BERLIN – In Germany’s recent regional elections, voters delivered a resounding rebuke to Chancellor Angela Merkel’s party, the Christian Democratic Union. With an increasing number of Germans losing confidence in a European solution to the ongoing refugee crisis, calls for German isolation and unilateralism are growing louder – and far-right political forces are gaining traction.
This is highly troubling, but it should not be shocking. The European Union has consistently failed to find joint solutions to shared problems, even as it has been wracked by a series of crises. In the current refugee crisis, EU countries have shown a distinct lack of solidarity with Germany, with many refusing to take on even a small share of the burden. Despite the recent deal with Turkey aimed at reducing the flow of Syrian refugees, most Germans do not expect their EU partners to change course.
The Contradictions of Chinese Capitalism
PS On Point: Your review of the world’s leading opinions on global issues.
This is all the more infuriating for Germans, given that their country bore the heaviest financial burden for the rescue programs carried out in Cyprus, Greece, Ireland, Portugal, and Spain in recent years. Add to that sense of betrayal the looming possibility of a British exit from the EU, and it is not difficult to see why Germans feel that distancing themselves from Europe may well be their best bet.
Of course, for some Germans, the lack of solidarity regarding refugees is simply a compelling excuse for blocking reforms that they never supported in the first place, such as the completion of a European banking union. But they are now attracting the support of a growing number of Germans who previously might have disagreed with their anti-EU stance. The notion that EU countries merely want Germany’s money – the French, for example, have openly advocated the creation of a “transfer union” – is on its way toward becoming a majority view.
Against this background, if financial crises were again to intensify, Germany’s EU partners probably could not expect the country to agree to any financial rescue programs. In other words, Europe’s real financial backstop no longer exists.
Thus, the failure to define a European response to the refugee crisis, underpinned by genuine burden sharing, is destabilizing Europe both politically and economically. Instability may not be surprising in Greece, which has received some €240 billion ($255 billion) in official loans since 2010 and is the main frontline country in the refugee crisis. But in Germany, which has been remarkably stable for more than a decade and has been a pillar of EU-wide stability during tumultuous times, it represents a highly consequential reversal.
Merkel is paying a huge political price for her remarkable resolve in promoting an open Europe. Worse, the far-right Alternative für Deutschland party is the main beneficiary. Founded just three years ago on an anti-European platform, the AfD has now made opposition to refugees a cornerstone of its appeal. In the latest elections, the AfD entered each regional parliament with a significant share of the vote: 15.1% in Baden-Württemberg, 12.5% in Rhineland-Palatinate, and 24% in Saxony-Anhalt.
Domestic social conflict is also on the rise. Politicians and economists have been stoking fears among German citizens about the massive costs of the influx of refugees, which has intensified the struggle over high and rising levels of inequality in wealth and wages. Finance Minister Wolfgang Schäuble has proposed raising taxes in Europe on gasoline to finance the additional expenditures for refugees, although public budget surpluses in Germany amounted to close to €20 billion, or 0.7% of GDP, in 2015.
The refugee crisis is fundamentally changing German economic-policy priorities. The German government has been all but reneging on its commitments to strengthen significantly public investment in infrastructure and education. Other urgently needed reforms, such as to taxation and family policies, are also being postponed. With every refugee coming to Germany, it becomes more unlikely that Schäuble will be able to deliver on his promise of a “Schwarze Null” – a federal budget surplus – in the important election year of 2017.
The likely outcome is a further cut in public investment, combined with additional social spending and an increase in the minimum wage, which would benefit some Germans, but also make it more difficult for refugees to find jobs. Urgent reforms will be postponed further, and Germany’s economic prospects will be weakened.
The refusal of European leaders to take responsibility and agree on a shared solution to the refugee crisis is not just hurting the refugees; it is also damaging the EU’s future, as it weakens Germany’s willingness to reform and engage with the rest of Europe. Make no mistake: If matters continue on their current course, the narrow-minded nationalism that is on the rise in Germany today will come back to haunt each and every EU member.
Comments
Hide CommentsRead Comments (24)Please log in or register to leave a comment.
Comment Commented Luis Fernandez
Mr Schneider, it is clear cut the mood among German taxpayers, but I find two things German public opinion is not considering. First, our common project is a strong union for avoinding wars in Europe (I don't need to argue for this in Germany, I presume) and establishing a European brotherhood, against that nationalism that has been the cause of the European demise. So I gladly accept if money from wealthy regions of Spain goes to Mecklemburg-Vorpommern. Second, I think you are very perceptive of the German contribution to other countries, and not so perceptive of the German profits by having other countries as partners. In her trade with Spain 2010-2014, Germany accumulated a surplus amounting to 50 500 million €. This fabulous quantity went from Spanish pockets to German pockets. A good customer of Germany, don'y you agree? Now the real question: do you think Germany would have a 50 500 million surplus trading with a Spain performing in "pesetas" and not in €? On the contrary, cheap Spanish merchandises would invade German inner market, damaging German companies and jobs; and Spaniards with their wealth in "pesetas" would not be able to purchase so many goods in Germany! Your help to Spain is only the other side of the coin of your profiting from selling lots of things to Spain due to the fact that Spain is not counting in "pesetas", but in €.
Don't think of what you give, do think of what you take! Read more
Comment Commented j. von Hettlingen
Marcel Fratzscher says that "narrow-minded nationalism" in Germany has given rise to "isolationism," which will only "come back to haunt each and every EU member," if "matters continue on their current course." The regional elections last month had jolted Germany, as the far-right, anti-migrant Alternative for Germany (AfD) won big in three German states. The poor performance of Angela Merkel's centre-right party had made German politics look a lot less predictable and potentially less stable. The political landscape is fragmented. Gone are the days of two major parties, CDU on the right and SPD on the left. Smaller, more radical fringe parties are gaining influence, forming at times adventurous coalition combinations.
As more and more Germans believe they can't rely on European solidarity to resolve the ongoing refugee crisis, the author says, "calls for German isolation and unilateralism are growing louder – and far-right political forces are gaining traction." There are outbursts of anger "given that their country bore the heaviest financial burden for the rescue programs carried out in Cyprus, Greece, Ireland, Portugal, and Spain in recent years." Many Germans feel also a "sense of betrayal," saying Britain's in/out referendum on its EU membership revolves around self-interest. In this regard "it is not difficult to see why Germans feel that distancing themselves from Europe may well be their best bet."
The author seems to say "the lack of solidarity regarding refugees" among EU members would not hurt Germany, although it makes a "compelling excuse for blocking reforms" that Germans "never supported in the first place." He also hints that Germany still has the leverage with EU countries that intend to borrow money from this country in the future.
The author believes Merkel is "paying a huge political price for her remarkable resolve in promoting an open Europe." Not only does it boost the popularity of the AfD, whose voters are disenchated with her "pro-refugee approach," it will pose a huge drain on Germany's resources. Ordinary Germans fear that migrants will pose an enormous burden on their social welfare system, while the badly needed "public investment in infrastructure and education" be postponed. Wolfgang Schäuble's goal to achieve a budget surplus in 2017 may just well be wishful thinking. The demand for minimum wage would only make it more difficult for migrants to find work.
The AfD's tough populist rhetoric has attracted voters angered by the influx of migrants, chipping away at the traditional support base on both the left and the right - conservative voters who oppose Merkel's generous policy, as well as blue-collar left-wingers who feel nervous that state spending on migrants will undermine their own position in society. The gains of the AfD will certainly embolden conservative critics within her own ranks, who accuse her of betraying right-wing values, by dragging her party to the centre-ground.
The author says "the refusal of European leaders to take responsibility and agree on a shared solution to the refugee crisis is not just hurting the refugees; it is also damaging the EU’s future, as it weakens Germany’s willingness to reform and engage with the rest of Europe." Unfortunately those who are short-sighted can't envision a long-term perspective. They are merely interested in living a life on a daily basis, and see no incentive to change. Read more
Comment Commented Walter Gingery
There are always two sides to a story; thank you for articulating yours.
Unfortunately, in the Euro-conversation, no one seems to be listening to the other side, much less finding a way to work together. Unless that changes, which now seems unlikely, the future of the EU looks pretty dark.
Read more
Comment Commented Jose araujo
"This is all the more infuriating for Germans, given that their country bore the heaviest financial burden for the rescue programs carried out in Cyprus, Greece, Ireland, Portugal, and Spain in recent years"
And how was that made, the way I recall the instrument used had no resource of direct contribution from countries, so Germans paid nothing to help other countries. Read more
Comment Commented Jose araujo
Merkle and its boys were the ones spreading this lie. Germans haven't paid for the crisis, its the Portuguese taxpayers that are paying them. Read more
Comment Commented Elemer Tertak
Dear Mr Fratscher,
You allege that "In the current refugee crisis, EU countries have shown a distinct lack of solidarity with Germany, with many refusing to take on even a small share of the burden." This statement is however regrettably biased:
1. Under the Dublin Regulation Germany benefited from its geographic location, because it had not the first MS where asylum seeker entered the EU. So it had not to bother with asylum request by refugees that have entered Italy, Greece or Spain, and had not to show any solidarity with them.
2. This attitude had been changed only in the last year, when the number of arrived refugees increased by twentyfold, in particularly from July on. As Greece had not been able to comply with the requirements under the Dublin Regulation and thus the refugees - passing Macedonia and Serbia - overburdened Hungary as next Schengen country, Germany decided in August 2015 unilaterally to make use of the "sovereignty clause" to voluntarily assume responsibility for processing asylum applications for which it is not otherwise responsible under the criteria of the Regulation, moreover it declared publicly that there is ‘no upper limit to the right for asylum’. These lavish decisions turned out to be oil on fire, and resulted in a massive inflow of migrants to Europe, in particular to Germany.
3. The German government had neither consulted the Bundestag, nor the other affected countries in this matter but created by the induced huge inflow of asylum seekers a fait accompli for and put a lot of burden both on the German communities and on the countries along the Balkan route.
Solidarity is by definition unity (of a group or class), which is based on unities of interests, objectives, standards, and sympathies. Accordingly solidarity could be expected only if the relevant decisions were based on agreed interests, objectives, standards, and sympathies, but that had not been entirely the case. Therefore it is unfair to put now the blame on other countries.
You also assert that the lack of solidarity is all the more infuriating for Germans, given that their country bore the heaviest financial burden for the rescue programs carried out in Cyprus, Greece, Ireland, Portugal, and Spain in recent years. In terms of numbers it is of course correct that Germany has the highest stake in the provided financial assistance, but: (1) it were also the German banks and institutional investors that had the highest exposures in these countries, (2) in terms of population and GDP is Germany the largest country, and (3) finally also countries such as Slovakia, or Estonia participated in the rescue, although they joined the EU only later as most of the rescued nations, and their per capita economic strength is lower as those of the programme countries.
Elemer Tertak Read more
Comment Commented Jose araujo
Just to add to your post by saying that the instrument used to rescue the periphery mad no resource of countries taxpayer money,think of it more like a collateral.
But the interest on the money loaned are paid by taxpayers on Greece, Portugal, etc. so in fact its we that are paying Germans, not the opposite. Read more
Comment Commented Luis Fernandez
Germany is already isolated, Marcel, because she has chosen the austerity narrative imposing macroeconomic madness all over the periphery of Europe and identifying that with the UE and the EMU. It has been a great mistake, born not only out of ill-thought orthodoxies, but also of nationalist interest (to protect German bankers, German commercial surplus, German budgetary balance) and not peripheric 'piig' people.
The EU rescue of Greece or Spain mainly helped German and French banks, rescued from irresponsable credits in the good times. It is wholly paradoxical that a Europe strictly following austerity paths ordered by Germany will end provoking a nationalist upsurge in Germany. You are victims finally of your own bad policies. The 'Berlin calling' last summer was a nightmare for all Balkan and Danubian countries. The 'Berlin rules' are destroying labour markets and welfare states from the Atlantic to the Aegean. We would not have sympathized with German reunification or German-led creation of the euro, if we had been warned about these dire consequences. To hear about budgetary surplus while the Ezone has countries with a 20% of unemployment rate is demoralizing, de-Europeanizing, and de-Germanizing. Well, there are Goethe and Kant, but, what else? Mr Shäuble believes to be protecting Germany, indeed he is sowing the end of the German prestige in Europe. Greek GDP is again going down, after six years of suffering and German diet. No wonder nationalism is on the rise everwhere. We have learn nothing of the agony of the Gold-Standard. Germany cannot remember she survives thanks to Keynes. Ingratitude. Read more
Comment Commented Peter Schneider
It is exactly this: the "EU" is not a single entity like the US. We cannot behave like a single entity because we are not. We are indeed very different. We are separate nations. Our mentalities are very different. Our notions on economic, monetary, social or cultural policies are very different. That's why the political union has no support among the people. And if the monetary union does not work without the political union - then it's most natural that we won't enforce political union but we will abandon monetary union. As soon as the governing elites have lost the rest of their remaining credibility this might happen quite automatically.
How can I explain? I mean you know what the concept of a "nation" means - who if not you? You care about your Montana and I care about my Montana (which is called Mecklenburg-Vorpommern). And a Spanish guy cares about his Montana (which is maybe called Extremadura). I know people from Mecklenburg-Vorpommern but I don't know anyone from Montana or Extremadura. I can travel to Mecklenburg-Vorpommern and talk to the local people in my mother tongue. To go there, it takes me a few hours. But to go to Extremadura it takes me maybe a day. Over there, I am a stranger, I am not accustomed to the local habits and taboos. And so on. That's why I tolerate subsidies to Mecklenburg-Vorpommern but do not tolerate subsidies to Extremadura (exceeding a certain amount). Imagine you had to pay huge subsidies to Chiapas/Mexico (and you were not even asked about it).
I wrote this a while ago:
Please imagine a Northern American monetary union with Canada, the US, Mexico, Guatemala, Jamaica, the Dominican Republic, Aruba and Curaçao as member states and with the "Americo" as currency. Imagine that Guatemala lived well over its means for years with 10% deficit per year. Imagine that you were then asked to bail out this totally corrupt country although in the law a bailout was explicitely forbidden. Imagine that they would officially admit 20% of the total bailout money, bring it through your parliament by the skin of one's teeth (the MPs would only get to see the treaties one day before the final decision and there would be only a version in Spanish language available, the MPs in doubt would be villified as dissidents and evil nationalists by the parliamentary chairmen). There would be no public discussion (and people who still dared to speak up against it would be villified as dissidents and evil nationalists in the mass media). The remaining 80% of the bailout money would be payed for you without your knowledge and without your approval by your central bank where Aruba and Curaçao together would be able to outvote the US. Imagine that the Guatemalan people would then start withdrawing their money from their bank accounts and your central bank would recapitalize bankrupt Gautemalan banks with your money but without your knowledge and withour your approval (this would not be a problem as Guatemala together with Aruba and Curaçao would just outvote the US). Then Mexico would show up and say that without more transfer payments the "Americo" would inevitably collapse. In the meantime, Guatemala would guide millions of illegal immigrants from Venezuela and Ecuador into your country and those people would show up in your city and ask for social security payments. Imagine then that you were constantly bullied to agree on ever closer union with Guatemala, that the traditional institutions you once admired, e.g. the newspapers and national TV stations, were now flooded with constant propaganda about how great and wonderful the situation really was (and hush up everything else). At the same time, your money would permanently lose in value. Imagine that unelected bureaucrats in Mexico City would on one day fix the curvature radius for cucumbers and on the next day would ask for the pooling of Guatemalan and US unemployment insurance.
Would you not find this strange? Read more
Comment Commented Steve Hurst
@Peter
The Eurozone will not work without perpetual wealth transfer from wealthy to poorer regions. It doesnt matter what is on a piece of paper, the ruling issue is the commmon 'fixed' currency. The reason subsidy flows to Montana and others in the US is without it that state depopulates, the local economy declines and the infrastructure eventually runs into trouble because the infrastructure cost is largely fixed and the cost borne by progressively fewer and fewer residents.
The only other mechanism is steadily increasing debt which is unsustainable. This is the root cause of stresses in the EU. The original French idea was Federalism by stealth and crisis if it occurred driving things onward in that direction - and countries residents dont want it.
The Euro is a death machine. There is a choice - wealthy to poorer perpetual transfer aka subsidy - or debt write-off periodically - or shut abandon the euro.
You will find that - 1 Transfer is not allowed, 2 Debt write-off is not allowed, 3 There is no mechanism as such to leave the Euro, it was never built into the system
The only way the Eurozone can work without transfer and periodic debt write off is if the economies involved are very similar, ie Nothern Europe
It is unhelpful if money has been squandered on vanity projects around Europe but nothing to do with the way the Euro has to work
At present either one or more of the indebted has to quit the Euro or Germany has to get fed up and leave. Germany is not likely to jump as the TARGET2 ledger will move to at risk, the German currency will rise significantly and export transaction costs withing Europe will rise
The idea of the EU is to try and match the US as an economic entity and to do that it has to act like the US, a single entity
Regards Read more
Comment Commented Peter Schneider
@Steve:
Germany is another example for a transfer union (over 1 bn euro from west to east since reunification) and I'm perfectly fine with that. But notice that all your examples are nation states (with exception of Spain where secessionist forces are strong). The "EU" is no nation state. There is a common currency area but any transfer payments are forbidden by law. The reason for that is the old democratic principle "no taxation without representation". So any member state dependent on transfer payments cannot be member of the currency union any longer. It has to leave. This is what the Maastricht treaty implicitely demands. And it was signed by all member states.
@Jose:
You can be sure that I won't ask you for your pension savings to cover up for the losses in this case. Read more
Comment Commented Jose araujo
@Peter
Lets see if you use the same arguments when the Deutsche Bank goes belly-up... Read more
Comment Commented Steve Hurst
@Peter
There is nothing weird about a transfer union. It is implicit in a common currency area. It exists in the USA with effective subsidy going to the likes of Montana and Alaska. It exists in the UK with regions such as Wales and the NE. To name another country, it exists in Spain with money flowing from Catalonia, hence the Catalonia indie movement. The only other mechanism without a transfer union is localised debt such as you are seeing around Europe, followed by depopulation and economic decline. Merkel's lastest missive has been that there can be no debt write-off in the eurozone. Put that alongside no transfer union mechanism and you have a bonfire of the vanities which will burn until all is consumed. As far as turning against German voters - It is quite clear that German policy is guided by German voter sentiment. Polls in Germany were clearly against any debt write-off for Greece. German voters may be once removed from the decision to hang Greece out to dry but they are part of it. You cannot wash your hands of it. Germany with its love of all things uniform is wreaking havoc Read more
Comment Commented Peter Schneider
Germany has never imposed "austerity" on Club Med. Effectively, you signed up to follow sound budgeting in 1992 at Maastricht. Only that your elites did not tell you back then. As well as our elites did not tell us back then that we would have to finance your overconsumption with our pension savings. It's all a giant fraud imposed on the people of Europe. Your elites wanted to have the low interest rates for their megalomaniac infrastructure projects and their corrupt networks but they had no plans how to regain competetiveness without the possibility of devaluation. Why our elites sacrificed the German Mark I still cannot grasp - the rumour is that France would have otherwise tried to impede German reunification. So maybe, all the chaos roots in French inferiority complexes.
Please recognize that we were all betrayed and that we are all victims of this flawed currency union. You are plagued by a massively overvalued currency leading to mass unemployment and "austerity". We are plagued by a massively undervalued currency leading to loss in purchasing power and competetive pressure. Apart from that, we are more and more drawn into a weird transfer union (where all of a sudden we have to guarantee for your banking systems and your welfare state). But we all suffer together from the more and more desperate methods our elites choose to save their project which turn our accustomed economic and social systems upside down and lead to the abolition of the rule of law and, in the end, democracy itself.
So, don't turn your wrath against the German people. The majority of us never wanted the euro. We were betrayed as you were betrayed. And don't let your mind be confused when the elites try to denounce dissenting opinion as nationalism or populism. In this article, you can sense the problems the German elites face, namely that an increasing part of the German population just does no longer believe their propaganda. Read more
Comment Commented M M
Dear Luis, now these are very valid arguments. well done. Read more
Comment Commented Steve Hurst
What is this Comedy of Errors
Adriana: "Why should their liberty than ours be more?"
Act 1, scene 2,
Germany is a beneficary of the euro existing - a low currency aids its exports and the euro crisis yielded an extimated 100 billion advantage
Anybody asking for a transfer union is correct - the eurozone cannot survive without it. So where exactly is this German 'heaviest financial burden for the rescue programs carried out in Cyprus, Greece, Ireland, Portugal, and Spain in recent years'. Obviously on a separate ledger to the advantages yielded
Merkels latest comment is legally debt cannot be written off in the Eurozone, so you may as well expect it to fold even if it takes sometime to fruition. Southern trees bear a strange fruit, Strange fruit hanging from the poplar trees.
As for Merkels idiotic - come on down and party invite - to the world and his wife. The outcome was inevitable. Didnt anybody ask how many people could fit into Berlin or Frankfurt first, I've been there, they are not that big
Then there is the Schengen so loved by Germany. Of course it is loved, they gave the task to another state to police borders. Only problem is one of the states has a border impossible to police with nearly 2000 islands. Now the idea is to give another country not in the EU the job of border control. You couldnt make it up.
This is the 3rd time Germany has tried to dominate Europe in a century and at the moment its going as well as the last two. If it wasnt tragic it would be laughable
'... as it weakens Germany’s willingness to reform and engage with the rest of Europe'. Really - can you advise examples of Germany's willingness in this area. I would need a shroom or two to envisage that. Wolfgangs proposal of picking the pocket of every fuel user in the Eu to fund Merkels refugee mashup is about the size of it
Germany will be very lucky if more than 1 in 3 refugees ends up employed, that is the latest German industrial partnership assessment so German public disquiet will rise with time. Then there are the same number rof economic migrants with no entry right to try and get deported. I cannot see that ever happening
Now please tell me how this is the fault of the rest of the EU
Let me guess - its all the fault of the Greeks whose GDP is 3% of the Eurozone GDP
Never mind there will be the French to blame soon as their economy continues to decline, or Italy when it debt rollover bubbles up. Or Greece, Italy, Spain when their circa 50% youth unemployed say they dont like this game of soldiers
“Why, sometimes I've believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast.” Alice in Wonderland Read more
Comment Commented M M
The overwhelming view is the exact opposite. No one wants to be part of any “German Commonwealth” and people want to repatriate their jobs to their homeland from Germany. The refugees / migrants crisis, which the German leadership has instigated, is not the issue. Also, the EU in its current set up is not viable. For the Germans, anything that does not start with an “A” such as: Angela, Austerity, Auschwitz, is a no go…. Read more
Comment Commented M M
Dear Peter, the population, any population has always been lied to by its politicians throughout the ages. The lies by the German and / or other political leadership are nothing new. What is extremely disappointing is that the German people did not rise up or even commented against these “concentration camps” and had three chances (three general elections) and several regional elections in the last decade or so to change course but decided on the “Status Quo”. If you had been following my blogs on PS, I was the 1st one to have predicted the fate of these migrants and I said it all along NO / OXI / NEIN to “concentration camps”. The Greeks rose up to the idea and are still rising. They blocked their defence minister from landing on Kos Island (he had to land instead in a field) to inspect a potential site for a refugee camp. They are currently on strike, they have been extremely accommodating and helpful to the migrants (despite the hardship imposed upon them by the German leadership) whilst they had nothing to do with the problem neither did they instigated it. On PS everyone has debated the issue of debt, why should other EU tax payers incur debt or be asked to fund the cost of the “concentration camps” that are illegal by the way and have been condemned by the UN and other Int’l organisations. It is a question of moral responsibility which the German leadership, solely bares full liability and responsibility. There is a good article today on the express.co.uk titled: “Now even migrants turn on Merkel. Refugees say German leader lured them to EU with lies”. Try and read the article but more importantly the comments made by the readers. And you are quite right, these “concentration camps” that have mushroomed everywhere should not be compared to “Auschwitz” they are much worse than “Auschwitz” but one shall leave it up to the historians to come up with an appropriate name for them. There is a famous quote from GW Bush Jr. that applies to the German elections: You fool me once, shame on you; You fool me twice, shame on me; You fool me Thrice….. Read more
Comment Commented Peter Schneider
I can understand your anger. I'm also angry. But please recognize that "austerity" is the only way you have if you cannot devalue your currency. As I said above, this is what your elites signed you up to (obviously without telling you). So please don't unleash your rage on Germany but instead on your own elites. Please ask them to remove your country from the euro.
On the defamatory level I could call you PIGS. But that doesn't lead anywhere. As I said above: you were betrayed as well as we were betrayed. We were all betrayed. But, in the end, we might share the same goal: to destroy the "EU" in order to restore democracy and the rule of law and something like the old European Community. Read more
Comment Commented Jose araujo
@Luís
Why is the reference to Auschwitz is unnecessary when in the root of the problem is the German racial attitude?
For Germans its the German way or the German way... Read more
Comment Commented M M
Dear Luis, what can one call the inauguration / opening / the setting up of refugees’ concentration camps in Greece and in Turkey other than “Auschwitz”? She is inaugurating a refugees’ camp in Turkey next week, in Turkey! We all know how good exporters are the Germans, so exporting and executing the concept of concentration camps to Greece and to Turkey is not an innovation for them. What the German leadership are doing / have done to the rest of the EU and to the refugees is immoral, to say the least? Who is to blame for the mess of the last decade in the EU, the German electorate or the elected German leadership or the other EU citizens that had and have no say in who gets elected in Germany but that person that gets elected in Germany chooses not only to govern Germany but to rule over all of the EU and beyond? Sensitivity is not an argument here, morality is. Read more
Comment Commented Luis Fernandez
You should not have mentioned Auschwitz. It is unnecessary for the argument, and it is unjust towards a majority of Germans horrified by the Holocaust. Furthermore, if we mention Auschwitz at every moment, we are somehow watering down its enormous moral and historical significance. One thing is to tell Germans what we think they are doing wrong, another thing is to incriminate them (surely you have guessed that would not help to convince them). It is true that if they do not see the problem of the Eurozone, isolationist and nationalistic trends will be on the rise for the next generation. Is this what the German social leaders want? I hope not. Read more
Comment Commented Michael Public
The EU is a silly arrangement - separate nations with monetary union - kind of like a 'communism of countries' rather than of the regular type when individuals pool their money. Germany probably got the better end of the deal of the whole thing being an exporter nation. The bailouts they paid for were small change. Read more
Comment Commented Jose araujo
Germans didn't pay the bailout, that's just not true. Germans paid nothing, the instrument used for the bailouts didn't resort to taxpayer money. Read more
Featured
Anti-Trade America?
Kenneth Rogoff laments the protectionist rhetoric dominating the US presidential campaign.
Europe’s Generational War
Harold James worries about the long-term effects of older generations' political dominance.
Realism for Europe and Turkey
Joschka Fischer on why both sides have an overriding interest in reducing tensions.