From The Times / October 26, 2006
What has four letters, begins with E and is
slowly killing half of Europe? Anatole
Kaletsky
WHILE MOST of the worlds attention has naturally focused
on the catastrophe of Iraq, the nuclear showdown in North
Korea and the electoral nemesis approaching for George W.
Bush on November 7, it has also been an interesting week in
Europe.
Hungarians marked the brutal suppression of their democracy
by Soviet tanks 50 years ago by rioting against their elected
Government. In Italy, the Governments credit rating
was reduced to the same level as Botswanas, and Romano
Prodi seemed on the verge of losing a vote of confidence,
just six months after sweeping his reviled and derided predecessor,
Silvio Berlusconi, from power. The British Home Secretary
welcomed Bulgarians and Romanians into the European Union
by restricting their ability to seek jobs.
The Iraq invasion, disastrous though it has been, may not
go down in history as the greatest political blunder of the
past decade. That dubious honour will probably belong to an
event most people still regard as a triumph: the creation
of the euro. What we see today, not only in Italy and Hungary,
but also in the other relatively weak economies on the southern
and eastern fringes of the EU, is the beginning of the end
of the European project. And if the euro project does turn
out to be the high-water mark of European unification, then
history will judge it a far more important event that anything
happening in the Middle East.
But what does the euro have to do with the political troubles
in Hungary and Italy? And how can I compare the technocratic
financial problems connected with the euro to a moral and
humanitarian disaster such as Iraq? These two questions have
a very clear answer: democratic self-government or,
more precisely, its denial.
What we see in Eastern and Southern Europe today are the
consequences of the EUs transformation from a union
of democratic countries into a sort of supra-national financial
empire in which the most important decisions affecting EU
citizens are no longer subject to democratic control.
In Italy the Government is on the brink of collapse because
of Signor Prodis insistence on implementing tax increases
and budget cuts demanded by Joaquín Almunia, the EU
Economic Commissioner, under the terms of the Maastricht Treaty.
In Hungary, the riots began a month ago because the Prime
Minister showed his contempt for democracy by publicly admitting
that he had lied, morning, noon and night about
the tax increases and public spending cuts that he had promised
Señor Almunia before a recent election and after
the election was over, he naturally felt that his promises
to Brussels were far more important than the ones he had made
to Hungarian voters.
The resulting budget cuts of 7 per cent of GDP over two years
would be roughly equivalent in Britain to closing down the
entire NHS. And Hungary, remember, is being forced to do this
to comply with the Maastricht treaty, without even being admitted
to the eurozone.
There is now almost no chance of Hungary, or any other new
European country, being admitted to the euro-zone in the foreseeable
future. This was demonstrated over the summer when Lithuania
and Estonia was refused permission to join the euro on the
flimsiest of grounds. This EU decision attracted little attention
in Britain but was hugely controversial in Eastern Europe.
It effectively meant that the accession countries would continue
to have their economic policies set in Brussels and Frankfurt
without even being able to enjoy the modest benefits of using
the single currency.
The political consequence of this asymmetry of power is growing
disillusionment in the East, not only with the EU but even
with the concept of parliamentary democracy. The economic
effect of forcing Central Europe to abide by deflationary
policies designed for the mature economies of the eurozone
is the weak demand growth and mass unemployment experienced
by the accession countries. This unemployment has been the
main driving force behind the huge flow of labour out of Central
Europe. And that flood of workers, in turn, has provoked the
hostile and ultimately self-defeating rhetoric of the British
Government against Bulgarian and Romanian immigrants.
The Maastricht treaty has turned the Eastern Europeans into
second-class citizens. The belated recognition of this fact
is starting to have the predictably ugly impact on the politics
of Europes eastern periphery. But before getting too
indignant about the injustices to Eastern Europe, let us spare
a thought for the citizens of old Europe who are privileged
to enjoy full membership of the eurozone. The
latest budgetary crisis in Italy may well be averted and the
Prodi Government will probably survive for a few more months.
But as Signor Prodis huge tax increases begin to bite,
the Italian economy is almost certain to sink back into recession.
Moreover, there will be no chance of Italy tackling any of
its real economic problems once unemployment starts rising
next year.
What Italy needs today is competition, privatisation of grossly
inefficient state-sponsored utilities, deregulation of the
financial system and changes in labour laws. Such reforms
can be hard to implement even in a booming economy. In a stagnant
or declining one, they will become impossible.
To make matters worse, Italy will be tightening its budget
at the same time as Germany implements the biggest tax increases
in its modern history also in deference to the Maastricht
Treaty, if not under quite such direct compulsion from the
EU. These simultaneous fiscal blunders in Italy, Germany and
Eastern Europe will almost mean another lost year
for the euro zone, with economic performance falling far behind
America, Britain and Japan. But the long-term consequences
could be more far-reaching.
At some point the people of Europe will realise that there
is something rotten in a political system that leaves them
forever in the world economys slow lane and which
cannot be changed by any democratic process, regardless of
how people vote.