John Bolton: Don't mourn the euro ... It's always been anti-American
[John Bolton, a former US ambassador to the UN, is author of "Surrender Is Not an Option: Defending America at the UN and Abroad."]
The chaos in world financial markets over the stability of the euro calmed somewhat late last week. But the con ditions causing the European Union crisis -- the solvency and even creditworthiness of many governments using the euro -- are far from resolved, and the next stages may be even more perilous.
Realize first that, from the outset, the "common currency" project was as political as economic. Europeans who wanted an "ever closer union" hoped that creating a currency without a government was an important backdoor way to build the pan-European state they ardently desired.
They believed that the need to coordinate national fiscal policies to keep the euro as strong as the German deutschmark it was replacing would, over time, lead to a consistent EU-wide fiscal policy. As with so many assumptions of the EU integrationists, this proved wildly off the mark.
Instead, member governments hewed to their own fiscal policies -- too often spending profligately and increasing their national debts, while avoiding the financial consequences they would've encountered had they retained their national currencies. While the spotlight is now on Greece's parlous fiscal condition, many other EU countries -- including some of the largest -- have enormous national debts that have been sheltered for years under the euro's camouflage. This is why the crisis is likely only in its early stages.
With the failures of the euro's foundational assumptions now exposed to public scrutiny, EU advocates of "ever closer union" are reacting predictably. As in every past EU crisis (political or economic), failure of one integrationist idea inevitably leads them to conclude that the solution is still more integration.
They now seek to correct unilateral national fiscal policies by further concentrating fiscal decision-making at the EU headquarters in Brussels -- thus transferring substantial national sovereignty and power under the guise of accountancy. Even non-euro countries like the United Kingdom would be subject to greater budget scrutiny, further proving that the ultimate objective of this proposed "solution" to the euro crisis is more political than economic.
There are, of course, alternatives...
Read entire article at New York Post
The chaos in world financial markets over the stability of the euro calmed somewhat late last week. But the con ditions causing the European Union crisis -- the solvency and even creditworthiness of many governments using the euro -- are far from resolved, and the next stages may be even more perilous.
Realize first that, from the outset, the "common currency" project was as political as economic. Europeans who wanted an "ever closer union" hoped that creating a currency without a government was an important backdoor way to build the pan-European state they ardently desired.
They believed that the need to coordinate national fiscal policies to keep the euro as strong as the German deutschmark it was replacing would, over time, lead to a consistent EU-wide fiscal policy. As with so many assumptions of the EU integrationists, this proved wildly off the mark.
Instead, member governments hewed to their own fiscal policies -- too often spending profligately and increasing their national debts, while avoiding the financial consequences they would've encountered had they retained their national currencies. While the spotlight is now on Greece's parlous fiscal condition, many other EU countries -- including some of the largest -- have enormous national debts that have been sheltered for years under the euro's camouflage. This is why the crisis is likely only in its early stages.
With the failures of the euro's foundational assumptions now exposed to public scrutiny, EU advocates of "ever closer union" are reacting predictably. As in every past EU crisis (political or economic), failure of one integrationist idea inevitably leads them to conclude that the solution is still more integration.
They now seek to correct unilateral national fiscal policies by further concentrating fiscal decision-making at the EU headquarters in Brussels -- thus transferring substantial national sovereignty and power under the guise of accountancy. Even non-euro countries like the United Kingdom would be subject to greater budget scrutiny, further proving that the ultimate objective of this proposed "solution" to the euro crisis is more political than economic.
There are, of course, alternatives...