It is time to save the EU

By John Lloyd
April 2, 2014

A surge of far-right parties is about to hit the European parliament. Last weekend’s success of the National Front in France was led by the party’s leader Marine Le Pen, who pledges to take France out of an agreement that is destroying jobs and flooding towns with immigrants. Similar advances by the right are appearing in differing degrees of intensity elsewhere in Europe.

The European elections next month will likely see 100 or more deputies from the Freedom Party of Austria, the British UK Independence Party, the Dutch Freedom Party, the Finnish True Finns, the Flemish (Belgian) Vlaams Blok, the German Alternative for Germany, the Greek Golden Dawn, the Hungarian Jobbik, the Italian Five Star Movement, the Swedish Democrats as well as the National Front enter parliament. They’ll be noisy, passionate, insulting, disruptive and in some cases well-primed to exploit every weakness and mistake in the European parliament.

The arrival of these deputies is the most recent bit of bad news for the Brussels politicians and officials whose job is to steer the European Union through its roughest patch in half a century. Together with two other hammer blows, this bad news could actually save the EU.

A no-holds-barred argument about the purpose of the EU would dynamize this somnolent assembly. Some would be forced to face the euroskeptic issues that are raised by far-right parties, including the difficulty of attracting interest to an organization in which the members are unknown.

For decades, these issues have been ducked. But in the next election they will be forced on to the agenda. Finding the words and the passion to defend and promote the EU in debates will mean that Europeans will perhaps begin to see the point of the organization.

The second bit of bad news is now familiar. The revelations of public debt in euro zone countries where growth has slowed or gone negative, as in Italy, Spain, Ireland, Portugal and Greece, have raised fears of defaults. The total debt of the 17 member states that make up the euro zone was a cumulative $12.2 trillion (8.84 trillion euros) at the end of last year, or nearly 93 percent of gross domestic product in the euro zone states. That is way above the 60 percent limit that the euro zone had pledged.

Mind you, that’s an improvement. The debt has come down slightly in the past few months (though it’s still higher than it was a year ago) and the current account is now in surplus because the euro zone states are exporting more than they import. That’s good news. The account deficits they were racking up a few years ago was one reason for the crash.

But the surplus is also a sign of weakness. Depressed domestic demand in the euro zone states is largely responsible for the turnaround, as consumers cut purchases of imported goods. If these economies don’t begin to show stronger growth leading to restored consumer confidence, the good figures could point to stagnation, and renewed crisis.

So what can be good about that? For one thing, it can lead to a greater integration of the euro zone, and maybe the EU. The European Commission — the business end of the EU — is trying to pull a rabbit of triumph from a hat of tragedy by arguing for “a deep and genuine economic and monetary union,” which should be accompanied by parallel steps toward a “political union with reinforced democratic legitimacy and accountability.”

The logic underlying the crisis is the construction of a new state. A United States of Europe — the vision of the EU’s founders. It’s happening slowly, but it may, in the end, be a reality.

The third piece of bad news is an impending tragedy. Crimea, part of Ukraine, has been taken into Russia, from which it is unlikely to emerge. NATO is pointing to “very sizable” Russian forces massing on the border between Russia and Ukraine. Sergei Lavrov, Russia’s foreign minister, is pushing a plan that includes a veto on any Ukrainian application to join NATO and a decentralization of powers in the Ukrainian regions, thus allowing the eastern regions to institute a “soft secession” to Russia.

Ukraine’s former President Victor Yanukovich had toyed with the idea of an association agreement with the EU for months when, a few weeks before its signing, he abruptly cancelled it and opened talks with Russia on joining the Eurasian Union. He was soon driven from office by protesters.

It’s right to blame the EU for not thinking through what the offer to Ukraine would mean for Russia, and how, if taken, it would destroy Ukraine’s balancing act between Europe and Russia. I’ve placed blame myself.

But, careless or not, the fervor with which many Ukrainians embraced the EU and aspired to democracy, clean government and the rule of law, is moving. It jerked us out of our solipsistic brooding on our own problems and reminded us that we’re lucky and we should continue to spread that luck around. Sometimes you need to have your belief in the advantages of law, freedom and democracy confirmed by the power of those who yearn for them.

All three of these hammer blows, each one serious and difficult, could be turned around — but only with a revival of the passion and idealism that lays behind the founding of the EU after World War Two. It was a move designed to put an end to future wars. The setbacks could force Europe to rediscover its values and its energy and to understand that through struggle against adversity can come a stronger union — one that can shape its future for the good of the world.

For Europeans, the challenge is there to be met. If its leaders can rise to it then the union has a future. For the moment, in its introspective and fearful state, hoping its troubles will lift, it does not.

PHOTO: A Member of the European Parliament attends a debate on the situation in Ukraine at the European Parliament in Strasbourg, February 26, 2014. REUTERS/Vincent Kessler 

More From John Lloyd
Ukraine’s future lies with the West, but there is much suffering ahead
No gimmicks, just 10 good reasons why Scotland shouldn’t leave the UK
In clashes over Ukraine or Iraq, liberty must be defended
Russian ‘realism’ is winning now, but will fail in the end
Germany’s renewed hegemony isn’t something Europe needs to fear
‘Braveheart’ they’re not. What’s Scotland’s problem with a United Kingdom?
Comments
12 comments so far

Ukraine is in need of applying constraint on its Dodge city attitude to regulation, corruption and acceptable governance. The last thing they need is a hammer blow by being dosed with the same medicine that has been so successful in treating Greece for that is just what they have let themselves in for. Rather than see Russia bolster them up and apply the anti oligarch treatment we will infect them with rampant capitalism which is destroying our entire “free world” sic – no, SICK.

Posted by baglanboy | Report as abusive

While we endevour to destroy the Russian and Chinese economies, we will need the EU as a partner, but ultimately once successful with the first two rivals we will then turn to the EU. The EU will be the next threat to our economic imperialism, and thus they must not be allowed to gain too much strength during this time in which we falsely assure them of our alliance. Our goal is world domination of all wealth and resources, you kow, because we are the righteous nation that god has selected to dominate and destroy the world. We learned this from the British. Of course as with all empires, we won’t see the decline coming and it may be sudden, or it may be a slow decay.

Posted by brotherkenny4 | Report as abusive

The European Commission is courting suicide. “a deep and genuine economic and monetary union,”…accompanied by parallel steps toward a “political union with reinforced democratic legitimacy and accountability.”?

The Euro economic basket cases are each about as attractive to the rest as was Eastern Germany to West Germany. They are the open portals through which pour the hoards of third world economic refugees without end seeking a better life. But by what right and at whose expense? Europe must, in the end, sustain itself.

Third world hell holes are marvels of pointless reproduction by those with no land, money, skill, education, job or reasonable prospect of any of these. They have no unalienable “right to reproduce” if others must raise or feed their progeny.

If the religious argue otherwise, let THEM come up with the necessary food, etc. The world does not need more feces or urine. At some point those who know better will HAVE to adopt an attitude consistent with those “Do Not Feed the Pigeons” signs. Only food limits their number.

Posted by OneOfTheSheep | Report as abusive

Interest rates in the club med are dropping to change the people into a good mode before the elections. We’ve seen the same during the election campaign in Greece.
In my opinion a plutocracy is not enough sustainable to create the United States of Europe. This might work out after decades of a stable identification process as for instance in the US.
Emos, baby bawling and the same stupid tv show formats everywhere are not really a helpful replacement. These tools become counterproductive after a while and strengthen the desire for the own national culture. Also Crimea is only a joke compared to the size of the unification task.

Posted by seafloor | Report as abusive

small correction: Of course we’ve seen the stock exchange rising in the Greece before the elections and not the interest rates for government bonds.

Posted by seafloor | Report as abusive

We talk a lot about good meals in Europe. Would you choose a standardized fast food hamburger or your favorite national delicacy?

Posted by seafloor | Report as abusive

no problem. we’ll start in Nuremberg.

Posted by lkofenglish | Report as abusive

OOTS – Glad that ‘paintcan’s comments on your demise are untrue.
((http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/ 2014/04/03/mccutcheon-should-the-wealthy -speak-louder/))

Posted by euro-yank | Report as abusive

The EU is unworkable for a long term existence. In any free trade zone there will be losers and bankruptcies, so there needs to be real courts and laws or there will be unworkable results and hard feeling, that means some central figures elected by whole of the EU, In time some of the members will need mobilize an army, free trade penalizes big expenses of any member (their taxes will be higher drive employers away) and there are other required big expenses even for small states if they are remain competitive. Therefore, there needs to be some central tax and spending officials again under officials elected by the whole. Along those lines the army should be unified if they plan to meet a common foes.

In short the Articals of Confederation did not work for long nether will the EU.

Posted by SamuelReich | Report as abusive

I’m not sure that a “US of Europe” is even possible. The United States was formed from what was basically new territories in the Americas; the new states did not have a long history or unique culture (beyond some small differences in local behaviors).

In Europe there exists literally hundreds of years of culture for each nation, and they would have to give up large parts of that national identity to create a political union. I don’t think they can do it; I don’t think they really want to do it.

Posted by stevedebi | Report as abusive

@euro-yank,

Appreciate the kind words. Responded to paintcan in that thread!

Posted by OneOfTheSheep | Report as abusive

@samuelreich “The EU is unworkable for a long term existence”
That is true. EU is a romantic desire only. Nevertheless it seems excessive to throw EU away as whithout any means, any leadership, any will. Even in the M.Lloyd’s article that makes three hammers falling on us breaking and splitting our brains we are not yet Kaput because economic crisis bring us something new, weaker facing Russia but stronger with China which lends us a lot of money.

Posted by meleze | Report as abusive
Post Your Comment

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/