Over the last few days, I have tried to report on Italy's efforts to re-establish the conditions required for it to remain in the eurozone. Whilst, over in Rome, the government responsible for doing this is getting ready to take up its duties, a few aspects of the events surrounding the euro are worthy of being pointed out or clarified.
Repetition. My first point is simply a repetition of an earlier comment; historians and intellectuals (who are most welcome in European debates) should learn to distinguish between being a member of the EU and being a member of the euro, two radically different situations. We often read wise and passionate stances about what a shame it would be for Europe to reject Greece, the cradle of all our civilisations. But there has never been any question of Greece leaving the EU; on the contrary, in the event of problems, Community support is stepped up and extended. It is the country's presence in the eurozone which is a problem, for Greece and for other countries, because the euro cannot work if its rules are not observed by all. The shortcomings of a single country, even the smallest of all, send shockwaves across the entire zone and well beyond it, as we have had ample opportunity to observe just recently. But neither Greece nor any other member state will ever be asked to leave the EU unless it wants to.
Citizenship. In Italy, alongside a political class which has been roundly criticised and challenged (and which does not seem prepared to remedy its abusive expenses and advantages) and on the sidelines of those taking advantages of abusive privileges (and who refuse to give them up), we have also seen a spontaneous movement of support for the national economy. One Mr Melani, unknown beyond the circle of his family and friends, paid for a full page in the main daily newspaper of the country to urge his countrymen to buy up national treasury bonds. The take-up exceeded all expectations: there were thousands of positive responses and four banks decided to waive the commission they normally charge for these operations. The national competition body indicated that a possible agreement between the banks to roll out this behaviour would be in line with competition rules (both European ones and national ones), because they provide a substantial advantage to consumers. Admittedly, the buyers are benefiting from currently high interest rates, but the public debt stays in the country.
Additionally, some analyses of the Italian situation are fairly positive: solid economic base, many citizens own their own homes, a high percentage of the debt under national ownership. The executive director of the IMF, Arrigo Sadun, said in Rome this week that the efforts the EU is asking of Italy, although considerable (cutting public debt by €100 billion in three years), are not beyond the limits of the capacity of the country's economy.
London demolition job. A very considerable proportion of British society is continuing with its more or less underhand work of demolishing the euro and its future. It would be ridiculous to see this as a reminiscence of a long-distant past or an intellectual or historical attitude. In actual fact, very real interests are at stake, mainly concerning one of the main cornerstones of British wealth: the financial markets of London. We need to have the courage to say it: in the field of finance, it is not a question of different methods or of competition, but of a conflict between opposing interests and objectives. The British pound is in the opposite corner to the euro, London rejects essential Community initiatives such as the financial transaction tax.
These antagonisms lead to equally opposing attitudes on the future of European integration as a whole, on developments underway, which the two sides see very differently: in London, they are fighting for ties to be relaxed and national autonomy to be stepped up; on the continent, the general favourable attitude towards political integration, which is traditional for some member states and within the Community institutions, continues to exist and is even growing stronger (partly due to the need for the euro to work). British Prime Minister David Cameron has even come up with a new term for the EU he wants to see: a network of states, not a bloc. Later this week, Dr Merkel, who has been increasingly vociferous in favour of European integration, and Mr Cameron are to meet: will it be a meeting of appearances, or a real confrontation between two incompatible visions?
Preparation? According to a number of sources of information, the authorities of certain member states are in the process of looking into votes out in the event that certain countries of the eurozone should end up leaving it. There is however, much confusion between various hypotheses. This is a subject to be handled with caution and one to which this column will return in detail.
(FR/transl.fl)