Why will the collapse of the euro turn out to be his triumph

Recently, so many things have been declining about the collapse of the euro zone that the idea itself became the same that the Unified European currency turned out to be some kind of unsuccessful or generally failed project. The participating country did not receive any serious benefits from such a deepening of the economic integration of the country, but they made a bunch of ugly imbalances, which now have to be corrected somehow on the move.

This assessment proceeds from a false message that the euro was invented in order to make the European Union even richer and prosperous. But in reality, the economic aspects of the project for fathers of the unified currency were the tenth business. Their main goal was to create a truly united Europe. And just for this purpose, the euro copes every day better.

Back , President of the Czech Republic, back in 2003, warned that there was no economic feasibility in the transition to the euro. This is a purely political project that is needed for the forced centralization of the European Union, because the participating country will never agree to the voluntary centralization of the country. It is customary to laugh at Klaus, as if over an eccentric euro -assembly, but everything turned out exactly as he said.

The fact that the introduction of the euro would not be any special economic benefit was clear even to any crises. Europe used the advantages of regional integration, thanks to the creation of a common market. It was not necessary to introduce a single currency here.

In reality, the euro allowed to save on transaction costs and currency risks, but both of them turned out to be penny savings. The disappearance of transaction costs was only noticed by Finnish pensioners on vacation in Greece, and there were no serious currency risks in the European Union. Countries like Zimbabwe or Belarus, which can devalue their currency three times in a month, simply did not take there. But the EU states lost the opportunity to pursue a flexible and individual monetary policy .

As a result, from the transition to euros, Europe was not accelerated, but a slowdown in economic growth. For 1991–2001 (before the introduction of cash euros) The total GDP of the Eurozone (according to the PPS) in its current composition increased by 49.3% . Over the next ten years, 2001–2011. - Only 39%. The drop in growth can be attributed to the current crisis, but the economic crises were both in the early 90s, and in the early 2000s. And in the depths of the present, first of all, the euro itself is to blame.

But the political achievements of the euro managed to overtake the dreams of the most desperate Euro enthusiasts. Until recently, the EU countries fiddled with such an innocent thing as a Lisbon agreement for several years. National leaders entered more and more amendments there until they certainly made sure that they would not even lose a tiny piece of state sovereignty.

More or less serious steps towards the centralization of the EU seemed, if possible, then only somewhere in the distant future. When a new generation grows up, which from the elementary school was inspired about the unity and solidarity of the peoples of Europe.

But three years of the economic crisis did more than the change of generations. The leaders of the EU countries themselves voluntarily suffered huge pieces of national sovereignty in Brussels. If they had not been constrained by a single currency, then the European Union would have expected another decade lost for integration, as in the 70s. Integration projects would freeze, because there are things and more important, and the participating states would again begin to indulge in protectionism, trying to swim alone.

The euro coped, the decay and mutual Kidalov did not happen. The fear of the consequences of leaving the currency union turned out to be stronger than the fear of losing part of the authority due to the growth of centralization. Until recently, unthinkable restrictions on the freedom of actions of national governments easily and quickly became familiar. Greek Prime Minister Papandreu spent two years in his post, but during this time he could not make a single serious independent decision. And when I still tried, Brussels immediately replaced the democratically elected leader of the sovereign state with a more convenient papadimos.

But that Greece. The world power Italy - and that lost the right to appoint a leader to Brussel. Who could imagine that the Italians, without the slightest resistance, would refuse their right to choose the head of government and accept the Brussels technocrat appointed by the European Union, albeit Italian? Thanks to the euro, all this became possible and does not even cause much surprise.

And now the European Union is ready to carry out another integration leap with unprecedented speed. It was decided that national governments do not deserve confidence in budgetary issues. Now the last word will be behind the Brussels bureaucrats, who, in which case, will be able to make final editing to the main financial document of the country. They will reduce the deficit to the required 3% of GDP and will be written out by the guilty of a well -deserved punishment.

With a new restriction of sovereignty, all Eurozone countries and almost all other EU states agree. Ireland, where for the approval of the Lisbon Agreement it took several years of debate and two nationwide referendum, now does not put forward any objections. The German Constitutional Court for more than two years carefully studied the Lisbon Treaty - whether everything there complies with the German Constitution there. And even demanded that some little things be corrected. But with new agreements on the centralization of budget policy, nothing of the kind is required. They will sign it by March.

Poland, which created the image of the most grumbling EU participant with constant requirements to take into account its national specifics, this time in a hurry to sign everything that she will not be offered, although the Euro itself has not yet entered into the zone. Just not to lag behind the main stream of European integration. The main euroskeptics of the Czechs should follow the example of Poland in the near future. The Czech Foreign Minister Schwarzenberg admits that the new agreements do not delight him at all, but he does not see an alternative for the country.

There was no such amazing unanimity on such important issues in the European Union even when there were only six countries that were close in terms of development. Therefore, the “Father of Euro” Jacques Delor grins in vain that the EU leaders condemn the euro to failure from the very beginning, because they did not let Brussels control national budgets right. Now they will give. The euro will force.