Will There Be An European Economic Government?
As the second wave of European crisis becomes more and more evident, the president of France and the Chancellor of Germany have proposed the creation of a “true economic government” made up of all the heads of state in the Euro zone and led by the president of the European Union Herman van Rompuy.
Sarkozy and Merkel met in France after the turbulent week for world markets and decided that the 17 nations that are now composing the Euro zone include a balanced budget into their national constitutions.
In order to make sure that the cross-border economic government works well, the two heads of governments from the most influential nations in the European Union will make sure that the economic government will have two meetings in a year and a two-and-a-half presidency.
In a conference delivered on Elysee Palace, Sarkozy explained the move as a means of assuring the fact that France and Germany will continue to support the continental currency and that they will take their place in the European economy, and in order to do so a unity of vision is required.
Sarkozy and Merkel are under a lot of pressure to secure the survival of the continental currency, after a year and a half of continuous stress on it, and to make sure an economic balance can be found after this commotion on the international markets.
The situation in Europe does not seem to improve even after the bailout of Greece and Ireland, as Italy and Spain are about to go through the same situation placing an extra stress on the Euro.
For that reason the proposition made by the two leaders is intended as a strong signal for the economic markets that the Euro will endure, and will survive this crisis.
Apart from this economic and political construction, Sarkozy and Merkel also proposed a European-wide tax on financial transactions and the harmonizing of their corporate taxes.
Some were interested in this “federal eurozone” idea, and appreciated it a means to make sure that the Euro has a very serious background. Such a bold step would bring a fiscal union of the 17 Euro countries, but it seems more like a dream to others.
The two leaders sent a letter containing these propositions to Herman Van Rumpoy, the president of the European Union.
The proposition of Merkel and Sarkozy comes at a time when there are rumors that Germany has already resumed the printing of the former currency the Deutch Mark, and that there is a possibility that it may leave the Euro in case it becomes to difficult to sustain.
Economic analyses made by German economists show that there is a possibility that the Euro zone be redefined as to comprise only the most powerful states in the EU, with the most stable economies and the capacity to meet every requirement of a strong Euro.
This area would include, in the opinion of the German analysts, apart from France and Germany, the Benelux countries. The other countries would have a Euro currency but a milder one, capable of being supported by the economies of the respective countries.
The plan advanced by Merkel and Sarkozy seems to go beyond these economic analyses of the German economists who were thinking of ways to save Euro.
The construction of a “government,” be that an economic one, is more than a simple accountant’s job, since the measures of such a continental body are expected to be carried out by the “local governments” of the 17 countries that compose the eurozone.
That brings back into question the decision-making process within the European Union and the plans for the future of this association of states.
There is a growing feeling in Europe, at least in the European Union countries, that the continental body is anything but a democratic state. The decision-making process is most of the time lacking the transparency that is mandatory in a democratic society, and is more bureaucratic than the decision-making process in a private corporation.
The important decisions, that are being carried out in all the EU members, since the constitutions of these countries have been modified as to give precedence to the EU recommendations over national laws, are being made mainly by some bureaucrats in Strassbourg or Brussels, without any consultation with the population.
The European Parliament seems like a democratic place filled with civilized people from all over the union (most of them), where every one is allowed to have a saying, but in the end the decision rests with the bureaucrats, and the representatives of the parliament give the impression of a huge Hyde Park, where everybody can speak their mind being absolutely sure that no one ever listens to them.
The way the leadership of the European Union is elected has also nothing to do with the presidential elections in the United States or the EU member countries. Except for the members of the European parliament, no one has ever voted for Herman van Rompuy to become the president of Europe.
Of all the 400 million of European citizens, almost no one knows that there is an office of president of European Union and even fewer know who holds it.
Why is that? Because after the failure to have the Nissa Treaty admitted by referenda by the nations in European Union, the continental leadership found a way to make sure the decision is made as far away as possible from the citizen, who should not be bothered with such problems, that could keep them from producing the money the European bureaucrats can spent without ever being held accountable for it.
It is so that the Lisbon Treaty was enforced on all the countries of the European Union, after it was first turned down by the Irish people and the referendum was held again, like in a banana republic of Africa, or in the Soviet Union of Stalin, where it makes no difference who votes and what for, the only ones who count are those who account the votes.
After the Irish were showed the error of their ways and were made to understand that it is in their best interest not to oppose the treaty, the Czech president was also compelled to sign it, though the old respectable man had his hesitation caused by the same provisions in the treaty that were making the European Union a super-state.
Now, with all this democratic process going on so smoothly, the European Union bureaucrats were far to busy to tell the people of Europe what will EU look like: Will it be a federal state with the actual national states as constituents or will it be a super-state that will inherit the national territory of the states after they were broken down into their constituent provinces, who would become some sort of regions on which the European Union will be built.
The most important leaders of the Union come and propose an “economic government,” which, if the situation demands, shouldn’t be so hard to put in place. With the democratic processes working so well, the EU should have a government in no time.
Especially since the economic crisis is a perfect excuse to convince the population of countries whose states are threatened with bankruptcy that a “federal government” is better than the national ones.
At this point it all seems economic-based. But let us not forget that before it became a political body, the European Union itself was no more than a common market for those who were selling natural resources in an Europe devastated by a terrifying world war.