“To deserve being up front, one must first prove he knows how to do what he demands of others, in order to reach goals on time … Only then will he be accepted as the leader.”
– Fernando Fuster-Fabra
Versión Español: http://wp.me/pRlnf-5e
Scarcely three weeks have lapsed since my post on the G-20 summit in Cannes. Now, with the celebration of the European Council meet about to be held, same must decide if the EU stays or goes. In fact, the bulk of the issue to date goes beyond what some have dubbed as ‘the Euro crisis’.
The true dilemma is much deeper as it has to do with the imposition of a leadership that has neither been agreed upon nor elected amongst the partners and European citizens.
Why have two leaders self-acclaimed themselves as the only competent actors in a matter that corresponds all 27 leaders to resolve in the frame of their legitimate governance organism, the European Council?
As I have said in previous posts, it is not viable to resolve a problem with the same ideas that caused it nor can the same actors who created the problem or increased it be in the lead roles. Such is the case of the Merkel-Sarkozy tandem, responsible of the ‘Deauville conspiacy’.
One would have to go quite a time back when this unfortunate duo still wasn’t as powerful as today. The newly named Union, which was not much more than the EEC in its mature state, decided to take a giant step forward towards the convergence of all its member states. Nevertheless, in the mid-90’s, the financial pundits of said states ignored the recommendations of visionary Jacques Delors. The ECOFIN centred its actions in the creation of the Euro and sidetracked the physical union of the states to develop its competitivity as a single supplier to global markets. Furthermore, those of us engaged in Eruopean projects insisted then that the true union stemmed from the socio-political cohesion, wherein common economics was a mere driving force of growth with the Euro as a supporting element for those generating business in the member states.
It has required lots of effort to bring together the union of 15 members then, more so with the hasty incorporation of 12 others in only a decade without any realistic justification. The reasons behind the acceptance of such an expansion by other members, clearly beneficial to translate the axis of power towards Berlin as Europe’s capital, is something I have sensed but it is best not to discuss in this post.
The operational Euro was launched in 2002 as a two-speed system, an error in itself. Nonetheless, vested interests that pulled the power strings so decided. To claim now that we are in danger of a two-speed Euro is pure demagogy; we have always had two levels of centralised European power and two operational ranges amongst single currency operators. It would be a different matter if we ask what Germany and France plan to impose the other members at this stage. It consists in renouncing to a certain amount of state fiscal sovereignty without offering in turn any guarantee of corresponding decision-making competencies for those renouncing.
Do we know who will assume such ample powers so as to be authorised to impose state budgets or economic sanctions without any defined criteria on same?
Definitely not. What is obvious is that those who will wield power will not be persons elected by the citizenry who afterwards will have to foot the bill of said ceded sovereignty.
If the problem is so pressing today, just on the eve of a European summit, then why haven’t more European Council meetings been held this year or even in 2009 and 2010 to clarify the solutions proposed in relation to the European problem?
I will not stop insisting that – There is no such thing as a ‘Euro crisis’ nor is public expenditure the cause of the speculation against European economies. It is all a make-up with a single objetive, that of deviating the attention from the real global problem; a plot put together by vested interests with the blessings of some European leaders. Thus far, they have achieved to get rid of a couple of elected leaders that have been replaced by supposed experts that are not legitimated by their respective citizenry.
What’s really going on this this our Europe?
Who are apparently in command in the EU? Above all, who gives them orders?
Is the scenario being set up for another conflagration that would benefit large corporations involved in arms, military aviation, chemical & pharmaceutical industries, energetic suppliers and the leading bankins entities?
It may be worth recalling what Baron Rothschild, a Jewish-German banker said: – “ .. It’s time to buy when bloods flows in the streets, no matter id it is your own …”
Has someone decided that the time for this has come?