How can Greece be helped? The monetary troubles that shook up the weekend have excited some of the European press. The headlines to which we have been treated include, “Monetary Union in Danger”, and even better, “The EU hanging off a cliff”. No less! We should not ignore the close link between monetary somersaults and implementation of new financial regulation. I must apologise for such banality but we have to take things with a bit of a pinch of salt every time the difficulties in some eurozone countries are discussed. Greece lacks transparency and robust budgetary management, and it displays a certain casual attitude to statistical data, but at the same time it suffers from a high level of illegal immigration and does not benefit from sufficient support from other member states (see EUROPE 10067). Its currency is also under attack from speculators.
It is it in this context that the monetary and legal debate on austerity measures decided by the Greek government should be seen, as well as the very rigorous monitoring provided by the European Commission (EUROPE 10070) on which the Eurogroup and the Ecofin Council will give their verdict at the beginning of next week - a monitoring which some commentators have described as a form of tutelage. One very controversial aspect is whether the Eurogroup could possibly envisage providing financial support to Greece. The rules in force exclude this and we understand why. If countries that respect financial discipline have to pay for the others, this would encourage further budgetary slippage. Rumours about individual loans from one or another member state have been denied. The hypothesis of a loan from the International Monetary Fund (IMF) was presented as proof that the eurozone would be incapable of resolving its own problems. Nonetheless, the director general of the IMF, Dominique Strauss-Kahn declared: “If we are asked to intervene, we will do. We are there to help”. One European affairs specialist economist, Jean Pisani-Ferry, observed that there would be nothing shameful about this for the eurozone because European countries are the IMF's main shareholders: this would definitely mean that the EU would finance a large part of any intervention made. The IMF would impose strict conditions and tough monitoring. It is true that the European Commission intends to impose the same surveillance as the IMF but … with less financial support. Is it possible that no solution will be found?
The role of speculation. The most disagreeable aspect is the speculation used to exploit difficulties in Greece and the preparation of similar de-stabilising manoeuvrings for other eurozone countries: Portugal, Spain and Ireland … José Socrates, the Portuguese prime minister, was outraged by this manoeuvring, the blame for which he primarily puts on the shoulders of the rating agencies. He pointed out that public debt is much worse in the US, Japan and the United Kingdom than in his country. This manoeuvring calls for much tougher financial regulation.
Ms Merkel. I agree entirely with the Chancellor. She expressed the firm intention to buy and use the list of 1,500 German taxpayers guilty of tax evasion and hiding their considerable earnings in Swiss bank accounts. This list would enable the German inland revenue to recover at least €100 million in taxes. What is the problem? The list was actually set up illegally by unscrupulous individuals who stole the data with the intention of selling it to the German government. Can a state use information that has been obtained in this way? According to the Swiss authorities, it is unthinkable: a state that buys stolen data is guilty of receiving stolen goods. Even in Germany the question is controversial. Some ministers believe that the Chancellor has gone down a blind alley and that this is an “incentive to steal”. Legal experts believe that the courts would not allow the use of data obtained in this way. The German finance minister however, Wolfgang Schäuble, pointed out that a precedent does exist (Liechtenstein) and no court contested the operation.
I am not a legal expert, far from it, but in cases of this kind I would like to quote Cicero: “Summum jus, summa iniuria” - the maximum of justice corresponds to the maximum of injustice. Cicero was referring to a truce agreed between two belligerent sides, which lasted for 30 days. Once night fell, one of the two sides attacked the other and claimed that the agreement only mentioned “days” and not “nights”. I am not sure if Cicero's wisdom is applicable in the German example but I wish it were.
Even more so, given that in the meantime, on the advice provided by their lawyers, those guilty of fraud are now spontaneously rectifying their tax returns. The objective would therefore be reached whilst avoiding any legal conflict. Gentleman jurists should not be oblivious to the fairness and results of political action. (F.R./transl.fl)