By Ben Laurance
Where does it all end? What will be the outcome of the financial storm
battering Europe and its single currency? Can the euro be saved? And if so,
what will be the longterm consequences?
The financial historian Niall
Ferguson, visiting London from his selfimposed exile in America to promote the
paperback version of his most recent book, is typically confident that he has
the answers to these difficult questions — and they are not what you might
expect from this tireless proponent of free markets.
As he begins his energetic deconstruction of the euro's prospects, he wants to remind us that he was deeply and publicly sceptical of its creation in the first place. "I was a staunch opponent of the single currency in the Nineties," he insists. "I wrote a piece predicting that in 10 years the single currency would suffer a crisis a bit like this because of the lack of fiscal integration."
Such prescience is now a bit
of a problem for the Scot, who holds posts at Harvard, Stanford and Oxford
universities and is never self effacing at the best of times. "My impulse
is to gloat," he admits. "My impulse is to dance with the glee at
having been right."
However, he is not dancing,
because he predicts only one way out of the present crisis — for the euro
countries to go the full federalist hog and adopt a single fiscal system. This
is not the outcome he would have chosen.
"I am not a
federalist," he says. "But the costs of the single currency
disintegrating are really so high and would impact so many people, that the
only responsible thing for me to do is to argue urgently for the next step to a
federal Europe. I see no alternative at the moment that isn't a great deal
worse."
He has no truck with the
increasing number of people, both commentators and politicians, who entertain
the possibility of an orderly exit from the euro for Greece. "It's too
late to unravel the single currency," he says. "People talk about
that as if that option existed, and it simply doesn't. It's an illusion to
think you can just kick Greece out without unleashing a real nightmare of
contagion through the banking systems of the peripheral countries."
When you remember that the
"peripheral" countries being discussed include Spain and Italy, the
12th and eighth biggest economies in the world, the true size of the problem
becomes apparent.
Ferguson's broad view, then,
is clear: disintegration is what should be feared and what should be avoided.
But look where we stand at the moment. On the one side is a seemingly immovable
Germany sticking resolutely to the austerity script. Those countries who
borrowed and spent with cheerful southern European abandon when the times were
good must now pay the price, Berlin says.
On the other is a Greek population that is feeling unloved, underemployed, resentful and increasingly inclined to spit out the austerity medicine. It sounds like an impasse. It sounds like a disaster waiting to happen — and happen very soon.
"It is still possible
that the game of chicken between Athens and Berlin ends with the two cars
colliding," Ferguson says. "But my sense is that both will swerve at
the last minute — the Greeks because they see the costs of exit would be
catastrophic for them, and the Germans because — if they don't realise it
already, they pretty soon will —the banking crisis that this would unleash as
deposits fled the periphery would be highly destabilising for the whole
eurozone, Germany included.
"The Greeks say, 'We're not going to comply with our commitments'. The Germans say, 'Then you're out'. They're both bluffing." And so, he argues, Germany — through gritted teeth — will have to concede that Europe as a whole must stand behind the debts of individual nations. Welcome to the era of the eurobond.
But surely this is just the
sort of notion to which Germany has hitherto shown such resistance? "The
Germans have the biggest interest in preserving the euro," Ferguson says.
"It has been highly advantageous to German business not to have a superstrong
Deutschmark, and I think that's one of the reasons Germans will swerve in this
game of chicken, because anything that threatens monetary union is pretty
threatening to German business . . . Germans are going to have to make some
kind of concession to the periphery. It's not enough just to say 'austerity,
austerity'."
There is, of course, the small
matter of having to sell this to the German people. After all, it is likely
that there would have to be a referendum to allow the country to commit its
considerable economic muscle to a rescue of the European financial project — in
other words, to pick up the bill. And would Germans really be prepared to
swallow the idea that the strong countries at the European core would be giving
regular dollops of funds to the periphery rather than adhoc bailouts?
"That's the hard
bit," Ferguson admits. "But here's the choice, Mein Herr. You accept
the logic of the Mitterrand/Kohl era, which always was 'we're having monetary
union in order to get to a federal Europe' . . . The logic of the 1990s was
that 'monetary union will force us to evercloser fiscal union, which is hard
to sell politically, but we'll make it happen — we'll back into it through a
monetary union'.
That always was the model —
which was one reason for being against it as a British Eurosceptic. Now we're
at the moment of truth when you can no longer maintain the fiction that a
monetary union can exist independently of a fiscal union."
And the other option? "On
the other hand — and this is the message to Angela Merkel — to use George
Bush's phrase: this sucker's going down. We've reached that point."
Of course, Frau Merkel, as she
discovered in last weekend's regional elections, isn't Frau Popular at the
moment. But, insists Ferguson, that scarcely matters: her main political
rivals, the Social Democrats, are more federalist than Merkel's CDU.
"The CDU, the Social
Democrats, the Greens — they're all essentially proEuropean. When the question
is put — 'Europa, ja oder nein?' — they won't vote against Europe. Europe has
been their alibi, their way to redemption since the war.
"Also, corporate Germany
is rich and powerful and benefits massively from Europe. There isn't a major
corporation from Deutsche Bank to Siemens that will do anything but support the
ja campaign."
Elsewhere, other countries
will fall into line, he insists: "Now you have [President François]
Hollande in France and the likelihood of the SPD [Social Democrats] in
government in Germany next year, which makes it more likely that we will end up
with tax harmonisation and eurobonds, which bails everyone out."
Tax harmonisation? Surely,
that won't be appealing to Ireland, which has pursued a policy of rockbottom
rates of corporate tax to attract companies. Ferguson is dismissive: "The
Irish will squeak, but they have no leverage."
There is a further, more
general point, and here he uses his historian's wider view. Ferguson maintains
that across large parts of Europe, support for federalism is being bolstered by
disillusionment with domestic politics.
"The complete descent
into disrepute of national political elites helps make the case for federalism.
The Italians despise their politicians; they have had to bring in [Mario] Monti
as a nonpolitician [prime minister]. The Greeks basically voted against the
established parties. All over Europe, national politics has been discredited.
Look at the Netherlands, at Belgium.
"The national politics of
continental Europe is collapsing and that's paving the way towards a federal
solution in ways that aren't fully understood in Britain."
There is a further layer to
this story. "Time and again, you see politicians fail at the national
level like Jacques Delors, Roy Jenkins and Peter Mandelson and then they are
reincarnated at the European level. Once you are a European commissioner, you
are reincarnated as a Eurocrat and, curiously, your credibility is increased.
In due course, these Eurocrats win because the business of governing a European
national state — usually with PR — is absolutely hopeless.
"It is such a thankless
task. You have to forge a coalition that ultimately is going to disappoint the
majority of the electorate. That's why power is shifting inexorably to
Brussels. I think it would be odd if that trend, which has been going on since
the Treaty of Rome, were to be broken.
"There has got to be a
possibility that this will all go horribly wrong with a Greek exit, but it has
got to be in the 10% to 20% range [of probability] because this would be so
costly to everybody. It would be a massive act of selfimmolation and I don't
think they're that crazy."
Established national political
elites may indeed be out of favour, but does that not, then, open the way for
extremist firebrands to take the lead? Just look at the gains made by Marine Le
Pen's National Front in France and Golden Dawn in Greece.
Ferguson is unconcerned.
"This is the dilemma. Europe is essentially an antipopulist, if not antidemocratic
phenomenon. European integration has always been a project of the elite that
has been foisted on national electorates. There is a latent populism in almost
every European country that flares up periodically, as it did, for example, in
Austria under Jörg Haider, but at each stage in the process the populists lose.
They're never in power for very long because they can't deliver what they say
they're going to do and the European centre gains step by step in its power.
"Fascism is discredited
in Europe. When people play the fascist card, they come to grief. No one should
worry too much about these goons in Greece. They don't account for that big a
percentage of the electorate and so they're never going to be part of the
government."
And, Ferguson maintains, the
ageing of Europe's population helps: "Remember, by 2050 a third of
Italians will be 65 or over. The elderly don't make good stormtroopers. They
want to retire early and be bone idle at the state's expense."
So, according to his thesis, a
breakup of the eurozone is possible but unlikely. And we shouldn't fret too
much about the threat of right wing xenophobes coming into power across the
Channel or around the Mediterranean.
But isn't this all a bit
optimistic? On paper, Greece is just weeks away from the point where it simply
doesn't have money to pay the wages of state employees. And corralling eurozone
member states together to agree a full fiscal union would take an age.
"As a Scotsman, I'm not a
congenitally optimistic person," Ferguson says. "I'm just telling you
from a historian's vantage point which seems the more likely of two difficult
scenarios.
"Even if just one country
leaves the eurozone, that creates a massive contagion effect, and no one knows
where the ripples would stop — it could even be a tsunami that hits New York.
"Also, although the
German political elite appears slowmoving and plodding, it wasn't slowmoving
and plodding in 1989-90 when the opportunity presented itself to reunite
Germany: monetary union with East Germany was the product of political
thinking, not economic logic. But the point is, I think you might be surprised
by how quickly they move when the chips are down.
"Are the Greeks going to
choose to selfdestruct?" (At this point Ferguson rather unkindly reflects
on Greece's need to maintain imports. "Greece is just ruins and beaches;
that's their business model. It's like East Germany used to be, except with
retsina and dolmades instead of beer and wurst.") "And are the
Germans going to let Greece self-destruct? Then there would be an unstoppable
effect as deposits exit Portugal, exit Spain, exit Italy.
"It is easier by miles
for the Germans to say, 'Okay, austerity wasn't quite enough; we're also going
to have structural funds deployed to Greece; we are also going to have
recapitalisation of the Spanish banks.' And the money is there . . .
"They should have done
this two years ago, but they thought they could kick the can down the road.
What they didn't realise was that each time they did that, the can got more
explosive. I'm not an optimist about Europe. That's why I live in America. So
don't call me an optimist."
And what of those who dreamt
up the single currency wheeze in the first place? Shouldn't they now be feeling
at the very least a trifle sheepish? Not at all, Ferguson reckons. If things
play out the way he predicts, they will have achieved their ambition — albeit
by somewhat devious means.
"I think it's worth
considering that the architects of the monetary union knew all along that it
would lead to a crisis and the crisis would lead to a federal solution. I'm not
quite sure how far that was articulated, but I think it was implicit. In fact,
you could say it was actually designed to create a crisis," he says.
In the late 1990s, an internal
paper circulated in the Bank of England about a hypothetical breakup of the
single currency. It floated the idea that "country I" — and the
supposed identity of country I could be speculated upon but was never made
explicit — would run an unsustainable deficit. Because there was no legal exit
from the single currency, the costs of any exit would be sky high. "And,"
Ferguson says, "it was designedly so. That point has held good.
"They [the euro
enthusiasts] have achieved what they wanted in that the level of financial
integration has gone so far, it's almost impossible to undo. And it was always
meant to be undoable, which is why there never was an exit clause. You were
never going to get federalism by any other means."
If the current crisis does
indeed see the creation of a federal state of Europe, where does that leave
Britain? Would it want to be part of that new superstate? "The answer is
clearly no," Ferguson says. And if— a big if — there were a referendum,
Britain might vote to leave the EU altogether.
"If you're not in this
new federal union, you have zero say, zero influence over the decisionmaking
process. If you're not in the currency, you're not in the room at all.
"The twospeed model
works if it's confederal at the core. But if you create a federal republic of
Europe it's impossible to be in the British position of being semidetached.
And I can't imagine that many of the other current members of the EU will want
to join us in a powerless periphery."
Further than that, he is wary
of making any specific predictions, though his analysis invites many, notably
about the longterm future of the European Union, an institution with such a
clear democratic deficit.
"Figuring out what's
going to happen in the eurozone over a 12week time horizon let alone 12 months
is difficult enough," he says. "When I'm asked to write about the
world in 10 or 20 years, I'm already in the realm of fiction.
"Look where we were in
the late Eighties, when the Berlin Wall was about to crumble. We thought the
western model of liberal democracy had triumphed. The future we imagined at
that point was one where western institutions were the global standard. Now, 23
years later, China is on the brink of overtaking the US in terms of economic
output — and China is run by the Communist party. It's hard to predict the
future."
Yet here are the historian's
headlines: the euro will survive; the European Union will become a federal
state; and Britain could end up outside it.
A reminder: without a new
dollop of cash, Greece runs out of money in six weeks' time.
No comments:
Post a Comment