It would be up to the European assembly and the parliaments of the states to decide and resolve the contradictions, under the supervision of European citizens. It does not matter if this forced union will start with only a few states: today it is urgent to react to the trauma of Trump’s victory, explicitly affirming the strength of European values, parliamentary democracy, the welfare state and investments in the future
By Thomas PICKETTY
After the victory of Donald Trump in the American elections, Europe can no longer be satisfied with declarations of good intentions: it must organize itself and take back control of world affairs, without having any illusions about what will come from Washington. However, the bottom line is that it will be impossible to face the socio-economic, climate and geopolitical challenges as long as the twenty-seven countries of the European Union have to take joint and unanimous decisions, as is unfortunately the case. today, especially in the financial field or budget matters.
The only way out of this situation is for a strong core of states, led by France and Germany, to put concrete proposals on the table that allow us to make progress both at the budgetary and institutional level, without waiting to fall all agree.
This hypothesis has been evoked several times in the past and also recently in Mario Draghi’s report, which proposed a large investment plan in Europe. The time has come to act. For this, three conditions are needed: this strong core must be given institutional and democratic foundations; it is essential that Germany also has its benefits, especially in terms of budget, and not only France, Italy or Spain; it is necessary that within each country and in general on the continent, different political visions, right and left, can be expressed and developed.
Let’s start from the first point. In order to form a core of states capable of making financial and budgetary decisions with all the necessary democratic legitimacy, it is important to create a solid institutional and political base. The most logical thing would be to start from the Franco-German Parliamentary Assembly (APFA), created in 2019 as part of the renewal of the bilateral treaty between France and Germany. A new and little-known institution, made up of a hundred deputies from all the parliamentary groups of the French National Assembly and the German Bundestag, Apfa has met roughly two or three times a year since its creation, and until now has been left to a consultative role.
But nothing prevents the two countries from giving it a decision-making role, especially for the budget, and opening it up to all the countries of the Union that want to participate, transforming it into a real European ensemble.
This strengthened parliamentary union would bring together countries that are ready for stronger cohesion and want to have a greater role in world affairs, as well as invest in the future. Above all, they can take joint loans to finance investments in energy, transport, research and new technologies.
Let’s go to the second point. While some countries, such as France, Italy or Spain, could accept this prospect, the main difficulty has always been convincing Germany, which is very wary of the idea of a joint debt, or of taking on debt in general. However, the situation is changing: a growing part of German public opinion is aware that Berlin needs to invest in its infrastructure in the poorer regions of the east and throughout the territory. This is today the opinion of the majority of German economists, who were recently joined by a large number of industrialists. This issue, among other things, is destroying the coalition between the left and the liberals. To overcome the recent problems, it is necessary to demonstrate that common European debts are the right instrument.
The third and final point: for such an ambitious project to see the light of day, it is essential that different political ideas find space. Draghi’s report has a liberal and technocratic approach: the former president of the European Central Bank (ECB) insists on public subsidies for private investments, for example in industry or artificial intelligence, and in the centers of excellence of large metropolises. Liberals and the right would feel comfortable in this context and would certainly emphasize the increase in military spending and a “Fortress Europe”, increasingly closed to immigration.
The left, by contrast, would insist on the importance of investment in the welfare state, education, public health and open infrastructures for as many people as possible, both in the slums and the peripheral regions, and would focused on the objectives of fiscal justice.
It would be up to the European assembly and the parliaments of the states, to decide and resolve the contradictions, under the gaze of the European citizens. It does not matter if this forced union will start with only a few states: today it is urgent to react to the trauma of Trump’s victory, explicitly affirming the strength of European values, parliamentary democracy, the welfare state and investments in the future. (Le Monde)
