The Euro Argument
Fidel Sendagorta
March 28, 2010
We are all in debt with Greece. Thanks to its unfortunate indebtedness, we finally have in Europe a fascinating and substantial debate on the euro and its sustainability. The exhausting and depressing experience of devoting our best energies for ten years to the cause of institutional reforms had left us a bitter aftertaste –and it was definitely not worth it. But now we can forget this bad experience and face a real challenge. The debate on the euro deals with one of the most visible and obvious aspects of the European integration in the daily lives of millions of citizens. And it is about one of the more risky aspects of integration: after all, there are not many current or past currencies not backed by a single State.
Suddenly, the experiment could not be irreversible, in spite of having finally learned to calculate in euros without the tiresome need to convert into old currencies. Some talk, with very bad manners, about showing Greece the door- and then others? Some more well mannered suggest allowing a country out of monetary union for some time, so it can return once it has placed its accounts in order, with the help of “de facto” devaluation. A more imaginative and malicious banker proposes to use the fiscal distinction North / South between stringent and relaxed European countries to be reflected in a division of the euro in two currencies: the “neuro” and the “sudo”(read “pseudo”) . A joke which has the merit of exposing a popular narrative of the dilemmas of the euro based on the timeless fable of the grasshopper and the ant.
Beyond the speculative exuberance of economists, political visions about the future viability of the euro could be classified into the following categories:
First, the apocalyptic puritans such as Krugman, who consider Europeans have to pay dearly now for the original sin of the arrogant over-ambition of the leaders who gave birth to the euro. (more…)
La querella del euro
Fidel Sendagorta
25 de marzo, 2010
Estamos en deuda con Grecia: gracias a su desgraciado endeudamiento tenemos por fin en Europa un debate sabroso y sustancial sobre el euro y su sostenibilidad. La experiencia agotadora y depresiva de haber dedicado nuestras mejores energías de los últimos diez años a una causa –la de las reformas institucionales- que seguramente no lo merecía, nos había dejado un regusto amargo. Pero ahora podemos quitarnos el mal sabor de boca con un plato de gusto. Porque se trata sin duda de un debate que toca a uno de los aspectos más visibles y evidentes de la integración europea en la existencia cotidiana de millones de ciudadanos, como es la moneda. Y al mismo tiempo, que afecta a una de las facetas más experimentales de esa misma integración, ya que no hay muchos precedentes presentes o pasados de una moneda que no esté respaldada por un estado.
De golpe, el experimento (que dábamos ya por consolidado después de acostumbrarnos por fin a calcular en euros sin necesidad de hacer la engorrosa conversión a las viejas monedas) resulta que podría no ser irreversible. Unos hablan, con muy malos modos, de enseñarle a Grecia -¿y después a otros?- el camino de la puerta. Algunos más complacientes proponen que se permita a un país salir de la unión monetaria por un cierto tiempo, para volver una vez haya puesto sus cuentas en orden, con la ayuda de una devaluación de hecho. Un banquero más imaginativo y malicioso propone que la diferencia norte/sur en Europa entre países fiscalmente rigurosos y relajados se refleje en una división del euro en dos monedas: el “neuro” y el “sudo” (pronúnciese “pseudo” en inglés). Una guasa que tiene el mérito de desvelar un relato bien vigente de los dilemas del euro solidamente construido sobre la fábula intemporal de la cigarra y la hormiga. (more…)
Part III: South of Ibar river
J. Ignacio Torreblanca
March 3, 2010
Today, Wednesday, we have a second chance to talk to the Serb minority in Kosovo and find out how they feel, what their views are, what sort of problems they face. Contrary to the area of North Mitrovica, where the Serbs are the majority and feel relatively safe because their territory is contiguous with Serbia proper, we are now talking with Serbs in Serbs enclaves surrounded by Albanian kosovars. These Serbs see things from the perspective of an isolated minority. They feel squeezed between Pristina and Belgrade, none of them, they feel, really cares about their practical needs.
First, we meet with Goran Avramovic, a Serb journalist running an independent radio for the Serbs in an enclave close to Pristina. He says life here is miserable for Serbs, most of them are just selling their places to Albanians and leaving to Serbia because they cannot make for a decent living. He himself has his family in Serbia, because having a small child down here, he says, is impossible: there is no way to live a normal life when even electricity is not taken for granted. He complains of Serbs having no future: he says Milosevic’s oppression has now been replaced by Pristina oppression. Very few people take their rights seriously: on paper, with the Athisaari plan, they are entitled to many things, but the reality is far away. A simple example: “if this is a multi-ethnic country”, he asks, “how is it that road signs are only in one language?” Asked about the European Union and the role that the European Union could have, he takes us by surprise very aggressively arguing that he does not believe in the EU. “How can we believe in the EU’s role in the region when they can’t even get to agree on whether to recognize Kosovo or not”, he says. He does not care about the European perspective: what he needs, he says, is European standards. The bitterness in his words is evident: he feels like a victim, a loser, and he has to live with a very uncomfortable reality which may well end up defeating him. (more…)
Part II: Crossing the Ibar River
J. Ignacio Torreblanca
March 2, 2010
Monday we drive to Mitrovica in order to have a first hand experience of how is it to live in a divided city. Our guide today, an Albanian, used to live in the North. She had to flee during the war and when the war was over and she returned, her house was occupied by Serbs. For ten years now, she has been unable to return to her flat, and the UN has been of little help. Serbs have concentrated north of the Ibar river and Albanians south of, with very few exceptions. People cross the bridge but the Serbian flag stands up at the other end, reminding people what they are doing. So-called (Serb) “bridge-watchers” closely follow all the traffic. Allegedly, Serbian secret police and security forces are very active in North Mitrovica.
North Mitrovica is the gate to the Serbian dominated part of Kosovo. Serbs living north of Mitrovica can afford the de facto partition: they can freely travel free to Serbia and go on with their normal lives without seeing an Albanian. But for people in Mitrovica, life is difficult: the only hospital is in the south, the university campus is spread across both sides, and sewage and electricity infrastructures cannot be separated. For them, status, i.e. recognition of independence is not a theoretical issue but rather a practical one. Serbs in this area who we have the opportunity to talk to complain of how Belgrade interferes in every decision, not matter how technical, in order to make sure that there is no practical cooperation. So even if the European Commission is offering them 6 million euro for repairing the sewage system, they are not allowed to engage in talks with the EU. (more…)
Part I: Beograd
J. Ignacio Torreblanca
March 2, 2010
This is the first post of a series I am going to be running for the few days on Serbia and Kosovo. I am here invited by the Kosovo and Serbia Open Society Foundations. With me, there are two members of the Spanish Parliament’s Commission for Foreign Affairs, a lawyer and former MP who is specialized in human rights and a journalist.
I had never been in Belgrade before, my experience in the Balkans being reduced to Albania and Macedonia. I was surprised by the beauty of the Danube, but shocked by the run down aspect of Belgrade, which in many senses still looks as a post war city. As I walk down the main pedestrian street to the Fortress, I look at young people and I wonder how much do they do or care about the past, the war, Kosovo and all this.
In the morning after our arrival to Belgrade we are briefed by Peter Sorensen, EU representative, and his assistant on the daily difficulties which the recognition issue bears for the two million of Albanians and Serbs living in Kosovo and how difficult regional cooperation is. (more…)
Lisbon: and the winner is…
Christian Bulzomí
March 2, 2010
As it is already well known, the new Lisbon Treaty has brought major changes to the “European institutional architecture”. The Institutions have all experienced changes due to the entry into force of the new Treaty. While the big institutional changes such as the creation of the posts of President of the European Council and of High Representative for Foreign and Security Policy have attracted criticism and brought anything but clarity about who should be the person in charge of ensuring the external representation of the European Union, the winners of the adoption of the Lisbon Treaty appear to be the European Parliament and the National Parliaments.
On the one hand, the European Parliament has definitely gained its place as co-legislator as it “shall, jointly with the Council, exercise legislative and budgetary functions”. The Lisbon Treaty has brought over 40 new fields under the co-decision procedure. Consequently, most of the EU legislation will be adopted under this procedure which is now called “ordinary legislative procedure”. Thus, the European Parliament’s powers have been, once again, extended through the reform of the Treaties. (more…)