Archive for the ‘European Union’ Category

As Europe Confronts the Coronavirus, What Shape Will Solidarity Take? – The New York Times

BRUSSELS As a poorer, battered south asks a richer, frugal north for solidarity, youd be forgiven for thinking the coronavirus is throwing Europe back into last decades economic catastrophe. Youd be wrong. This time is set to be far worse.

The pandemic and the havoc the coronavirus is wreaking on European economies has echoes of the eurozone debt crisis, but this calamity is hitting everyone, not just smaller wayward nations, and it goes well beyond the economy. It presents a watershed moment for the future shape of the European project.

A growing number of officials and analysts believe the European Union needs an enormous financial response on a scale commensurate with the calamity. Short of that, they warn, the bloc risks inviting an even larger disaster, as well as losing legitimacy.

There are obvious links to the lack of solidarity with the eurozone crisis era of austerity and the handling of the migration crisis, said Janis Emmanouilidis, a senior analyst at the Brussels-based think tank European Policy Center. People now are also asking, What do we have the European Union for?

The very scale of the looming depression is focusing the minds of European leaders, and the fact that this crisis, unlike last time, does not come from some perceived profligacy may ultimately knock down the reluctance to putting up aid. The question is what shape that solidarity will take.

European finance ministers failed to reach an agreement over a list of measures in a marathon meeting that started on Tuesday and broke up Wednesday morning. They will reconvene on Thursday to try to hammer out a consensus on how to stave off the worst of the looming economic maelstrom.

European officials said that there was broad agreement on some measures, for example a loan program valued at 100 billion euros, or $109 billion, that will help member states fund temporary unemployment benefits.

But despite debating for 16 hours, the ministers were unable to reach a consensus on how to use the euro area bailout fund, created to tackle last decades crisis, to distribute loans without the brutal austerity restrictions Greece had to face. The European Investment Bank, it seems likely, will provide billions in support of small businesses.

Once the finance ministers reach an agreement, their bosses, the leaders of the European Union countries, will meet via teleconference to finalize the measures, which in total could amount to hundreds of billions of euros.

But as sweeping as those measures may be, they will disappoint some members.

At least nine of the 19 leaders of the countries in the common-currency bloc, and some leading policymakers in Brussels, believe the euro area needs to issue joint bonds, commonly referred to as Eurobonds or in the context of the current crisis, corona-bonds.

In the acrimonious overnight meeting, finance ministers from those countries demanded at the very least a reference to this approach in any final report, but it proved impossible to get an agreement.

Collective debt would be a first for the bloc, and has been fiercely opposed by wealthier states like Germany and the Netherlands. They argue that, by treaty, every member nation of the European Union is responsible for its own finances. Floating these bonds would also be legally difficult and time-consuming, opponents say.

Each member state has launched its own interventions, and if we aggregate those, were talking about rather big figures, said Paolo Gentiloni, the European commissioner for the economy and a former Italian prime minister, who supports the idea of joint bonds. But we are a union, 19 member states who have a common currency.

It is crucial to have a common fund to face the crisis, and help the recovery, he added. How can you have a common fund? Only by issuing bonds, obviously.

Key to this is a question that has been nagging for nearly two decades: How can 19 of the now 27 European Union countries share a currency, the euro, and not use some, even limited, common debt to weather crises?

And the coronavirus counts as a crisis by any measure. The currency unions third- and fourth-largest economies, Italy and Spain, seem set to shrink by more than 10 percent, while the largest, Germany, could also shrink by 10 percent, unleashing a domino effect. By comparison, the euro area shrank by 4.5 percent in the post-financial crisis recession in 2009.

The stimulus that will be needed because of the damage caused by the epidemic is being estimated at more than 2 trillion, or $2.18 trillion. At stake wont be just the survival and recovery of each individual economy, but potentially the survival of the euro.

Eurobonds are the solution, a serious and efficient response, adapted to the emergency we are living, said Prime Minister Giuseppe Conte of Italy in an impassioned address to the nation on Monday.

Prime Minister Pedro Snchez of Spain, where the death toll has approached 14,000, has called for a new Marshall Aid plan for the reconstruction of Europe.

Without solidarity there can be no cohesion, without cohesion there will be disaffection and the credibility of the European project will be severely damaged, he warned.

Europes de facto top leader, Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany, this week called the coronavirus outbreak and its aftermath the greatest test for the European Union since its inception.

Germany will only do well in the long run if Europe is doing well, Ms. Merkel told reporters at a news conference. The answer to current events, she said, was more Europe, a stronger Europe and a well-functioning Europe in all its parts, meaning in all its member states.

But Ms. Merkel stopped short of backing joint debt.

For Ms. Merkel, loans with few strings attached and German subsidies for unemployment benefits elsewhere in Europe were already quite brave measures, and as far as she was prepared to go.

She and other northern European leaders have signed off on waiving rules that normally punish European countries for running high deficits.

They have also implicitly backed a decision by the European Central Bank to launch a new bond-buying program that will see it swoop up the debt of eurozone countries, buying time for leaders to work out their next moves.

Joint debt has been a foundational step in the creation of federal states, most notably of the United States in the late 18th century,

In Europe in the age of coronavirus, it has been elevated to an existential question for the future of the bloc.

Why? Because these bonds imply a clear and explicit sharing of the cost incurred to fight the Covid-19 crisis, as a symbol of European solidarity, says Silvia Merler, head of research at the Algebris Policy Forum, the research branch of an investment fund based in Milan.

But they are by no means the only tools on the table, she added.

One key obstacle to joint debt is the scar tissue from the eurozone debt crisis of last decade, in which the bloc paid hundreds of billion of euros to Greece and another four countries, demanding in exchange some of the harshest austerity measures in modern history, to ensure no nation sought such bailouts opportunistically in future.

The wounds of that crisis are still deep, as is the feeling in Italy and Greece that the European Union was also not there to help much with the migration crisis that peaked in 2015-2016.

Mr. Gentiloni and others are keen to stress that, despite a fleeting resemblance, this time is different.

I think it is a completely different crisis, Mr. Gentiloni said. In itself this crisis is an equalizer, it is affecting at different speed and intensity more or less all of Europe, all countries, it is not concentrated like the financial and migration crises were.

And the debate over how to respond is more mature too, experts noted, pointing to the fact that even conservative German economists were no longer talking about solidarity as if it meant charity, as they had in the past.

When the Greek crisis started back at the end of 2009, the question of European solidarity was much more controversial, Ms. Merler said. Back then, policymakers could not even agree among themselves on whether it was legal for euro area countries to help financially a member in distress.

As the debate over assuming joint debt goes on, the European approach in the meantime to fighting the coronavirus will look similar to how Europe tends to respond to crises: a patchwork of imperfect measures.

Theyll build substandard instruments that are not good enough, but do the job at first, and they will keep kicking the can down the road, said Shahin Valle, a French economist who is a senior fellow at the German Council of Foreign Relations, and previously served as a senior adviser to the European Council during the eurozone crisis.

It wont be a make-or-break moment like some predict, Mr. Valle said. Instead well just continue to hobble along on our crutches.

Katrin Bennhold contributed reporting from Berlin, Emma Bubola from Rome and Raphael Minder from Madrid.

Go here to see the original:
As Europe Confronts the Coronavirus, What Shape Will Solidarity Take? - The New York Times

The European Union still refuses to confront the coronavirus crisis – Morning Star Online

ONEmeasure of the stability of the capitalist system is the profitability of its banks. This is so important a priority for our ruling class that it rescued themwith unimaginable mountains of cash our cash in the fallout from the 2008 financial crisis.

Even so banks remains a weak link. For banks across the Eurozone, according to figures from the European Central Bank, the average return on equity fell over the past year from 6.2 per cent to 5.2 per cent.

In the dominant EU economic power German banks had a return of 0.08 per cent.

Banks are so central to the maintenance of economic stability that the case for firm supervision is barely contested in places where the public might notice. In fact inmore select gatherings of the rich and entitled such circumspection is missing, while among the public as a whole the case for public ownership and control of the banks finds a ready audience.

The divisions between the stricken southern members of the EU and the main beneficiaries of the way the eurozone is structured those northern states grouped around Germany have widened as German Chancellor Angela Merkel and Dutch Premier MarkRutte stalled on an EU-wide programme to deal with the coronavirus crisis.

And this after the European Parliament's President the Italian David Sassoli was excluded by the select pair from talks on the EU response to the coronavirus crisis.

In a statement the European Council said: The Covid-19 pandemic constitutes an unprecedented challenge for Europe and the whole world.

It requires urgent, decisive, and comprehensive action at the EU, national, regional and local levels. We will do everything that is necessary to protect our citizens and overcome the crisis, while preserving our European values and way of life.

They then kicked the whole issue into the long grass.

One barely suppressed undercurrent has it that the change in the leadership of the Labour Party offers a new opportunity to reverse the Brexit mandate or at least place Britains separation from the EU into cold storage.

A good part of the support for Britain remaining in the EU came from still comes from well-intentioned people who project their own hopes and dreams for a continent of co-operation,with nations united in scientific endeavour,onto the less seductive reality that is the neoliberal alliance.

The news that the EUs top scientist, the president of the European Research Council, has chucked in his job right at the start of his four-year term of office should give those starry-eyed at the sight of the starry blue flag second thoughts.

Professor Mauro Ferrari resigned after the EU turned down his proposal to establish a large-scale scientific programme to fight Covid-19.

I have been extremely disappointed by the European response to Covid-19, he said. I arrived at the ERC a fervent supporter of the EU [but] the Covid-19 crisis completely changed my views, though the ideals of international collaboration I continue to support with enthusiasm.

In a telling phrase Professor Ferrari said: The proposal was passed on to different layers of the European Commission administration, where I believe it disintegrated upon impact.

It is clear that the coronavirus emergency is best tackled by international co-operation and solidarity. While President Trump now threatens to withdraw funding from the World Health Organisation, accusing it of a China bias.

The WHO set the pace with firm advice and in popularising best practice from countries that have made significant progress in tackling the crisis. China and Cuba have set the pace in rendering real aid to stricken nations while the EU has failed the test.

Excerpt from:
The European Union still refuses to confront the coronavirus crisis - Morning Star Online

COVID-19 a make-it or break-it moment for the European Union | TheHill – The Hill

Shortly after World War II, French Foreign Minister Robert Schuman came up with a plan: In order to prevent further wars on the European continent and achieve peaceful coexistence of the European nation states, he recommended to build a European community based on mutual solidarity. Fully aware of this being a long-term task, he proclaimed in 1951: Europe will not be made all at once. It will be built through concrete achievements which first create a de facto solidarity.

One might assume that 70 years and eight treaties later including the Treaty of Rome establishing a European Economic Community and the Treaty of Maastricht founding a common European parliament Schumans dream would be fulfilled.

Europe presents itself as a strong, social community. But how much is this sense of community worth when it regresses into a collection of egoists as soon as it is challenged by global problems, like an economic recession or migrants asking for asylum in this community.

The last month taught us that COVID-19 is a global problem a crisis seeking global, post-national solutions. The European Union (EU), a community of 27 states, built on solidarity, is (supposed to be) the flagship of the post-national era. It seems to be predestined to cope well with major and global crises. After being challenged in 2010 by the economic breakdown of Greece and in 2014 by the high influx of refugees mainly from Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan, one might think that the EU would be well-equipped for another global crisis; that it would have a blueprint ready containing a common strategy for how to fight a world-wide pandemic, together and in solidarity.

But the opposite seems to be true. The German chancellor Angela Merkel is preparing her people for an infection rate of 60 to 80 percent. She emphasized the situation is serious and asked her people to stay calm and remain in their homes. Her French counterpart Emmanuel MacronEmmanuel Jean-Michel MacronCOVID-19 a make-it or break-it moment for the European Union US inaction is hurting the chance for peace in Libya Officials say Paris hospitals will be hit hard following coronavirus spike MORE employed all his pathos in a speech about our new heroes, the doctors and nurses fighting for French lives. He declared, We are at war. Victor Orban, the Hungarian Prime Minister, flexed his populist, right-wing muscles, firmly trained during the refugee crisis. He closed his borders and is using the spread of the coronavirus to win the vote to rule by decree, muting critical journalists who dare challenge his health care system.

Missing in the cacophony of parental admonitions, pompous speeches and populist deemphasizing is a clear and loud pan-European voice asserting solidarity within the community a voice like that of Robert Schuman. His Schuman Declaration is the foundation of the European Union, proclaiming the rule of three principles in Europe: reconciliation, peace and solidarity. These are the three pillars on which the EU is supposed to be built on; this is what it is supposed to stand for. It is also what the EU will be tested on especially in days of crisis such as these.

In 2020, this would mean offering 26 helping hands to Italy, to send doctors and to receive patients, to exchange research results and to deliver protective gear. It would mean to create and operate a common European health care system, together and without borders. It should mean to bundle all knowledge, to stand and fight together in solidarity beyond national borders.

Instead, we are experiencing a comeback of the nation state. Borders are closing. Not only Europeans, but European member states are quarantining themselves. Europeans are becoming foreigners in Europe. Suddenly China feels closer than Germany or France. Serbia and Italy both already reached out for Chinese help as their European neighbors left their plea for help unanswered.

At the end of the day we have to realize: COVID-19 is a product of its time, globalized, leaping between species and societies. The virus does not stop at borders, it needs neither passports or visas in order to travel. We are truly entering uncharted territory.

The COVID-19 pandemic can indeed be compared to World War II not in terms of destruction but in terms of social and economic consequences. For Europe, this is the chance to rise and be the union it was meant to be. Europe needs to show real solidarity and to prove that the Union is a sustainable and necessary concept for the future. It needs brave and compassionate visionaries. It needs a Europe of the people and for the people. If the EU fails this stress test, it will make itself very dispensable indeed.

Katharina Konarek is a political scientist working on European and German foreign policy, currently teaching and researching at the Haifa Center for German and European Studies (HCGES) at the University of Haifa.

Continue reading here:
COVID-19 a make-it or break-it moment for the European Union | TheHill - The Hill

Declaration by the High Representative on behalf of the European Union on the alignment of certain third countries concerning restrictive measures…

On 17 February 2020, the Council adopted Decision (CFSP) 2020/212[1] implementing Council Decision 2013/255/CFSP.

The Council Decision adds eight natural persons and two entities to the list of natural and legal persons, entities or bodies subject to restrictive measures in Annex I to Decision 2013/255/CFSP.

The Candidate Countries Republic of North Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia and Albania[2], the EFTA countries Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway, members of the European Economic Area, as well as Ukraine, the Republic of Moldova and Georgia align themselves with this decision.

They will ensure that their national policies conform to this Council Decision.

The European Union takes note of this commitment and welcomes it.

[1] Published on 17.02.2020 in the Official Journal of the European Union no L 43 I, p.6.

[2] Republic of North Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia and Albania continue to be part of the Stabilisation and Association Process.

Excerpt from:
Declaration by the High Representative on behalf of the European Union on the alignment of certain third countries concerning restrictive measures...

False claim: Boris Johnson refused offer of 50,000 ventilators from the European Union – Reuters

Multiple social media posts, including many on Facebook (here,herehere), claim thatBritishPrime Minister Boris Johnson refused an offer of 50,000 ventilators from the EuropeanUnion. The UK did not join an initial effort byEuropean Union member states to jointly procure medical supplies, including ventilators. But the nature of the procurement process means thatthe EU could not offerany country aspecificnumber of ventilators.

The European Commission launched a joint procurement procedure on March 17, 2020 to secure ventilators on behalf of European Union member states (here). The UK did not take part in this initiative,having missed a deadline to participate (here).

Owing to an initial communication problem, the UK did not receive an invitation in time to join in four joint procurements in response to the coronavirus pandemic, a UK government spokesman said in a statement (here). As those four initial procurement schemes had already gone out to tender, we were unable to take part in these but we will consider participating in future procurement schemeson the basis ofpublic health requirements at the time.

StefanDeKeersmaecker, aspokesmanat theEuropeanCommission, told Reuters:For this joint procurement,suppliers still have to sign a framework contract, andmemberstates have to place their orders. When placing these orders, thememberstates and the suppliers will negotiate the quantities and deadlines for deliveries.In the context of this joint procurement,it is therefore not the Commission itself which is offering ventilators.

False: an offer of 50,000 ventilators was not made to the UK Governmentby the European Union.It is not yet clear how many ventilators can be secured bytheEuropean Union joint procurementscheme.

This article was produced by the Reuters Fact Check team. Read more about our fact checking workhere

Read more from the original source:
False claim: Boris Johnson refused offer of 50,000 ventilators from the European Union - Reuters