The organic crisis of the Italian and European parties on which we have discussed a lot on these pages is pouring into the international arena due to the inability of European technostructures to understand what are the basic strategic lines that could allow the system of treaties that bind among them the European states to face the challenges that come from the international horizon. It is typical of centralized economies not to be able to commensurate foreign policy ambitions with the economic and institutional possibilities that allow them to be put in place. The crisis of the EU is that of the discrepancy, which is increasingly unveiled, between the economic need for international expansion and the institutional structure that prevents the creation of economic policies adequate for the geostrategic purpose. With more and more force a disruptor vice can be triggered. It is, moreover, already in place. All this emerges from the facts that I briefly recall here.
Italian Defense Minister Lorenzo Guerini recently visited the Sahel, Mali and Niger, with an intense series of institutional meetings with local authorities and the reaffirmation of the military value of our presence in that crucial geopolitical region. From Sudan to Mauritania, the wide strip of African territory between the Sahara and the sub-Saharan belt touches the state settlements of western and central Africa and, to the north, those bordering the Mediterranean. A historically crucial region for the European future, as is the Congo, which will require spasmodic attention in the future, when the emergence of African neo-bourgeoisies with ever higher degrees of strategic autonomy from the domination of international extractive capitalism, cannot fail to mark, with that of Europe, the future of Italy . A very difficult and crucial region, as evidenced by the emblematic situation that has affected the Lake Chad region for years and the conflicts that devastate it.
The future of Europe, if it does not want to be crushed by the German and Eastern European land powers, is in Africa, as France knows well it is no coincidence that it guides the operations of the Takuba Task Force, to which Italy has joined and which is fundamental for the fight against Islamic fundamentalism.
Europe of the EU should discuss these issues and commensurate its economic and financial projects with these immense possibilities for growth and the enormous challenges that these possibilities entail, instead of continuing to exhaust itself in the endemic conflict among the so-called frugal nations and those that are not frugal and that are not perceived as such. Moreover, the military problem strikes at the gates of the EU with an insistence that is now becoming dramatic.
A few days ago the study of the Center for American Progress in Washington, a think tank “with close ties to the Biden administration”, whose conclusion is clear and emblematic: “It’s time for the EU to become a global military power…. urges President Joe Biden – we continue – to encourage the EU to develop hardpower military capabilities and calls on him to abandon decades of opposition to EU defense integration by previous US leaders “. The pressures to overcome the orthodox theses of a substantial part of the Pentagon and the administration, according to which what was perceived as a duplication of NATO, must be overcome.
It is true that the Biden Administration wants a multilateralism based on the commitment of the emperor’s vassals in arms and with all that is needed to free the US from tasks that they feel increasingly conflicting with the priority ones of rebuilding the North American society, which otherwise risks a situation like the one it went through in the 1960s. The next NATO summit in June 2021 will be the testing ground for this new policy and the French Minister of Defense Florence Parly has already made her voice heard in this regard, expressing well the linear professions of autonomy with variable geometry of historical politics. French foreign exchange vis-à-vis both the US and other EU states.
But the general attention is instead, alas, entirely directed both in Italy and in the EU, to the long-distance debate between Commissioner Gentiloni and the executive vice-president of the Dombrovskis Commission, for which it will resume by the end of the year. the debate for the modification of the Stability Pact, whose application is now suspended until the end of 2022 due to the pandemic, but which remains “one of the most controversial discussions” at European level. The Commission will, it says, “work to build consensus” and make reform possible. However, it was also stressed that the current Stability Pact already provides for a certain “flexibility” starting from January 2015, when the Commission adopted an interpretation of the rules that seemed to take into account investment expenditure and “exceptional circumstances”.
Gentiloni is today questioning the need for changes to the pact, changing the current rules (the so-called “six-pack” and “two-pack”), even without modifying (as we should) the EU treaties. The executive vice-president, on the other hand, seems to be satisfied, for his part, with a new “interpretative communication” from the Commission, like that of 2015: is it a real debate, or is it a game of mirrors?
It looks like you are dancing on the Titanic. All this while there are 13 signatory states of the treaties with the debt / GDP threshold at 90% and as many as 26 out of 27 are those that exceed 3% of the deficit / GDP. Dombrovskis’ vision is exemplary: “With regard to 2023 – he said – I would like to emphasize that the current guidelines provide sufficient flexibility, within the rules, to be able to find the right balance between financing the recovery and ensuring the sustainability of public budgets. … And so – he concluded – how to simplify the rules, how to strengthen their counter-cyclical effect, both in negative and positive cycles and to ensure the sustainability of the public debt ”will be the commitments of the future.
The problem is, however, that these declarations do not seem to be able to follow decisions that satisfy what is the real challenge that the EU faces today. I am referring to the satisfaction of the military commitments that are incumbent on all EU states in the future and which are unavoidable, if we do not want to see Africa plunge into chaos, and thus give China the ideal condition to continue its policy of imperialism of the debt and military pressure: a radical change in EU economic policy is needed. And it must be a policy of supply and investments: there is no escape. The knots will then come to a head and a paradigm shift that no longer makes debt a paralyzing independent variable will be unavoidable.
Either change (thanks to a European federal constitution and a true and not illusory central bank) or sink into chaos. It is a dilemma that has already arisen in world history.
— — — —
We need your input to continue to provide you with quality and independent information.
SUPPORT US. DONATE NOW BY CLICKING HERE
© REPRODUCTION RESERVED