*** KENNETH DYSON, IVO MAES (Editors): Architects of the Euro. Intellectuals in the Making of European Monetary Union. Oxford University Press (Great Clarendon Street, Oxford OX2 6DP, UK. Tel: (44-1865) 556767 – fax: 241701 – Email: onlinequeries.uk@oup.com – Internet: http://www.oup.com ). 2016, 307 pp. £55. ISBN 978-0-19-873591-5.
Here we have a book that has unfortunately been gathering dust on the shelves of the Bibliothèque européenne, for far too long. It was, however, and still is, of immense interest to those who want to understand where the storms affecting the Eurozone for almost a decade, come from. These storms have, in a certain way, validated the doubts expressed during the 1990s by certain economists, “especially Anglo Americans” about the viability of the Economic and Monetary Union project. These commentators include Milton Friedman, who saw this as the victory of politics over the economy and argued in 1997 that it would exacerbate political tensions between member countries of the Eurozone. In this connection, he made this rather brutal warning, “Monetary unity imposed under unfavourable conditions will prove a barrier to the achievement of political unity”. Judging by the evidence, we may concur that this might have appeared as a simple premonitory statement but…This book therefore appears at the very right time because it brings together a number of different academic endeavours to assess the contribution and legacy of the architects of the euro, including a number of eminent intellectuals that have at one time or another been involved in the long gestation of the single European currency. As explained by Kenneth Dyson (University of Cardiff) and Ivo Maes (Catholic University of Leuven and Ichec Brussels Business School) in their introductory chapter, the multifaceted crisis that struck in 2008, “poses questions about the quality of the original design of the Euro”. To be clear, are these architects the source of the design problems the Eurozone is suffering from or on the contrary, was their opinion ignored on certain key questions and which is in fact “a source of inspiration for solving the design problems"? The answer to this burning issue can be found in the forward by the two editors of the book, which calls on readers to make a distinction “between architects and architecture” and which was in fact the remit of the political leaders, “especially those from France and Germany” who took part in the Maastricht European Council of December 1991. It was there that it was decided that monetary policy would be supranational but that the member states would maintain full sovereignty in budgetary policy, banking supervision and regulation and policies that impact on competitiveness. The architects are therefore not responsible for the “asymmetric design” that almost caused the death of economic and monetary union. Did the architects identify the problems that monetary union could cause and put forward solutions that were ignored at the time? This important book helps us to make a number of discoveries in light of the biographical approach of ten different individuals: Robert Triffin from Belgium, “The Arch Monetarist in the European Monetary Integration Debates”; the French nationals Robert Marjolin and Raymond Barre, the former sought to make the common market secure and the latter wanted to modernise France; the Luxembourg Prime Minister, Pierre Werner, “Visionary European and Consensus Builder”; Roy Jenkins and Jacques Delors; the German nationals Hans Tietmeyer, apostle of “Ethical Ordo-liberalism” and Karl-Otto Pöhl; Tommaso Padoa-Schioppa from Italy, who saw economic and monetary union as the foundation stone of a federal Europe and finally, Alexandre Lamfalussy, from Belgium, who, according to Professors Dyson and Maes, was, “perhaps the most prescient of all the architects”. These were selected extremely carefully on the basis of a number of very precise criteria. The majority come from the so-called “founding” countries and although the Netherlands is not represented, this is because, according to
Dyson and Maes, of the “strong Dutch orientation to German views on monetary union”. In any case, the range of personalities selected is representative of very different visions of European integration and even of the economic and monetary union that needed to be built. Nonetheless, it does not mean that any of them would now claims that the architecture decided on in the policies during the Maastricht European Council was “their own”. All of them would agree, however, in confirming what Jan Smets, the governor of the national Bank of Belgium states when writing in his forward, “the Euro area needs to build institutions that reinforce the cohesion of economic, monetary, and political union” and which, first of all, requires “a sense of shared responsibility” to be recreated. It remains to be seen whether today’s political leaders will be more capable of this than their Maastricht predecessors... Michel They
*** IVO MAES, GYÖRGY SZAPÁRY (Editors): Alexandre Lamfalussy – Selected Essays. Magyar Nemzeti Bank (9 Szabadság tér, H-1054 Budapest). 2017, 405 pp. ISBN 978-615-5318-10-8.
This book is the result of a joint initiative between the National Bank of Belgium and its Hungarian counterpart, the Magyar Nemzeti Bank. It is a homage paid to one of the founding fathers of the euro, Alexandre Lamfalussy, who died at the age of 86 on 9 May 2015. He was the first president of the European Monetary Institute, which successfully helped to deliver Economic Monetary Union, before handing it over to the European Central Bank. He was born in Hungary before becoming a Belgian after his exile after the communist regime was set up. He was not just a highflying central banker (heading the Basel-based Bank for International Settlements), intellectual who had the ear of the economic and financial community but also a convinced European and a long-time supporter of European economic integration. With the backing of György Szapáry for whom Lamfalussy was the director of his PhD thesis at the Catholic University of Leuven, Professor Ivo Maes – who currently holds the Robert Triffin Chair, whilst working at the National Bank of Belgium– has chosen a number of articles and speeches made by a figure who often had the reputation of being something of Cassandra for his warnings regarding the forthcoming financial storms. The first part of the book returns to the period of the “young Lamfalussy”. His first text goes back to 1953 and focuses on the steel industry and the European Coal and Steel Community, which is soon followed by reflections on the Common Market and the need to build a European Monetary Order. The second part of the book covers the years 1976-1993, spent in Basel. The third part examines the speeches he made as president of the European Monetary Institute, including his farewell speech to this institution in 1997. “Lamfalussy the Elder” particularly focuses on stability of the financial markets, an eminently contemporary issue. (MT)
*** CONSTANTINOS LAPAVITSAS, HEINER FLASSBECK, GUILLAUME ETIEVANT, FREDERIC LORDON, CEDRIC DURAND: Euro, Plan B. La sortie de crise en Grèce, en France et en Europe. Editions Topos (2 rue Plapouta, GR-11473 Athens. Tel: (30-210) 8222835 – fax: 8222684 – Email: info@motibo.com – Internet: http://www.toposbooks.gr ). 2016, 160 pp. €10. ISBN 978-960-499-202-7.
It is quite clear that European leaders had a lot of difficulty in tackling the Eurozone crisis. It became apparent to a number of people that the countries experiencing difficulties were faithfully taking their medicine while there economies contracted or even worse, collapsed. At the same time, the capitulation of the government led by Alexis Tsipras provoked a broad debate on whether alternative solutions were possible. In this connection, the radical left in Europe was at the forefront. In this book, Professor Heiner Flassbeck (University of Hamburg), deputy minister for finance in Germany between 1998 and 1999 and Costas Lapavitsas, Professor of economics at the School of Oriental and African Studies at the University of London, present a social rescue programme for Greece. They analyse certain technical aspects if Greece were to leave the Eurozone and present this as an historic opportunity for the country that would be perfectly manageable. Unsurprisingly, they are not at all contradicted in this publication by Guillaume Etievant, the former secretary of the French Left Party and for which he was responsible for economic and labour issues; the sociologist and economist, Frédéric Lordon, working at the CNRS in France, who belong to the so-called “School of adjustment”, which has its roots in Marxist and Keynesian thought. They also have the backing of Professor Cédric Durand (University of Paris 13), a member of the radical group of economists, the “Economistes Atterrés”. The three of them help develop a rethink about a possible plan B for Greece, as well as France and the whole of Europe. They emphasise the economic and political dimensions of a total break with the neoliberal model, for which they also seek to identify and assess the ramifications. This is a politically partisan book, which calls for the crucial debate we need to be developed further on the future of the European Union and the role that the left can play within it. (AKa)
*** PANOS TSAKLOGLOU (Editor): Plan de sortie de la crise. Un nouveau modèle de production pour la Greece. Editions Dianeosis (7 rue Granikou, GR-15125 Maroussi. Tel: (30-213) 0023000 – Email: info@dianeosis.org – Internet: http://www.dianeosis.org ). 2017, 224 pp. €9. ISBN 978-618-82833-0-5.
Why did Greece go under? What are the distortions to the model of wealth production in Greece and what led to the collapse of the economy? Following this monumental fiasco what should be changed? What should the new model of growth for Greece look like and what reform should be implemented to achieve this growth? This book brings together five working economists, who also perform other roles as lecturers and researchers at the University of Athens. They bring a number of responses to these crucial questions and many others too. The book is in fact a cartography of the structural causes of the crisis. The authors assess the measures adopted by the country as dictated by the memoranda and then go on to look at possible ways of creating a new model for growth for the Greek economy and subsequently offer ways of developing a crisis exit strategy. These are the results of around ten different studies that have been synthesised and composed into an invaluable and very comprehensive guide for those responsible for planning the country’s development. The book is also of great interest insofar as it provides a huge amount of data and very reader-friendly graphs that indicate what needs to be done to find a way out of the crisis. It also makes an appeal to focus the public debate on the real causes of the Greek crisis and help provide a major contribution to defining public policies that can help stimulate economic recovery and job creation. (AKa)
*** Politique. Revue belge d’analyse et de débat. ASBL Politique (9 rue du Faucon, B-1000 Brussels. Tel: (32-2) 5386996 – Email: info@politique.eu.org – Internet: http://www.politique.eu.org ). May 2017, No. 100, 132 pp. €12. Subscription: €45 (€40 for PDF, €50 for the two versions).
The 100th issue of the progressive Belgian French speaking journal has recently benefited from an input of youthful new blood that is graphically illustrated in the new judiciously designed editorial makeover. An excellent feature article focuses on the question of whether it is possible to “find a way that goes beyond capitalism”. The editors of the book immediately recognise that after “a century of attempts and errors” between 1917 and 2017 “no one really knows what anything beyond capitalism would look like and what could serve as a practical utopia for the medium-term”. Nonetheless, there is absolutely no question of accommodating to capitalism which has obviously “led humanity and the planet to an impasse”. This observation is made by the economist Gabriel Maissin, who points out that the theorem of Helmut Schmidt, “where today’s profits are the investments of tomorrow and the jobs of the day after” is no longer the case because an increasing part of this wealth is “taken up in dividends and financial and banking profits”. The part of the wealth produced that goes back to the workers has experienced a continual decline throughout the world. More than ever, “the need to go beyond capitalism remains a necessity”, he argues, underlining that, “the conditions, modalities and deadlines for this ‘exit from capitalism’ still need to be defined”. There are very few positive lessons to be taken from past experiences in this connection, as demonstrated by the examples of the former Soviet Union and Russia, China and “Latino populisms”, “the Chilean exception” at the time of Allende or Africa when capitalism and colonialism were combined. For Western Europe, François Perl illustrates that a political exit from capitalism “has never really been on the agenda or gone beyond rhetoric” which explains perfectly why, “the current collapse of social democracy and even its current discourse, is no longer able to distinguish itself from liberalism”. Is this simply something that we have to get used to then? The authors do not manage to resolve this question but in the last part of the article they do provide possible ways of “continuing the struggle” in a number of different areas. In this connection, Michèle Gilkinet, defends the “promises made in alternatives to growth” and Jean-Claude Englebert calls on readers to “go beyond the current juncture” and tackle “the collective illness” that allows “capitalist absolutism” to rule as master. (MT)