No definitely this Europethere is wrong

Europe has therefore come to the aid of the Greece. It was time. But was she really doing

Let's start with the emergency. In the next two months, the Papandreou Government must raise 18 billion euros to refinance the debt of the Greek State. It would have probably come sexy the barge of lender with high interest rates. But, failing that, a terrible disaster scenario carrying: the State creditors would have found the default and no one would have wanted to advance money to Athens and then perhaps to Lisbon and Madrid. It is the same thing - a doubt suddenly on the ability of a borrower found safe to deal with a heavy maturity - that led Washington to fly to the rescue of two mortgage banks Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in September 2008, a week before the sinking of Lehman Brothers.

But Europe has no Government. Even worse: the Treaty of Rome prohibited explicitly any intervention of the Union, member countries and the European Central Bank to support a country bankrupt ("no lease-out"). The only case for unblock financial assistance focuses on "exceptional events" beyond the control of the State concerned. However this is not an earthquake that struck the Greece this time. It is the leak in front of its successive Governments.

If the Greece had not melted its Drachma in the euro, it would be passed under the influence of the IMF. Other countries of the European Union, as the Hungary, have lived this subject last year. But, as it is part of the Monetary Union, its fate involves other countries share the same currency. The best evidence of this link is the devaluation of 10 of the euro against the dollar since the beginning of Greek disorders (that said in passing, it is rather good news for European manufacturers). Must therefore be, not only to avoid a contagion to other fragile States.

The Europeans have so acted or reacted rather. The method seems to be good - a firm commitment wave of support for the Greece, which complicates the deal for speculators. The problem is elsewhere. It is regrettable that the Commission did not play the lesser role in the process, as it was remained planquée under the table during the banking of the end of 2008. But, after all, in times of tension, it is always the will of the national rulers who did advance Europe. No, the real problem, it is that and not the Greek rescue was led by twenty-seven by the sixteen, the European Union and not by monetary Union. It is a problem in the euro area (otherwise, the twenty-seven should fly to the rescue of the Hungary). It is within that ought to express solidarity - a totally absent term of financial articles of the Treaty. In times of crisis, a single currency requires joint actions. The Nobel in economics Robert Mundell was well explained: in a monetary zone, "asymmetric" shock suffered by one of its members, must be offset by measures of solidarity through other channels, such as the budget. The France has already begun on two occasions of monetary unions that exploded to be that monetary - the Latin Union in the second half of the 19th century and the block or in the 1930s.

No, definitely, this Europe-there is wrong. It should be otherwise. Finally develop solidarity mechanisms... but it might be too complicated. Better to start from some. The France and the Germany, of course. And also the Belgium, because there is Brussels and Herman Van Rompuy, the current President of the European Council, which seems to be a man of good will. And then the Italy, to rebalance to the South with a country remained fairly cautious in the crisis. Not to mention the Luxembourg, regulatory monitoring paradise. And the Netherlands, so that the Germany not feel not alone. Could be baptized this small group of the European Committee for the future, which would give a roughly pronounceable acronym in all languages - ECSC. But, apparently, he has already served.