 (original spelling)

Brexit will not point the way. Leave or Remain is irrelevent; the reason that Brexit is even occurring is the warning. Surely the fact that Germany with Merkels siren song of open borders in its ears is petitioning for the collapse of Schengen to continue another 6months is also an indicator. The euro remains a currency Ted Bundy at loose on the South Coast
A new reply to this comment has been posted.

https://prosyn.org/OE646wOar

من أجل رؤية متجددة في أوروبا

Subscribe to Project Syndicate

New Comment

Email this piece to a friend

Contact us

Log in/Register

من أجل رؤية متجددة في أوروبا

Subscribe to Project Syndicate

Edit Newsletter Preferences

Set up Notification