Preface
Europe – still not having properly dealt with issues raised
by the common currency, debt, free-market-unfriendly regulatory regimes, and
the like – is now also confronted with a continuous and seemingly unending
stream of refugees (and also very likely migrants) from the Middle East, North
Africa and southeastern Europe.
Both issues are causing divisions: between national
governments and the EU, between national governments and other national
governments, and between the people and their national governments. On both issues – the economy and the refugees
– Germany is playing a key role.
First, a brief history of the ramrodding that has been – and
is – the European project, from Ambrose
Evans-Pritchard:
Perhaps it would be churlish to
point out that the cause of this near existential breakdown is a series of
moves that have [head of the European Commission Jean-Claude Juncker’s]
fingerprints all over them:
The fateful decision to launch the
euro at Maastricht in 1991 without first establishing an EU political union to
make it viable, and to do this despite crystal-clear warnings from experts
within the Commission and the Bundesbank that it would inevitably lead to a
crisis - the "beneficial crisis" as the EMU enthusiasts mischievously
supposed.
The escalating treaties of
Amsterdam, Nice and Lisbon, each concentrating power further in the hands of a
deformed institutional system, sapping at the parliamentary lifeblood of the
ancient nation-states that can alone be the fora of authentic democracy in
Europe.
Above all, to destroy trust by
overruling the categorical "No" of French and Dutch voters to the
European Constitution in 2005, and bringing back the same treaty by executive
Putsch, with a disgusted but complicit British prime minister signing the
document in a side-room in Lisbon safely screened from the cameras.
Read the last paragraph again and let me know if you think
there is not a powerful elite above the visible rulers. If the British Prime Minister was actually in
charge of anything, there would be little reason to be disgusted – simply don’t
sign and thereby avoid disgust; if he was feigning disgust for the sake of the
constituency back home – why? To
demonstrate he was a puppet? Disgust and
signing could only simultaneously occur if someone else was pulling the
strings.
In any case, as long as local economic activity was
generally moving in a good direction, the people remained relatively
compliant. This all changed
significantly in 2008, with the financial calamity brought about by government
control over the monetary and financial sectors.
Conflict
From Mehreen
Khan, at The Telegraph (emphasis
added):
…Mr Juncker said Europe could not
continue in its "business as usual" fashion in the face of a refugee
crisis and a stagnant economy.
"We have got to be frank: the bell tolls. Our European Union it is
not in a good situation. There is a lack of Europe in the European Union, and
lack of union in the EU."
The bell tolls for Europe.
From John
Donne (1572-1631), Devotions Upon
Emergent Occasions, Meditation XVII: Nunc Lento Sonitu Dicunt, Morieris:
Now this bell tolling softly for another,
says to me, Thou must die.
Perchance he for whom this bell
tolls may be so ill as that he knows not it tolls for him…therefore never send
to know for whom the bell tolls; It tolls for thee....
George Friedman sees this as well (as relayed
by John Mauldin, emphasis added):
This is not simply about migrants.
It is one more thing that shows Europe does not work and cannot make
decisions.… What we are seeing before our
eyes is the collapse of the European project. There is nothing meaningful
when we say “EU.” It was an institution that functioned for a while, but
countries are no longer paying any attention to Brussels.
Recall the earlier description of the force and trickery
used to bring the EU project to this point.
Juncker is continuing this long tradition. Returning to Ambrose, (who described the
current situation in Europe as a “near existential breakdown”):
…Mr Juncker wishes to invoke treaty
powers to force countries to accept 160,000 refugees by a quota, whether or not
they agree with his solutions, or indeed whether or not they think it is highly
dangerous given the state of total war that now exists between Western liberal
civilisation and Jihadi fundamentalism.
By invoking EU law to impose quotas
under pain of sanctions, Brussels has unwisely brought home the reality that
states have given up sovereignty over their borders, police and judicial
systems, just as they gave up economic sovereignty by joining the euro.
This comes as a rude shock,
creating a new East-West rift within European affairs to match the North-South
battles over EMU. With certain nuances, the peoples of Hungary, Slovakia, the
Czech Republic, Poland and the Baltic states do not accept the legitimacy of
the demands being made upon them.
Political divides between the EU and various national
governments; political divides between the various national governments of
Europe; political divides between the people and their national
governments. Returning to Mauldin:
The rise of anti-immigration
political parties throughout Europe is now quite evident. Such parties are not
yet a majority anywhere, but Marine Le Pen in France is only a crisis or two
away from winning a national election.
Keep in mind that this demographic
and social adjustment will be playing out on a continent that has just forced
its eastern half to accept immigrants it did not want and whose southern tier
is still trying to emerge from a deep, prolonged economic slump. Greece stayed
in the club this time because it had little choice. That won’t always be the
case.
As more and more countries,
especially the larger ones, see themselves losing their sovereignty to Brussels
and to an increasingly out-of-touch elitist leadership, the pressures on the
European Union are going to become ever more profound.
The European project won’t work because it can’t work. It is central planning of a very high order;
central planning cannot long be sustained.
Further, with each edict another bit of consent is lost. Maybe this mattered little when the economy
was reasonably healthy. For many in
Europe, this is no longer the case. On top
of the tensions introduced due to the financial calamity, forced integration
will not reduce the tensions.
The bell tolls.
Resolution
TBD, but I lean toward decentralization.
Bonus Coverage
As an aside, and returning to Mauldin:
My good friend Dennis Gartman wrote
about this in his September 15 daily report:
But there is a very real
demographic reason why Germany is so willing to take a surfeit of these
refugees: German’s demographics demand it. Simply put, Germany’s population…
and especially its indigenous… population is imploding swiftly and certainly.
Already there are very real
shortages of young, skilled workers, and many German companies openly and
regularly complain that they cannot hire enough workers to fill job vacancies
because there are not enough workers available for those jobs.
Further, Germany needs younger
workers to fill those jobs because it needs their salaries for the social
welfare programs that Germany is so renowned for. Simply put, there are not
enough workers paying into the social programs to pay for them at present, and
this problem shall become worse, not better, unless Germany’s population swells
measurably in the coming years and decades.
So, Ms. Merkel has a clear ulterior
motive for her seeming generosity: she wants the present welfare system in
Germany that benefits now and will even more greatly benefit more in the future
her normal constituency. If Germans are going to retire they shall need either
newly born Germans to take their place and pay into the social security systems
or Germany shall need to “import” foreign workers. For now, it is the latter
that Ms. Merkel is embracing.
Something is fishy about this. There are already countless numbers of youth
unemployed in Europe – European youth
unemployed. Greece, Spain, Italy and
Portugal all have youth
unemployment rates between 30% and 55%.
It would seem much easier to absorb and integrate youth from
these other European countries into Germany* than it will be to absorb and integrate
anyone from the Middle East or North
Africa. If the need was for youthful
labor, Merkel need not go to the Middle East to find it.
And so? I continue in
my view that Germany sees a better long-term future with the east (Russia,
China; MacKinder’s World
Island of Eurasia) than it does with the west. Merkel’s behavior in the EU financial crisis
has been to push others into pain, as if they want someone else to take the
first overt step of breaking the union; it is Germany’s indirect way of getting
out of the union without taking direct action themselves.
Merkel’s approach with the refugees can be interpreted in a
similar light – a means to break up the union by adding significant pressure to
other member states. How much better would
it be for European integration than
to more proactively advocate for long-term employment opportunities in Germany
for Europe’s unemployed youth.
Non-German Europeans living
and working in Germany in large numbers would do much more toward ensuring
European integration via cooperative means than just about anything being done
by Germany today.
Yet this path is not taken.
I can think of some reasons why this might be so, yet none of these seem
more compelling than the reasons to take this path.
----------------------------------------
*I assume that EU rules make this already quite
possible. I am merely suggesting that
overt programs can be taken by Germany to make it easier for unemployed youth
in other EU countries to relocate and train.
This would also be less disruptive and less expensive than taking in
refugees and migrants from vastly different cultures.
In many European countries (for example, Sweden), criticism of immigration is illegal. Open borders libertarians say that any immigration restriction is a violation of the NAP. Funny how open borders libertarians and the state agree on so many things.
ReplyDeletehow exactly? if i decide to rent my house out to a Syrian what business is it of yours?
DeleteIt becomes my business if your Syrian renter collects welfare provided by my taxes so that he can afford to pay your rent.
Delete"""There is a lack of Europe in the European Union, and lack of union in the EU."::
ReplyDeleteWhose fault is this? At every opportunity the unelected leadership of the EU has ignored the people of Europe while at the same time signing every international treaty and agreement that has been created.
This is one of the interesting points: the EU leadership is taking action that directly contributes to loss of faith in the EU project.
DeleteI can conclude (but it isn't the only possibility) that they see that the EU project is headed toward failure if left for time to slowly change culture, so they are forcing the integration as the next least bad alternative - trying to beat the clock, so to speak.
It may not work, but it might be seen as a better alternative.
All of Europe has the same demographic problems which Germany has. The number of nonworking recipients of the European cradle to grave, pay-as-you-go welfare system are growing faster than are the number of younger workers paying taxes into that system.
ReplyDeleteAt best Germany can poach other nation's unemployed youth. That's better than for them to remain unemployed. But the fact remains that European nations' birthrates aren't growing their populations fast enough to sustain their welfare systems. This is a problem for the welfare state even in the best of economic times. It's much worse that so many European youth are unemployed and are themselves on welfare. Yet, it will be socially catastrophic to accept poorly educated and probably largely unemployable youth from alien cultures to try to keep the unsustainable welfare state afloat a little while longer.