European dream is dying

[GoranZ]

How the European dream is dying, state by state?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... state.html

[thegreekdog]

It should be an interesting few years.

[warmonger1981]

I recently read an article stating that Switzerland has stopped pegging its Franc to the Euro. This is due to inflation of the Euro. It hurts Switzerland's exports/imports.

[waauw]

How the European dream is dying, state by state?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... state.html

well it portraits europe as a lot more anti-EU than it actually is.A general distrust in EU politics is not the same as disliking the EU. One of the things that holds the eurozone, and in extention the EU, together is fear of what would happen at disintegration.

Personally I think they should stop accepting more EU members. As for the eurozone, if the greeks demand too much: Auf wiedersehen Griechenland.

[GoranZ]

I recently read an article stating that Switzerland has stopped pegging its Franc to the Euro. This is due to inflation of the Euro. It hurts Switzerland's exports/imports.

Franc was fixed with Euro since 2011 in order to help Switzerland's exports, and recently it become expensive to defend that course of Franc(Swiss national bank was overflooded with foreign currencies they didn't knew what to do with). So breaking that fixed course was one of the solutions... the other was printing more money(as US and EU did). If it was up to me I would have chosen the second one, but I'm not in charge.
I also presume that the officials from Swiss national bank didn't expected 30% increase of the value of the Swiss franc... if they expected it they would have probably printed more money

How the European dream is dying, state by state?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... state.html

well it portraits europe as a lot more anti-EU than it actually is.A general distrust in EU politics is not the same as disliking the EU.

Currently EU become more like what Germans and French want, not what Europeans want. There is huge difference. If everyone put interests of Europe in first line things will be very different.

One of the things that holds the eurozone, and in extention the EU, together is fear of what would happen at disintegration.

Probably something like Yugoslav wars

Personally I think they should stop accepting more EU members. As for the eurozone, if the greeks demand too much: Auf wiedersehen Griechenland.

If I exclude Turkey, remaining candidate members represent less then 5% of current EU population. That is virtually nothing compared to the instability those countries can cause to Europe it self if they are not within EU.
When it comes to Greece, I can only say "Greece should return whole zero Euros to German/French banks". Why? On what grounds those banks were lending money? If you go to a bank and ask for similar terms you will probably be kicked out of the bank in an instance... German/French banks didn't do that with Greece so they deserve to get burn.

[warmonger1981]

Yeah investors looked at the Franc like gold. From what I understand the Swiss Central Bank is private but actually owned by its regional states/provinces. These states have voting power. Unlike the Federal Reserve owned by its charter banks.

[waauw]

Currently EU become more like what Germans and French want, not what Europeans want. There is huge difference. If everyone put interests of Europe in first line things will be very different.

I completely agree with you

One of the things that holds the eurozone, and in extention the EU, together is fear of what would happen at disintegration.

Probably something like Yugoslav wars

I think it's quite different. Yugoslavia had religious, nationalistic and dictatorial issues. Whilst what holds the EU together is rather the strong economic ties reliant on EU legislature and the euro.

If I exclude Turkey, remaining candidate members represent less then 5% of current EU population. That is virtually nothing compared to the instability those countries can cause to Europe it self if they are not within EU.
When it comes to Greece, I can only say "Greece should return whole zero Euros to German/French banks". Why? On what grounds those banks were lending money? If you go to a bank and ask for similar terms you will probably be kicked out of the bank in an instance... German/French banks didn't do that with Greece so they deserve to get burn.

The EU can not allow the Greek to just default on its debts. It's not even an issue about the direct economic repercussions of Greece defaulting even though it would cost a lot, but rather about setting a precedent. According to "C'est dans l'air" which is a program on the french TV station France 5, the big problem is upcoming spanish elections later this year. Just as in Greece there has been a growing spanish movement to renegotiate debts. So the EU will be forced to act strictly and swiftly concerning Greece. There is no way Greece can pull any major breakthrough. They'll probably just receive a mild extension of debt repayment, just so Syriza won't lose face immediately.

Concerning recruiting new members, I just want to say that the EU is in accute need for reforms and the less members there are the easier it'll be to come to a deal. So I just think the EU should keep any applying members waiting until this is taken care of.

[GoranZ]

One of the things that holds the eurozone, and in extention the EU, together is fear of what would happen at disintegration.

Probably something like Yugoslav wars

I think it's quite different. Yugoslavia had religious, nationalistic and dictatorial issues. Whilst what holds the EU together is rather the strong economic ties reliant on EU legislature and the euro.

Yugoslavia never had religious or dictatorial issues... that's nonsense presented by western media. But near its end nationalistic issues appear, and believe me but the strong economic ties were not enough to keep the country in one peace.

If I exclude Turkey, remaining candidate members represent less then 5% of current EU population. That is virtually nothing compared to the instability those countries can cause to Europe it self if they are not within EU.
When it comes to Greece, I can only say "Greece should return whole zero Euros to German/French banks". Why? On what grounds those banks were lending money? If you go to a bank and ask for similar terms you will probably be kicked out of the bank in an instance... German/French banks didn't do that with Greece so they deserve to get burn.

The EU can not allow the Greek to just default on its debts. It's not even an issue about the direct economic repercussions of Greece defaulting even though it would cost a lot, but rather about setting a precedent. According to "C'est dans l'air" which is a program on the french TV station France 5, the big problem is upcoming spanish elections later this year. Just as in Greece there has been a growing spanish movement to renegotiate debts. So the EU will be forced to act strictly and swiftly concerning Greece. There is no way Greece can pull any major breakthrough. They'll probably just receive a mild extension of debt repayment, just so Syriza won't lose face immediately.

Spaniards are not famous for bankruptcies as Greeks. Although both countries have similar problems they are far from same. In reality Syriza success might turn into nightmare for similar party as Syriza in other European countries. If Europe want they have other ways to effectively punish Greece for its insubordinate behavior. Ways that will hurt them really bad.

Concerning recruiting new members, I just want to say that the EU is in accute need for reforms and the less members there are the easier it'll be to come to a deal. So I just think the EU should keep any applying members waiting until this is taken care of.

You are mistaking a lot... For example if someone wants to come and visit you, they will ring on your door once, twice or maybe three times, after that they are gone, maybe even forever In such case they will start looking for other friends.

[waauw]

Yugoslavia never had religious or dictatorial issues... that's nonsense presented by western media. But near its end nationalistic issues appear, and believe me but the strong economic ties were not enough to keep the country in one peace.

Well I can't press you on this topic I guess. I only know what I've seen on the news and on documentaries here. I'm not exactly that educated on the topic.

Spaniards are not famous for bankruptcies as Greeks. Although both countries have similar problems they are far from same. In reality Syriza success might turn into nightmare for similar party as Syriza in other European countries. If Europe want they have other ways to effectively punish Greece for its insubordinate behavior. Ways that will hurt them really bad.

I agree with you. Finding ways to punish almost any country in the EU is not that difficult. All I'm saying is the greek will never default on their debts, they'd end up in a similar situation as Argentina if they screw up their relations with the richer parts of europe.

You are mistaking a lot... For example if someone wants to come and visit you, they will ring on your door once, twice or maybe three times, after that they are gone, maybe even forever In such case they will start looking for other friends.

I know, we can all see what Turkey is doing nowadays. However it is a very different situation for other countries. Those in the Balkan are pretty much enclosed by EU nations, making a search for different but useful friends a very difficult thing to do. So, assuming they act rationally, I dont think they will.

Though I see you're from Macedonia, you're from the region, you probably know better than me what politicians in that region think. As for the north-western part of europe(where I'm from) I can tell you that in my own country and in neighbouring nations nationalism and racism are on the rise. This endangers many of the foundations of the EU and is increasing hatred for foreigners, mostly muslims and eastern european immigrants.

[Symmetry]

How the European dream is dying, state by state?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... state.html

Ah, the Torygraph. What an odd little article.

[tkr4lf]

So, I'm pretty ignorant when it comes to the EU and European politics in general. Let's say the EU does crumble. What do you guys think happens then? Does the relative peace and prosperity of the past 50ish years go down the drain? Does it go back to how it was pre-WW1 era? Or do you guys think something else will rise up to take its place and prevent Europe from descending back into the blood soaked battleground it has been for most of its history?

[Symmetry]

So, I'm pretty ignorant when it comes to the EU and European politics in general. Let's say the EU does crumble. What do you guys think happens then? Does the relative peace and prosperity of the past 50ish years go down the drain? Does it go back to how it was pre-WW1 era? Or do you guys think something else will rise up to take its place and prevent Europe from descending back into the blood soaked battleground it has been for most of its history?

No

[waauw]

So, I'm pretty ignorant when it comes to the EU and European politics in general. Let's say the EU does crumble. What do you guys think happens then? Does the relative peace and prosperity of the past 50ish years go down the drain? Does it go back to how it was pre-WW1 era? Or do you guys think something else will rise up to take its place and prevent Europe from descending back into the blood soaked battleground it has been for most of its history?

If it would collapse, the first thing that would happen would be a period of turmoil, a transitionary phase. As for what europe would look like afterwards, would really depend on how the EU would fall apart. But you can rest assured that the US would do anything to keep it from creating too many hostilities within NATO too, while Russia would try and expand its influence sphere once again and China would look to buy up as many bargains as possible.

In the end looking at european politics, you should realise that the current struggle within europe isn't Germany vs Greece for instance, but rather wealthier vs pauperized nations(simplified to mere economics, while culture and political ideology are actually equally important). So in the unlikely case of a break-up, it's highly probable the EU would fall into blocks of like minded nations.

[tkr4lf]

So, I'm pretty ignorant when it comes to the EU and European politics in general. Let's say the EU does crumble. What do you guys think happens then? Does the relative peace and prosperity of the past 50ish years go down the drain? Does it go back to how it was pre-WW1 era? Or do you guys think something else will rise up to take its place and prevent Europe from descending back into the blood soaked battleground it has been for most of its history?

No

That was helpful.

So, I'm pretty ignorant when it comes to the EU and European politics in general. Let's say the EU does crumble. What do you guys think happens then? Does the relative peace and prosperity of the past 50ish years go down the drain? Does it go back to how it was pre-WW1 era? Or do you guys think something else will rise up to take its place and prevent Europe from descending back into the blood soaked battleground it has been for most of its history?

If it would collapse, the first thing that would happen would be a period of turmoil, a transitionary phase. As for what europe would look like afterwards, would really depend on how the EU would fall apart. But you can rest assured that the US would do anything to keep it from creating too many hostilities within NATO too, while Russia would try and expand its influence sphere once again and China would look to buy up as many bargains as possible.

In the end looking at european politics, you should realise that the current struggle within europe isn't Germany vs Greece for instance, but rather wealthier vs pauperized nations(simplified to mere economics, while culture and political ideology are actually equally important). So in the unlikely case of a break-up, it's highly probable the EU would fall into blocks of like minded nations.

Right. The US, Russia, China thing I can certainly see.

That last line of yours makes it sound like yeah, it could feasibly go back to pre-WW1 era type situation. So, if this were to come to pass, how likely would another great war type scenario be? Yes, I understand US and Russia would likely prevent something like that from happening, but say they aren't effective in their attempts. Do you guys think something like that could ever happen again? And by you guys, I'm mainly talking to the people that live in Europe and have firsthand knowledge of the situation. It's interesting to hear from the people that actually live there.

[Symmetry]

So, I'm pretty ignorant when it comes to the EU and European politics in general. Let's say the EU does crumble. What do you guys think happens then? Does the relative peace and prosperity of the past 50ish years go down the drain? Does it go back to how it was pre-WW1 era? Or do you guys think something else will rise up to take its place and prevent Europe from descending back into the blood soaked battleground it has been for most of its history?

No

That was helpful.

I could split it up:

Does the relative peace and prosperity of the past 50ish years go down the drain?

No

Does it go back to how it was pre-WW1 era?

No

Or do you guys think something else will rise up to take its place and prevent Europe from descending back into the blood soaked battleground it has been for most of its history?

No

[mrswdk]

So, if this were to come to pass, how likely would another great war type scenario be?

lol, a great war fought using what?

Given the disproportionately large amount of US troops in Europe, and the disproportionately small number of troops that the entire EU28 have between them, by far the most likely scenario is that the web of NATO supported by American enforcement would stop any hostilities from breaking out, even if any of the European nations wanted them to (which is highly unlikely anyway).

[Symmetry]

So, if this were to come to pass, how likely would another great war type scenario be?

lol, a great war fought using what?

Given the disproportionately large amount of US troops in Europe, and the disproportionately small number of troops that the entire EU28 have between them, by far the most likely scenario is that the web of NATO supported by American enforcement would stop any hostilities from breaking out, even if any of the European nations wanted them to (which is highly unlikely anyway).

LOL. how's that plan working in the Middle East?

[tkr4lf]

So, I'm pretty ignorant when it comes to the EU and European politics in general. Let's say the EU does crumble. What do you guys think happens then? Does the relative peace and prosperity of the past 50ish years go down the drain? Does it go back to how it was pre-WW1 era? Or do you guys think something else will rise up to take its place and prevent Europe from descending back into the blood soaked battleground it has been for most of its history?

No

That was helpful.

I could split it up:

Does the relative peace and prosperity of the past 50ish years go down the drain?

No

Does it go back to how it was pre-WW1 era?

No

Or do you guys think something else will rise up to take its place and prevent Europe from descending back into the blood soaked battleground it has been for most of its history?

No

Again, quite helpful.

You were sorely missed, sym!

So, if this were to come to pass, how likely would another great war type scenario be?

lol, a great war fought using what?

Given the disproportionately large amount of US troops in Europe, and the disproportionately small number of troops that the entire EU28 have between them, by far the most likely scenario is that the web of NATO supported by American enforcement would stop any hostilities from breaking out, even if any of the European nations wanted them to (which is highly unlikely anyway).

Right, good point.

But that's the way it is now. What's to stop the individual countries from rebuilding their militaries after (if) the EU collapses?

Again, I'm completely ignorant when it comes to any of this, so forgive me if I sound like I don't know what I'm talking about. I don't. That's why I'm asking.

[Symmetry]

You're asking if Europe is the same as it was over a century ago, I think that your view of Europe is kind of out of date.

[mrswdk]

So, if this were to come to pass, how likely would another great war type scenario be?

lol, a great war fought using what?

Given the disproportionately large amount of US troops in Europe, and the disproportionately small number of troops that the entire EU28 have between them, by far the most likely scenario is that the web of NATO supported by American enforcement would stop any hostilities from breaking out, even if any of the European nations wanted them to (which is highly unlikely anyway).

Right, good point.

But that's the way it is now. What's to stop the individual countries from rebuilding their militaries after (if) the EU collapses?

Again, I'm completely ignorant when it comes to any of this, so forgive me if I sound like I don't know what I'm talking about. I don't. That's why I'm asking.

Well, theoretically nothing. Germany has recently been talking about remilitarizing to some degree (in response to the situation in Ukraine), and I'm not aware of any legal or constitutional limits that would stop other EU countries from following suit.

That said, none of them (bar France and the UK) have shown any real inclination to maintain a serious army while they've had America watching their backs, and even if the EU were to collapse NATO and the American presence would still exist, so there still wouldn't be much incentive for European countries to ramp up their military spending.

[Symmetry]

So, if this were to come to pass, how likely would another great war type scenario be?

lol, a great war fought using what?

Given the disproportionately large amount of US troops in Europe, and the disproportionately small number of troops that the entire EU28 have between them, by far the most likely scenario is that the web of NATO supported by American enforcement would stop any hostilities from breaking out, even if any of the European nations wanted them to (which is highly unlikely anyway).

Right, good point.

But that's the way it is now. What's to stop the individual countries from rebuilding their militaries after (if) the EU collapses?

Again, I'm completely ignorant when it comes to any of this, so forgive me if I sound like I don't know what I'm talking about. I don't. That's why I'm asking.

Well, theoretically nothing. Germany has recently been talking about remilitarizing to some degree (in response to the situation in Ukraine), and I'm not aware of any legal or constitutional limits that would stop other EU countries from following suit.

That said, none of them (bar France and the UK) have shown any real inclination to maintain a serious army while they've had America watching their backs, and even if the EU were to collapse NATO and the American presence would still exist, so there still wouldn't be much incentive for European countries to ramp up their military spending.

What would constitute a "serious army" in your terms?

[tkr4lf]

You're asking if Europe is the same as it was over a century ago, I think that your view of Europe is kind of out of date.

I asked if it could return to how it was over a century ago. There's a bit of a difference.

Surely you can understand where I'm coming from. For the vast majority of Europe's history, it was little more than a battlefield. Then, it all culminated with two world wars, which led to the formation of the EU, which has been very good for Europe, at least as far as preventing mass bloodshed and war. (This is my limited understanding of the matter, I could be wrong here. Again, ignorance of the situation, as stated multiple times now. Also, I understand that the EU's stated goal isn't really preventing European war, it's more of an economic thing than anything else. But, by tying the various countries together economically, it does indirectly accomplish that task, at least to an extent.)

So, it doesn't seem like a huge leap in logic to my uninformed mind to think that if the institution that has been holding Europe together and preventing mass war were to fall, that it is a possibility that things could return to how they have been for basically all of Europe's history save for the past 50ish years.

That's where I'm coming from, anyway. So, pretty much just to sate my curiosity, I figured I would ask people that live there or are otherwise much more informed on the matter than I am about it. While others give an answer that includes a bit of explanation, you respond with "No." Not very helpful, as you can surely see.

[tkr4lf]

So, if this were to come to pass, how likely would another great war type scenario be?

lol, a great war fought using what?

Given the disproportionately large amount of US troops in Europe, and the disproportionately small number of troops that the entire EU28 have between them, by far the most likely scenario is that the web of NATO supported by American enforcement would stop any hostilities from breaking out, even if any of the European nations wanted them to (which is highly unlikely anyway).

Right, good point.

But that's the way it is now. What's to stop the individual countries from rebuilding their militaries after (if) the EU collapses?

Again, I'm completely ignorant when it comes to any of this, so forgive me if I sound like I don't know what I'm talking about. I don't. That's why I'm asking.

Well, theoretically nothing. Germany has recently been talking about remilitarizing to some degree (in response to the situation in Ukraine), and I'm not aware of any legal or constitutional limits that would stop other EU countries from following suit.

That said, none of them (bar France and the UK) have shown any real inclination to maintain a serious army while they've had America watching their backs, and even if the EU were to collapse NATO and the American presence would still exist, so there still wouldn't be much incentive for European countries to ramp up their military spending.

So basically, as long as the US and NATO keep up their troop presence, the likelihood of anything serious happening, in terms of war anyway, are pretty low, yes?

But, correct me if I'm wrong, aren't most American troops stationed in Europe concentrated in the west? The only place that I personally know that definitely has American troops stationed there is Germany. Where else are they?

And aren't the majority of the U.S.-friendly nations concentrated in the west? If so, what happens to the east? Does Russia expand their influence back over them? And if so, what does that lead to? Could we conceivably wind up in another cold war type situation?

And where would China fit in with all of this? I think waauw had a good point that they would be doing their best to buy up as much influence as they could, but then what? Assuming a Russia-Eastern Europe/U.S.-Western Europe cold war type situation, which side would China join in on? Are Chinese/Russian relations good these days?




Sorry for all the questions and ridiculous conjecture, I'm just curious. And woefully under/uninformed. I made a conscious decision a couple of years ago to pretty much quit paying attention and/or worrying about stuff that was out of my personal control, and that includes politics. I don't really pay attention to the news anymore, just generally try to avoid it all. I've found that I'm much happier because of it. However, this particular topic grabbed my attention, and so I figured hey, why not. If you guys don't feel like indulging my idle curiosity, no biggie. It's not important at all. It is interesting, though.

[mrswdk]

So basically, as long as the US and NATO keep up their troop presence, the likelihood of anything serious happening, in terms of war anyway, are pretty low, yes?

I would say so. It's difficult to end up in a war with your neighbor when both you and your neighbor are part of the same military alliance.

But, correct me if I'm wrong, aren't most American troops stationed in Europe concentrated in the west? The only place that I personally know that definitely has American troops stationed there is Germany. Where else are they?

They also have a reasonably significant amount of troops in Italy and UK. I believe a lot of their bombing missions against countries such as Libya and Syria have been run from British air bases. In any case, redeployment from Germany to elsewhere wouldn't be difficult, and those other countries have their own militaries anyway.

And aren't the majority of the U.S.-friendly nations concentrated in the west? If so, what happens to the east? Does Russia expand their influence back over them? And if so, what does that lead to? Could we conceivably wind up in another cold war type situation?

The 'buffer zone' of eastern nations that border Russia are mostly neither in NATO nor the EU anyway, so I doubt much would change there should the EU dissolve. The situation would still be NATO on one side, Russia on the other and a fence of (nominally) non-aligned states sat in between.

And where would China fit in with all of this? I think waauw had a good point that they would be doing their best to buy up as much influence as they could, but then what? Assuming a Russia-Eastern Europe/U.S.-Western Europe cold war type situation, which side would China join in on? Are Chinese/Russian relations good these days?

If we take history as precedent, China would take neither side. China has never shown any interest in getting involved in international affairs and interfering in disputes abroad, and isn't really doing anything today that would suggest that it would be interested in doing so now.

[warmonger1981]

Control population through finance. A standing army can only go so far. These people figured that out in the Bretton Wood system. One fails we all fail.