Posted on 06/27/2012 6:24:36 AM PDT by Olog-hai
Europe's leaders convening in Brussels on Thursday for an European Union summit are under intense pressure to come up with a new plan to save the euro, but they seem as divided as ever.
Chancellor Angela Merkel used uncommonly stark language on Tuesday when she rejected the idea for common euro bonds by saying Europe would not share total debt liability "as long as I live."
But German media commentators have drawn some comfort from a blueprint for a radical revamp of the eurozone's architecture presented this week by the "gang of four" European presidents: European Council President Herman Van Rompuy, European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso, Euro Group President Jean-Claude Juncker and European Central Bank President Mario Draghi.
The ideas would entail a dramatic loss of national sovereignty through the establishment of a central authority with power to demand changes in individual members' national budgets, as well as a "medium term" move towards euro bonds, as well as a banking union with a single authority that would insure banking deposits and have the power to shut or recapitalize banks directly, with help from Europe's permanent bailout fund, the European Stability Mechanism. …
German commentators say EU leaders will have to grasp the nettle and agree to at least the basic framework of a complete overhaul of the euro system if they want to save the single currency. Many agree with Merkel that euro bonds are the wrong answer, and that American calls for Germany to throw money at the problem won't solve the crisis. All countries will have to accept a loss of sovereignty to make the currency work in the long term—and in the medium term, says one commentator, the European Central Bank should take a bigger role in tackling the crisis. …
(Excerpt) Read more at spiegel.de ...
This will never happen, at least not for long. What the Germans mean by loss of sovereignty is that there will be a mechanism for forcing budgetary responsibility on the debtor states. What the other states mean is that there will be a mechanism for forcing the Germans to back and pay for everything.
These are incompatible. In the short term, the Germans would underwrite debt, but does anyone believe that a supranational agency could really force financial responsibility and make the non-Germanic states competitive?
It’s not about making them “competitive”. This is a power play. The EU’s economy is the social market economy by treaty.
Exactly. And a strong man can come striding in without warning, at any time; things are unstable enough.
Exactly. And a strong man can come striding in without warning, at any time; things are unstable enough.
In practice none of them truly are. They mostly rubber-stamp decisions made by 'the Community Method' as per the Treaty of Lisbon, except in those rare cases where a veto is used.
How many member states actually received so much as a referendum on the Lisbon treaty from their sovereign parliaments? IIRC, only Ireland - and they were re-polled until they gave the right answer. The Germans didn't get one.
Not even the European parliament is involved in (important) decisions. That is just a very well-paid talking shop busy creating destructive regulation and presenting a facade of representation.
However: the Germans, like the Finns and even the Italians - do retain a de facto power that (it turns out) Spain and Greece dared not use. This power is the ability to walk away. Germany can take their ball and go home. And I hope they will do so.
Fortunately the Germans may do exactly that. Their courts only accepted the Lisbon treaty if it was legally held not to institute a federal state. Now that Rumpoy has come out with this document, that decision will be revisited.
Hope this is helpful.
‘States Must Sacrifice Sovereignty to Save Euro’
Sounds like a moocher plot-line from Atlas Shrugged...
It won't of course.
But such a supranational agency will ensure that a worthless unelected political elite get to keep their jobs for a few more years.
For any rational, even slightly educated and mature individual, and right from the giddy up...nations hemorrhaging their sovereignty (not to mention, autonomy) HAD to be an inevitable requisite in ANY consideration of a functional EU!
Why is it only NOW that this is a deal breaker?
I am an American Jingoist, but I KNOW that is not true.
They don’t have the combat experience our troops do, but they have good personnel and equipment. Main problem is political not military. Lets hope that problem remains.
17 nations giving up their sovereignty. Yeh that will happen. Not.
Maybe because it’s the last straw?
No-one in Europe voted for the Lisbon treaty, except plausibly some of the Irish. Parliaments across Europe adopted it without reference to their populace. Gordon Brown famously signed it in secret, after having promised a referendum to the UK.
The transporter-accident we know as the EU is the mashed-together dream of a supranational elite and ideological socialists. The 500 million people in the EU haven’t had much opportunity to express their opinion so far: they have generally moved rightwards under the yoke of the treaty (e.g. the New Finns party in Finland).
Maybe this time they will throw it off - or the markets will throw it off for them.
17 nations giving up their sovereignty. Yeh that will happen. Not.
Soros...his followers and believers...and his billions...have come along way in creating a borderless Soros-ordered society. When will people learn.
I mostly agree. First, though, it has to be sold on the purported benefits. Those are fiscal responsibility, immediately through German financial obligations, and longer-term through control of the other countries. So, in effect it is pan-European socialism by treaty, as you say.
However, without crunching authoritarian control, this arrangement will have the Germans footing the bill for the continued lackadaisical behavior of the debtor states. It will be a long-term unstable situation, but for different reasons. The Germans will eventually rebel against higher taxes; so will the Greeks, the Spaniards, and the Italians, and moreover, against taxes imposed from outside.
Europe has no Lincoln.
Socialists of the world -— unite!
Good point.
>>They don’t have the combat experience our troops do, but they have good personnel and equipment<<
They are TINY (but I guess all about the same size so an EU war would be pretty even):
http://www.armedforces.co.uk/Europeandefence/edcountries/countrygermany.htm
Germany:
Total Armed Forces
Army: 160,000 including about 40,000 conscripts (plus about 130,000 reserves)
Navy: 24,000 including about 3,500 conscripts (plus about 4,000 reserves)
Air Force: 50,000 including about 10,000 conscripts (plus about 12,000 reserves)
http://www.armedforces.co.uk/Europeandefence/edcountries/countryitaly.htm
Italy:
Total Armed Forces
Army: 104,000
Navy: 34,000
Air Force: 44,000
Carabinieri: 107,000
http://www.armedforces.co.uk/Europeandefence/edcountries/countryfrance.htm
France:
Army: 112,800
Navy: 42,100
Air Force: 57,000
Medical Service: 8,500
Central Staff: 5,000
Gendarmerie: 101,000
USA By comparison:
Army 561,979
Marine Corps: 202,612
Navy: 323,139
Air Force: 329,640
Coast Guard: 41,327
(total 1,458,697)
Add to that 875,000 in active reserve...
Yes, they’re much smaller. But their equipment is very good, their training decent and there are plenty of troops to wreak havoc across Europe.
Of course, they’d all risk bankruptcy trying to finance actual military campaigns.
IIRC I think Farage calls this an attempt at a ‘Debt Union’.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.