发帖
雷达卡
Following the escalation of the euro crisis and decisions taken at theEuropean Union’s last summit, especially EU leaders’ commitment to embark on the road “Towardsa Genuine Economic and Monetary Union,” it is high time to ask whatcomes next. Whatever the final outcome, the current crisis will fundamentallyshape the future of European integration.
In a worst-case scenario, Europe’ssovereign-debt crisis could cause the eurozone to implode,with immediate negative effects for the EU itself. Fortunately, this scenariostill seems rather unlikely – as EU countries inside and outside theeurozone seem keen to avoid the enormous economic, financial, political, andsocial fallout that such a scenario implies.But the danger of a fundamental disintegration has increased over time, andtoday such an outcome cannot be excluded.
At the same time, it seems unlikely that member states will be ready andable to make one giant leap towards a “United States of Europe” – that is, a genuinefederal entity in which EU countries agree to surrender national sovereignty onan unprecedented scale.
The record since 2010 suggests that “muddlingthrough” will remain the EU’s dominant approach for the foreseeablefuture. But, contrary to the past, the increasing existentialpressures on the common currency and the constant scrutiny by markets andcitizens will require bold policy responses that go well beyond the lowest common denominator.
At the end of the day, “ambitious muddlingthrough” will most likely lead to a higher degree of sui generis economic and fiscal integration(especially among euro-zone countries), including binding synchronization of national budgets, greater economic coordination, and eventually also some limited form of debt mutualization. In otherwords, resolving the crisis will require “more Europe,”though the final outcome is impossible to predict, as it will result from acomplex process aimed at reconciling divergentand opposing positions both within the EU and among eurozone countries.
The EU’s leaders have asked Herman Van Rompuy, the president of theEuropean Council, to develop, in close collaboration with the presidents of theEuropean Commission, the Eurogroup, and the European Central Bank, a road mapto achieve a “Genuine Economic and Monetary Union.” The final report, due to bedelivered in December 2012, should identify which additional steps can be takenon the basis of the existing EU treaties, and which measures require treatyamendments.
Given the urgency of the crisis, some of the more immediate steps towardsa higher level of economic and fiscal integration, which are not enforceableunder the current EU treaties, might require additional intergovernmentalarrangements outside of the EU’s treaty framework. Such an approach should notbe a goal in itself, but it might be a necessary evilto avert the danger of a euro implosion.
But, in order to regain institutional coherence, legal certainty, anddemocratic accountability, core elements of the “fiscal compact” and any otherfuture agreements between EU governments should be incorporated into the Union’s primary body of law as soon as possible. Movingtowards a genuine Economic and Monetary Union will also require morefundamental institutional reforms. This process cannot be limited togovernments, but will also have to involve the European Parliament and nationalparliaments in the framework of yet another European Convention.
A higher level of economic, fiscal, and political integration will also compel the amendment of national constitutions. Ratification of a new EU treaty and the adaptationof national constitutions would inevitably require referendain a number of countries. Given Dutch and French voters’ rejection of the EU’sconstitutional treaty in 2005, and European citizens’ increasing frustration withthe Union and its crisis management, theoutcome would be highly uncertain. But it is a risk that must be taken. Indeed,the danger of a euro implosion or apotential exit from the common currency may prove to be sufficiently strongarguments to “persuade” a majority of Europeans to vote yes.
The “ambitious muddling through” scenario will be long, bumpy, and sometimes risky, and will probably endat a destination that looks very different from today’s expectations. But,before the EU embarks on that inevitable anduncertain journey, its institutions and member states (actively supported bythe ECB!) must fashion a safety net that canprotect the euro and the Union itself from hitting the groundface first when the going gets roughin the coming years.
After all, the debt crisis is likely to continue to generate immediateeconomic, fiscal, and market pressures. But the EU and its members will alsoincreasingly have to cope with the collateral damage caused by the crisis – itsunintended and unexpected consequences at the European and national levels.
That damage includes increasing nationalism and anti-euro/EU populism, mounting social challenges in manymember countries, a growing “democratic deficit” there and in the EU, a poisoned atmosphere among EU countries, and thelack of proactive, stable leadershipcoalitions pushing in the same direction. All of this could lead to a standstill, which, in the current environment,would be tantamount to going backward,threatening not only European integration’s future prospects, but also its pastaccomplishments.
Under these circumstances, “ambitious muddling through” is both the mostlikely and the most promising scenario. It will not be easy, and it will notallow time for complacency, given that theEU is most likely to remain in crisis mode for some time to come. But it isprobably the only way to keep Europe movingforward.
京公网安备 11010802022788号
