Leaders Use Summit to 'Congratulate Themselves' - Beyond fiscal issues, "There is no political will at the moment to pursue political integration over justice, borders, or foreign policy," says Judy Dempsey, a senior associate at Carnegie Europe. She cites the rise of euro-skepticism and the far-right throughout Europe, which makes it difficult for governments to pursue pan-European policies.
Nonetheless, the EU did officially agree earlier this month to give the ECB supervisory powers over euro-zone banks, the first step in developing a so-called banking union. While a banking union is a vital component of further European integration, EU leaders have yet to agree on a number of important elements that would make such a union truly effectual: first and foremost, a joint resolution mechanism for addressing weak euro-zone banks. EU leaders used the summit to "congratulate themselves on the banking union, but did not progress in other fields," says Lannoo.
Still, while scant, progress was made on moving forward with the banking union, Darvas argues. "There was an agreement to reach an agreement on the resolution mechanism by the end of the year at the finance ministry level," he says. Following recent pressure by the ECB and warnings that some euro banks will likely fail upcoming stress tests, a compromise could be on the horizon. Even Germany, which has resisted a scheme that would force national governments to guarantee loans to struggling euro zone lenders, "might be willing" to shift its stance, says Darvas.
Ultimately, the summit was overshadowed by allegations that US intelligence agencies had monitored German Chancellor Angela Merkel's cell phone. Goals to develop a European digital economy and a solution to the issue of migration -- one of the most politically controversial issues in the EU --were addressed rhetorically, but little was achieved substantively.
The main public takeaway of the gathering, says Dempsey, was a commitment by Germany and France to hold talks with the United States over its spying practices. Following the summit, Merkel and French President Francois Hollande called for the development of a new transatlantic agreement over intelligence gathering.
3 comments:
1) The trade surplus of the EU is creating a lot of friction in the world.
2) Devaluation of the currency would increase that friction even though the EU is the most responsible in this respect. Printing money might have some beneficial effects on the major economies using that money but it creates hot money in developing markets. We all know what the easy monetary policies of the dollar are doing to the BRICS (except the C).
3) The best way suggested by the author would be to increase internal demand. But wasn't this unbalanced consumption based economic model of the south without a competitive economy to fuel that demand that created the EZ crisis? I don't think much of the same would be the best course of action.
4) I love how the author brushes of the value of market reforms, like the Hartz IV as not particularly important but things that printing a few more EUR would be an easy solution. If something is very easy it is probably wrong.
5) The problem with Europe is that it does not need austerity, but economic discipline and enough political will to pass unpopular reforms for the common good. But that will is completely lacking in most of Europe.
The Federal Reserve currently remains the worlds foundational Ponzi scheme controller of FIAT money (which came over from the Parasites in Europe) with fractional reserve banking....and now here is Ambrose puking out the same garbage because the EU is the same as the Federal Reserve and owned by the same criminals.... so what Ambrose is spewing as usual is same corruption/foundational mechanism that these criminals in the very near future will be hanging from trees for given the exposure Karen Hudes (20 year world bank lawyer) has come forward exposing it all...
...seems the only ones with balls in this world are women for you sad corrupt lot who call your selves reporters.
Funny how the Anglosaxon capitalists always blame the nations that actually make it in real markets with real products that have real demand for causing economic inequality. With nations its just like with companies, shops, etc. - some succeed and drive others out of the market. Fiat currency and devaluation are de facto nothing else but implicit welfare to the loser nations since they punish successful nations and help loser nations gain competitivity by simple monetary tricks.
Real capitalism would mean competing at eye level on a kind of gold standard... but thats the scenario Anglosaxon capitalists hate most since they know their nations would not stand a ghost of a chance under fair conditions.
Post a Comment