EU future – two-speed Europe or the development of two of Europe?
December 14, 2011
The future of the EU the EU future
Two-speed Europe, or two Europes?
two development or two-speed Europe Europe ?
Nov 10th 2011, 2:23 by CharlemagneBRUSSELS 2011 年 11 月 10 日 Author: Charlemagne
NICOLAS Sarkozy is causing a big stir after calling on November 8th for a two-speed Europe: a “federal” core of the 17 members of the euro zone, with a looser “confederal” outer band of the ten non-euro members. He made the comments during a debate with students at the University of Strasbourg. The key passage is below (video here, starting near the 63-minute mark)
Nicolas Sarkozy published on November 8, the development of two-speed Europe remarks caused a huge commotion, he declared: Europe there is a rate of two developments, one is the 17 euro zone members constitute the core of “federalism” and the other is the failure by the 10 non-euro area membership of the “alliance system.” Sarkozy is the University of Johannesburg and students in a debate published in this comment. Here are some key passages: “You cannot make a single currency without economic convergence and economic integration. It impossible. But on the contrary, one cannot plead for federalism and at the same time for the enlargement of Europe. It impossible. There a contradiction. We are 27. We will obviously have to open up to the Balkans. We will be 32, 33 or 34. I imagine that nobody thinks that federalism-total integration-is possible at 33, 34, 35 countries. So what one we do? To begin with, frankly, the single currency is a wonderful idea, but it was strange to create it without asking oneself the question of its governance, and without asking oneself about economic convergence. Honestly, it nice to have a vision, but there are details that are missing: we made a currency, but we kept fiscal systems and economic systems that not only were not converging, but were diverging. And not only did we make a single currency without convergence, but we tried to undo the rules of the pact. It cannot work. There will not be a single currency without greater economic integration and convergence. That is certain. And that is where we are going. Must one have the same rules for the 27? No. Absolutely not [ ...] In the end, clearly, there will be two European gears: one gear towards more integration in the euro zone and a gear that is more confederal in the European Union. “” there is no convergence in the European economy and integration of , you can not have a single currency, but on the contrary, we can not implement the federal requirements of the European Union while seeking to expand the EU, which is impossible. There is a contradiction here, and now the European Union of 27 countries. In the future we of course, extended to the Balkans. then we will have 32, 33 or 34 countries and I think no one here that federalism – complete – will be implemented in all countries 33,34,35.
then we should do? First of all, frankly, a single monetary policy is an excellent idea, but not everyone on this issue and to question his government did not consider the case of economic convergence , it seems very strange. fair to say, there is a good point, but here omitting some details: We have successfully created a currency, but we do not make our financial system and economic system tend to the same, on the contrary becomes more deviation from the same time, we not only did not create the economic convergence in the case of a single currency, and we are trying to destroy our negotiated rules making it will not play any effect.
in Our economy is not better integration and convergence of circumstances, where there will not be entirely a single currency, which is determined the same time, that is the direction we are going to develop. is not our present 27 countries are required to implement the same system? No, absolutely not [...] Finally, it is clear that the development of Europe will have two gears: one will tend to be more integration in the euro zone development, while the other will tend to be more under the EU alliance of development. “
At first blush this is statement of the blindingly obvious. The euro zone must integrate to save itself; even the British say so. And among the ten non-euro states of the EU there are countries such as Britain and Denmark that have no intention of joining the single currency.
At first glance, this view is obviously blind. eurozone must unite to save its own; even in the United Kingdom say so, while in 10 non-euro area EU countries, including countries such as Britain and Denmark, and did not join the single currency area of ??interest.
The European Union is, in a sense, made up not of two but of multiple speeds. Think only of the 25 members of the Schengen passport-free travel zone (excluding Britain but including some non-EU members), or of the 25 states seeking to create a common patent (including Britain, but excluding Italy and Spain).
In a sense, the EU is not only has two and the pace of development is different. just think about the Schengen visa-free travel area of ??25 members (you do not even see the UK, including some non-euro area EU members) or those who want to seek to create a common standard patents in 25 countries (including the UK, but not including Italy and Spain) can be understood the.
But Mr Sarkozy comments are more worrying because, one suspects, he wants to create an exclusivist, protectionist euro zone that seeks to detach itself from the rest of the European Union. Elsewhere in the debate in Strasbourg, for instance, Mr Sarkozy seems to suggest that Europe troubles-debt and high unemployment-are all the fault of social, environmental and monetary “dumping” by developing countries that pursue “aggressive” trade policies. But Mr. Sarkozy remarks is causing increasing concern, because some people doubt that he wanted to build a xenophobic, protectionist trade with the euro area, while the rest of the EU excluded. Other occasions in Strasbourg, Sarkozy seems to think that Europe problems – the debt crisis and high unemployment – are due to the developing countries in social, environmental and monetary policy to achieve “dumping” to implement ” aggressive “trade policy result. For another insight into Mr Sarkozy thinking about Europe, one should listen to an interview he gave a few days earlier, at the end of the marathon-summitry in Brussels at the end of October (video here, starting at about 54:30): For Nicolas Sarkozy on the European point of view of another observation, we should listen to the end of the end of October in Brussels after marathon talks in an interview that he: “
” I don think there is enough economic integration in the euro zone, the 17, and too much integration in the European Union at 27. “
” I do not think the euro area has enough integration process, but 17 countries, with more than 27 members of the EU integration. “
In other words, France, or Mr Sarkozy at any rate, does not appear to have got over its resentment of the EU enlargement. At 27 nations-strong, the European Union is too big for France to lord it over the rest and is too liberal in economic terms for France protectionist leanings. Hence Mr Sarkozy yearning for a smaller, cosier, “federalist” euro zone.
In other words, the French or the like Sa Section Qi does not eliminate its rapid rate of expansion of the EU anger. For France, want to have a 27-member strong European leader in the play becomes very difficult, while the EU liberalization in the economic field too For a trade protectionist tendencies in France is also a big challenge, so am looking forward to Sarkozy a smaller, more closely, “federalism,” the euro area. This chimes with the idea of ??a Kerneuropa (“core Europe” ) promoted in 1994 by Karl Lamersand Wolfgang Sch?uble, who happens to be Germany current finance minister. Intriguingly, it is the first time that Mr Sarkozy, once something of a sceptic of European integration, has spoken publicly about “federalism”, although he had made a similar comment in private to European leaders in March (see my column). It echoes the views of Mr Sarkozy Socialist predecessor, Fran?ois Mitterrand. This holding “Kerneuropa” (“core Europe”) concept of voice was first proposed by Karl Lamers and Sch?uble proposed in 1994, and is just now Schaeuble, Germany finance minister. Interestingly, for the European integration has deep doubts about Sarkozy, it is He published the first time in public, “federalism” remarks, although in March, he met with European leaders when the private remarks have been made similar to Sarkozy echoed his Socialist Party Francois Mitterrand, the former point of view.
Such ideas appeared to have been killed off by the large eastward enlargement of the EU in 2004, and by the French voters rejection of the EU new constitution in 2005. But the euro zone debt crisis is reviving these old dreams.
the sound in a wide range of EU enlargement in 2004 and the 2005 French referendum on new EU constitution rejected when the disappeared, but European debt crisis deepened revived this dream. But what sort of federalism? Mr Sarkozy probably wants to create a euro zone in France image, with power (and much discretion) concentrated in the hands of leaders, where the “Merkozy” duo (Angela Merkel and Nicolas Sarkozy) will dominate. Germany will no doubt want a replica of its own federal system, with strong rules and powerful independent institutions to constrain politicians. Le Monde carries a series of articles (in French) on what a two- speed Europe may mean. but this is kind of federalism? Sarkozy might want to follow France intention to establish a euro-zone, which concentrated power in the hands of the leaders, and “MerKozy” duo (Merkel and Sarkozy) to dispose of such power in Germany no doubt want to copy its own federal system in the euro area, with strong rules and strong independent system to bind the politicians and the French world press made a series of articles discusses a two kinds of growth rate in Europe mean.
If the euro zone survives the crisis-and the meltdown of Italy bondsin the markets suggests that is becoming ever more difficult-it will plainly require deep reform of the EU treaties.Done properly, by keeping the euro open to countries that want to join (like Poland) and deepening the single market for those that do not (like Britain), the creation of a more flexible EU of variable geometry could ease many of the existing tensions. Further enlargement need no longer be so neuralgic; further integration need no longer be imposed on those who do not want it.
if the euro zone this time to weather the crisis – although the market Italian bonds plummeted making it increasingly difficult – then the EU treaties is a clear need in-depth reform. appropriate approach should be to those who want to join the European Union countries (eg Poland) opened its doors, while deepening and those do not want to join the EU single market (like the UK) relationship, with a more flexible variable mechanism of the EU will reduce the number of existing tensions future EU expansion should not be so haphazard; future integration process should not be imposed on those who do not want to do the country.
But done wrongly, as one fears Mr Sarkozy would have it, this will be a recipe for breaking up Europe. Not two-speed Europe but two separate Europes.
The first steps toward integration, the idea of ??holding regular summits of leaders of the 17 euro-zone countries, has already caused early friction with Britain (see my earlier post here). This week there were further cracks when, during a meeting of the euro zone finance ministers in Brussels, their colleagues from the ten non-euro states held their own separate dinner in a hotel nearby.
All this is alarming the European Commission, the EU civil service and the guardian of its treaties. Speaking in Berlin on November 9th, its president, José Manuel Barroso, delivered what amounted to a direct rebuke to Mr Sarkozy.
if you do inappropriate, then, some people worry that Sarkozy will do, it will lead to the division of Europe. no longer are the two-speed Europe but the development of split into two in Europe.
one The first step in the process, is at 17 euro-zone high-level regular meeting of national leaders, which had earlier led to friction with the United Kingdom this week, they will have further between the cracks, held in Brussels Eurozone finance ministers meeting, the 10 non-euro zone finance ministers will be held at a nearby hotel in their own dinner.
All of these are warnings of the EU administrative units and guardians of the European Commission in the November 9, the main European Commission Jose Manuel Barroso issued a little speech, which is actually very straightforward Sarkozy criticism, he said: “” The Commission welcomes, and urges- in fact we have been asking for a long time-a deeper integration of policies and governance within the euro area. Such integration and convergence is the only way to enhance discipline and stability and to secure the future sustainability of the euro. In other words, we have to finish the unfinished business of Maastricht-to complete the monetary union with a truly economic union. “welcomes the European Commission and called for Europe-wide internal policy and management can have a deeper integration, in fact we are already at a very early required to do so. This integration is to maintain discipline and stability of policy the only way to ensure the future of Europe is the only sustainable way. In other words, we must finish our unfinished task of Maastricht – that is, complete the monetary union to become a true economic union body. But stability and discipline must also go together with growth. And the single market is our greatest asset to foster growth. However, the stability and discipline policy was also consistent with economic growth. The unified market is our biggest asset for economic growth. Let me be clear-a split union will not work. This is true for a union with different parts engaged in contradictory objectives; a union with an integrated core but a disengaged periphery; a union dominated by an unhealthy balance of power or indeed any kind of directorium. All these are unsustainable and will not work in the long term because they will put in question a fundamental, I would say a sacred, principle-the principle of justice, the principle of the respect of equality, the principle of the respect of the rule of law. And we are a union based on the respect of the rule of law and not on any power or forces. let me say a little more clearly – a divided Europe we do not have any benefits. Some EU countries are engaged in a pursuit of contradictory objectives of the alliance, is a country with a complete core but seems to fall apart in the appearance of the alliance, one was an unhealthy balance of power or leadership system is controlled by a coalition of these are real. But all these are not sustainable and can not continue to operate in the long term, because this is a basic principle, the principle is respect for the law. Therefore, we respect the law is based on the basis of established alliances, rather than relying on power or force to establish a coalition. It would be absurd if the very core of our project-and economic and monetary union as embodied in the euro area is the core of our project-so I say it would be absurd if this core were treated as a kind of “opt out” from the European Union as a whole. “Economic and Monetary Union in the euro area is the core of our project, so in general, if the core is as a kind of exit from the EU ” exit mechanism “, I would say that this would be absurd. “Mr Sarkozy words seem to have caught the attention of Joschka Fischer, elder statesman of Germany Green party and a former foreign minister, who said that the EU at 27 had become too unwieldy.” Let just forget about the EU with 27 members-unfortunately, “he told Die Zeit, a German weekly newspaper.” I just don see how these 27 states will ever come up with any meaningful reforms. “Indeed, some thinkthe euro zone itself might be smaller than the 17 members (Greece may soon default and leave the euro). Sarkozy remarks seem attracted the attention of Joschka Fischer, Germany Green Party as his big brother and former German Foreign Minister has said, has 27 members of the European Union and become a white elephant. “Let us forget the 27-member European Union – unfortunately,” he told a German weekly newspaper Die Zeit said. “I just can not see 27 how many will make any meaningful reform.” In fact, some people think that the euro zone itself may be less than 17 members (Greece may soon be out of the euro). The speech that everybody is waiting for now is Mrs Merkel . The chancellor wants to change the treaties, and on November 9th she called for “a breakthrough to a new Europe”. But what sort of Europe that should be was left mostly unsaid. < br />
Now, we are waiting for Merkel remarks. German Chancellor want to change the treaty, while the November 9, she called on “to make a breakthrough to a new Europe”, but what kind of Europe should be, but most did not mention.
original from “The Economist” website, translated BY Nameness
