Posts
How is it possible to forge an
alliance between an imperialist power that is committed to EMU and one that may
hold a referendum on whether to leave the European Union? Or between a big
manufacturing power and one whose interests lie in the promotion of financial
'services'? It is not so difficult in these troubled times, when the shifting
tectonic plates of power balances make all the key players consider their
position. Consider the joint article written by (writers for) Germany's
finance minister, Wolfgang Schäuble, and Britain's chancellor of the exchequer,
George Osborne, in today's Financial Times. It is an important political
concession to the UK, but one that also reflects Germany's interests.
Furthermore, it reveals a striking view of the future for Europe's population.
They start out by lauding their
policies to rein in public spending deficits and 'reform' their economies,
adding that measures have been taken to prevent future financial crises from
damaging public finances (strangely omitting to mention the Bank of England's
policy to expand the UK banking system to nine times GDP). Then, ever so bravely,
they rail against Russia's actions in Crimea, also failing to note the EU's
role in putting Russia in a position where it had little choice but to act.
There will be 'consequences' for Russia, but they will be 'balanced and
proportionate'. They do not mention that any further measures will not be against
UK financial, etc, and German energy supply interests, but perhaps their writers
were too busy and overlooked that point of clarification. Surely, the Chelsea football team would not be incarcerated if Russian assets in London were to be seized?!
Striking points are made next on
Europe's decline: Europe's economy has 'stalled', others have grown; Europe's
share of patent applications has halved in the past decade; there is 25% youth
unemployment. The solution? Reform! What kind of reform? 'Europe accounts for
just over 7 per cent of the world’s population but 50 per cent of global social
welfare spending'. Draw the obvious conclusions about what this means for the
lifestyles of a privileged population.
The key concession for the UK in
this article is Schäuble's agreement to the view that 'countries outside the
euro area are not at a systematic disadvantage in the EU' and that there is a
guaranteed 'fairness for those EU countries inside the single market but
outside the single currency'. The reason for Germany's position on this is
that, as the paymaster for Europe, it is very happy with the UK's influence in
restricting the EU budget. It also agrees with the UK perspective of boosting
trade deals with the US and other regions, and there is little conflict here as
each country has different things to sell, each with its own distinct market
power.
