Considerations on PIIGS and post-colonial EU Governance
I was actually preparing an article on why stamping out tax evasion without first removing the main reasons why institutional corruption exists is as results-oriented as the charge of the 600.
Then, few articles attracted my attention: a statement from Theodoros Pangalos (vice-premier of Greece), an article/contribution from the Deutsche Bank, a series of commentaries on PIIGS states in Euroland, and few other articles about the foreign military activities of EU members.
At first I was puzzled from the statement issued on Monday by Mr. Pangalos, concerning the lack of direction in Europe, but then I read all these articles- giving more and more burning material to the fire set by his comments.
This is a really (for my standards) short article- as I think that by pointing at the sources, you can derive your own considerations.
The contribution on “The Economist” was interesting to a point- proposing to create an EMF (to mirror the IMF), i.e. a “financial markets umpire”.
Why I call it an “umpire”, a baseball referee?
Because some of the ideas were closer to letting the (financial) balls flying around, just regulating the excesses, instead of questioning the tools used (e.g. CDOs).
Probably akin to the creation of the EBRD to mirror the IBRD (a.k.a. World Bank).
Then, another couple of articles came to mind- the renewed efforts between two EU members to create a joint military, and the announce of the relaunch the European military transport airplane (hitching a ride to former USSR countries or US is not necessarily the best way to have an independent policy).
And, further extending the EMF/IMF and EBRD/IBRD model, why not create a mini-EU “security council”, e.g. between the two nuclear powers (France and UK), in preparation for a joint representative at the UN Security Council?
Certainly, UK and France are the two most active- as the Royal Navy steaming down to the South Sea is showing, while the (dis)joint decision to close the French base in Dakar (depends who are you asking to) could imply a shift in relationships- and a repositioning of interests.
But Mr. Pangalos hit a raw nerve: some new EU members (most recently, Poland, Romania, Bulgaria) are running to attract further US military installations on their territory, Diego Garcia is basically integrated in the US logistics, and France is leaving Senegal while US has (for the time being) a floating African military command in search of a home.
As I heard at a conference in a bookstore not too long ago- some countries propose a “multiple speed” and “shape shifting” EU integration- and this seems to be the current approach.
The only issue is: how overlapping interests could affect further integration- and avoid creating just a market (for somebody else’s interests).
But it is the usual tension between a “fortress Europe” and “Europe Inc”, as recently partially remarked by the UNHCR head (he was referring to the number of refugees EU is accepting, considering its past colonial history and its current economic clout).
Matter for a further article.
And as for Dakar… as I said to a Senegalese colleague: if the Americans do not reach an agreement, it could be used locally the way some US bases in Germany have been used- use it as a real estate development.
If, as President Sarkozi said, closing the base is a new step toward improved relationships, why not help to convert it into a scientific/industrial/engineering theme park?
Incidentally- Brussels airlines is further expanding its own African routes via Brussels- considering the position of Dakar, and that Brussels is a logistical hub (at least, the knowledge is still here), something more than the Paris-Dakar rally could be linking EU to Dakar, replacing the old commercial agreements
Considerations on PIIGS and post-colonial EU Governance
I was actually preparing an article on why stamping out tax evasion without first removing the main reasons why institutional corruption exists is as results-oriented as the charge of the 600.
Then, few articles attracted my attention: a statement from Theodoros Pangalos (vice-premier of Greece), an article/contribution from the Deutsche Bank, a series of commentaries on PIIGS states in Euroland, and few other articles about the foreign military activities of EU members.
At first I was puzzled from the statement issued on Monday by Mr. Pangalos, concerning the lack of direction in Europe, but then I read all these articles- giving more and more burning material to the fire set by his comments.
This is a really (for my standards) short article- as I think that by pointing at the sources, you can derive your own considerations.
The contribution on “The Economist” was interesting to a point- proposing to create an EMF (to mirror the IMF), i.e. a “financial markets umpire”.
Why I call it an “umpire”, a baseball referee?
Because some of the ideas were closer to letting the (financial) balls flying around, just regulating the excesses, instead of questioning the tools used (e.g. CDOs).
Probably akin to the creation of the EBRD to mirror the IBRD (a.k.a. World Bank).
Then, another couple of articles came to mind- the renewed efforts between two EU members to create a joint military, and the announce of the relaunch the European military transport airplane (hitching a ride to former USSR countries or US is not necessarily the best way to have an independent policy).
And, further extending the EMF/IMF and EBRD/IBRD model, why not create a mini-EU “security council”, e.g. between the two nuclear powers (France and UK), in preparation for a joint representative at the UN Security Council?
Certainly, UK and France are the two most active- as the Royal Navy steaming down to the South Sea is showing, while the (dis)joint decision to close the French base in Dakar (depends who are you asking to) could imply a shift in relationships- and a repositioning of interests.
But Mr. Pangalos hit a raw nerve: some new EU members (most recently, Poland, Romania, Bulgaria) are running to attract further US military installations on their territory, Diego Garcia is basically integrated in the US logistics, and France is leaving Senegal while US has (for the time being) a floating African military command in search of a home.
As I heard at a conference in a bookstore not too long ago- some countries propose a “multiple speed” and “shape shifting” EU integration- and this seems to be the current approach.
The only issue is: how overlapping interests could affect further integration- and avoid creating just a market (for somebody else’s interests).
But it is the usual tension between a “fortress Europe” and “Europe Inc”, as recently partially remarked by the UNHCR head (he was referring to the number of refugees EU is accepting, considering its past colonial history and its current economic clout).
Matter for a further article.
And as for Dakar… as I said to a Senegalese colleague: if the Americans do not reach an agreement, it could be used locally the way some US bases in Germany have been used- use it as a real estate development.
If, as President Sarkozi said, closing the base is a new step toward improved relationships, why not help to convert it into a scientific/industrial/engineering theme park?
Incidentally- Brussels airlines is further expanding its own African routes via Brussels- considering the position of Dakar, and that Brussels is a logistical hub (at least, the knowledge is still here), something more than the Paris-Dakar rally could be linking EU to Dakar, replacing the old commercial agreements
Have a nice day!
This entry was posted on Wednesday, February 24th, 2010 at 11:15 and is filed under commentary, everything, publications. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.