Europe: ‘no choice’ but to unite?

The debate about the Eurozone crisis has moved onto issues of political accountability and responsibility.

We have the governments of two historically important countries – Greece and Italy – in the hands of technocrats rather elected politicians, and many, including Aditya Chakrabortty in the Guardian, are asking: is this right?

In many senses, it isn’t. No public mandate exists for technocrats to lead a democratic, nation state.

But at this moment of crisis, the operating principle is ‘needs must’, and the real question is whether or not sufficient expertise can be brought together to allow the European project to do its job in investing in, and providing for, its citizens.

Technocratic skills are vital if Europe is to be able to effectively target and move money to address social and economic needs. But the problems that Europe is currently facing are not technocratic problems. Rather, the root problem we all face is the need to solve the European debt problem and create a long-term environment in which investment in infrastructure (in all its senses) can be created to solve the intractable disparities of wealth, health and opportunity that pervade the continent. In other words, Europe currently needs a different identity, not just different financial structure.

This problem can’t be solved by the institutions and instruments that Europe currently has to hand. We need politicians who can unite nations, and it might just be that a Greek banker might be more capable in providing unity than a politician such as Berlusconi.

So, it is no wonder that Merkel and a number of other politicians are beginning to think about how to build a more coherent and resilient European ‘body politic’ for the future – not just to prevent future, similar crises but to deal with the fundamental issues of global competitiveness.

There are echoes of the American War of Independence when ‘revolutionaries’ struggled with the lack of political instruments and precedence to deal with the growing discord between ‘mother country’ and local rights. The Founding Fathers had no choice but to ‘feel their way forward’. The same is true now for potential ‘unifiers’ – they feel that they have no choice if they are to avoid disaster.

Equally, the ultimate lesson from geopolitics is clear: a Europe of nations states can’t compete with the big regional blocs – China, USA, India – that are capable of delivering both wealth and innovation.

In my view, this recognition is why we are seeing signs that Germany under Merkel is beginning to build a consensus and a coalition behind the creation of a new European infrastructure and idea of a closer, united European union – if, perhaps, only for a smaller European grouping.

We need a more unified European Union, and a more unified financial structure to go with it, yet this is the one possibility that isn’t really being addressed. In my opinion, unification is the only way forward for Europe.

Will this ever happen? Probably not in the short to medium term. Politics will get in the way, although the chance of a Europe built around Germany, with the Scandinavian countries forming their own entity, is more likely now than ever. And that may be no bad thing, even if we need the help of unelected technocrats to get there.