Emmanuel Macron’s victory in the French presidential election sent a wave of relief and euphoria across Europe, but now a reality check is in order, because we do not yet know how the new president intends to restore the French economy.
The country suffers from an unemployment rate of nearly 10 percent and its manufacturing sector is still operating 12 percent below its level before the 2008 global financial crisis.
Macron has indicated that he does not want to increase the retirement age, change the 35-hour workweek or make it easier for firms to dismiss workers. At the same time, he wants northern eurozone nations to send money to southern nations, to protect French financial and economic markets in these regions.
This is an admittedly broad-brush portrayal of the program that got Macron elected, but it is nonetheless to the point.
What else could he possibly mean when he calls for a newly created eurozone finance ministry that can accrue jointly guaranteed debt and collect its own taxes. What about when he asks for common eurozone deposit protection and unemployment insurance?
The motive behind these ideas is all too obvious — support the domestic economy at others’ expense.
Macron also supports proposals for a new eurozone parliament, proclaiming a two-tier Europe, but that is simply a recipe for splitting up the EU.
Turning the eurozone into a transfer union with its own parliament would only deepen the divide between the eurozone nations and the EU’s northern and eastern member states — Denmark, Sweden, Poland, the Czech Republic, Croatia, Hungary, Romania and Bulgaria.
Because most of those nations would not join a European transfer union, they would be cut off permanently. As European Council President Donald Tusk has wryly observed, we already had a two-tier Europe up until 1989 and we should not wish for a return to that arrangement.
German policymakers, for their part, could not easily help Macron bifurcate the EU even if they wanted to, because Germany’s constitution grants the Bundestag the inalienable authority to manage the nation’s fiscal affairs. Even if every single member of the Bundestag agreed to transfer part of its fiscal sovereignty to a European-level institution, such a decision could still be made only through a formal referendum.
Germany’s powerful Constitutional Court has already made it clear that eurozone bailouts and other interventions represent the outer limits of what is possible under the nation’s Basic Law. The court might have deferred to the European Court of Justice on the question of the European Central Bank’s “outright monetary transactions” scheme, but it will not be able to do the same with respect to fiscal sovereignty, because the constitution is clear and the European Court of Justice has no standing to interpret German constitutional law.
That being said, it is important that European integration moves forward. There is still much work to do to improve the EU’s cross-border traffic routes and to strengthen its security partnerships. Indeed, Europe should take a lesson from the wars of the 20th century and do away with national armies altogether. Only then will Europe’s union for peace become a reality and not just a platitude invoked by politicians.
During the post-World War II era, European heads of state drafted a treaty to establish a Western European defense community, but the proposal fell through in 1954 owing to a veto by the French National Assembly, against the recommendation of wartime leader Charles de Gaulle. Later, the UK opposed a joint European military, but the UK will no longer be a part of the EU, at least for the foreseeable future, and France has a young, dynamic new president. So it is time to try again.
The German people can probably be persuaded to agree to this form of integration, in the same referendum that will have to be held, anyway, to approve Macron’s fiscal plans. The same can be said for the people of Eastern Europe.
By pursuing true political integration based on a common army and security partnership for the entire EU, Macron can guarantee his place in the history books. However, to achieve this goal he will have to break from the precedent set by his predecessors, who always categorically ruled out a political union, and he will have to acknowledge Germany’s concerns that by establishing a fiscal union now, Europe would lose the opportunity to pursue a political union in the future.
Combining Europe’s military forces under a joint command is the only way forward. Creating a fiscal union without a political union would forever block the road to European unification and set the people of Europe against one another more than the euro ever did.
No one who wants to build a union for peace can afford to permit, much less encourage, that outcome.
Hans-Werner Sinn, a professor of economics and public finance at the University of Munich, was president of the Ifo Institute for Economic Research and serves on the Advisory Council to the German Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
In a meeting with Haitian Minister of Foreign Affairs Jean-Victor Harvel Jean-Baptiste on Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) vowed to continue providing aid to Haiti. Taiwan supports Haiti with development in areas such as agriculture, healthcare and education through initiatives run by the Taiwan International Cooperation and Development Fund (ICDF). The nation it has established itself as a responsible, peaceful and innovative actor committed to global cooperation, Jean-Baptiste said. Testimonies such as this give Taiwan a voice in the global community, where it often goes unheard. Taiwan’s reception in Haiti also contrasts with how China has been perceived in countries in the region
The world has become less predictable, less rules-based, and more shaped by the impulses of strongmen and short-term dealmaking. Nowhere is this more consequential than in East Asia, where the fate of democratic Taiwan hinges on how global powers manage — or mismanage — tensions with an increasingly assertive China. The return of Donald Trump to the White House has deepened the global uncertainty, with his erratic, highly personalized foreign-policy approach unsettling allies and adversaries alike. Trump appears to treat foreign policy like a reality show. Yet, paradoxically, the global unpredictability may offer Taiwan unexpected deterrence. For China, the risk of provoking the
On April 13, I stood in Nanan (南安), a Bunun village in southern Hualien County’s Jhuosi Township (卓溪), absorbing lessons from elders who spoke of the forest not as backdrop, but as living presence — relational, sacred and full of spirit. I was there with fellow international students from National Dong Hwa University (NDHU) participating in a field trip that would become one of the most powerful educational experiences of my life. Ten days later, a news report in the Taipei Times shattered the spell: “Formosan black bear shot and euthanized in Hualien” (April 23, page 2). A tagged bear, previously released
Young supporters of former Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) chairman Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) were detained for posting the names and photographs of judges and prosecutors believed to be overseeing the Core Pacific City redevelopment corruption case. The supporters should be held responsible for their actions. As for Ko’s successor, TPP Chairman Huang Kuo-chang (黃國昌), he should reflect on whether his own comments are provocative and whether his statements might be misunderstood. Huang needs to apologize to the public and the judiciary. In the article, “Why does sorry seem to be the hardest word?” the late political commentator Nan Fang Shuo (南方朔) wrote
RSS