Yanis Varoufakis, the newly appointed Finance Minister of Greece, a prolific blogger, wrote on Sunday that “Greek democracy today chose to stop going gently into the night. Greek democracy resolved to rage against the dying of the light.”
The Greeks elected an extreme left-wing party to lead the country, specifically on the basis of the pre-electoral pledge to renegotiate the austerity measures committed to by the Greek government back in 2010. The Greek government had then reached an agreement on these measures with the troika made up of the European Union, the International Monetary Fund and the European Central Bank. These measures were successful in that they saved the country from financial ruin and reintroduced a measure of financial discipline in Greece. However, they also resulted in widespread hardship.
Between January 2010 and January 2013, pensions and public sector wages have declined by over 25 per cent on average, tax rates have increased by more than 20 per cent and public sector recruitment has been frozen, pushing up unemployment.
The Greeks voted to reverse these draconian measures. Greece is the birthplace of democracy and no one doubts the right of the Greek people to elect the government of their choice. Governments, however, inherit the international obligations entered into by their predecessors, and while electing a government is the sole prerogative of a people, adherence to international agreements should never be subject to whoever wins elections.
Changing the party in government does not give any country the right to unilaterally erase and default on deals, contracts and agreements the country has entered into. And this is where the trouble lies. There is reluctance on the part of the EU to agree to any drastic changes to the existing deal. Countries, including Malta, expect Greece to repay its dues, albeit with possible amendments relaxing the schedule of payments. Financial markets, governments and hopefully even the Greek people are hoping that common ground can be found once the posturing and bravado end, and common sense prevails.
Both sides will lose badly if agreement is not reached. On the one hand, Greece risks drifting back to the financial ruin it was facing prior to being rescued by support from Europe. The present hardships, instead of decreasing, will be accentuated. Europe, on the other hand, is risking losing a long-standing member of the euro and possibly even of the Union itself, with all the ramifications that that would bring.
European centrist parties are now wedged between the extreme left and the extreme right
A bankrupt Greece would mean that Europe will have to write off and absorb the amounts that Greece currently owes. Faced with these scenarios, none of which are desirable for anybody, neither side can afford to inflexibly dig itself into entrenched positions.
Reason must prevail, and I strongly urge all involved to strive to reach a solution based on the spirit of compromise, while hoping that Europe, including its member Greece, do not forsake the principles of liberty, democracy, respect for human rights and basic civil liberties and rule by law, for all our sakes.
The Greek election brought to power an extreme left-wing party. European centrist parties are now wedged between the extreme left and the extreme right. One has to ask why Europe is becoming a breeding ground for extreme sentiments. Something is clearly not right in the state of the Union.
The EU has achieved to a great extent the objectives set by its founders. It has to a large extent brought peace into what was previously a war-torn region. It has brought prosperity to many parts of Europe. It is also thanks to the EU that millions of citizens across the continent have governments that respect their rights and rule of law.
Much has been done but clearly not enough. The EU is seen by an increasing number of people as a detached bureaucracy incapable of connecting with a variety of issues of national and transnational importance.
The menu of woes attributed to the EU is extensive and includes headaches such as irregular immigration, high unemployment and declining competitiveness. The truth is that these problems were not created by the existence of the EU. The most the Union can be accused of is of not acting with the required speed and tenacity to eliminate the valid concerns of the European citizen.
The pertinent question to which we will not have an answer is whether life without the EU would have meant having less or more of a chance for addressing these problems.
Take irregular immigration, for instance. Immigrants are crossing over searching for a better life. As long as European countries enjoy a better standard of living, it will attract migration. Would European countries be in a better position to deal with this situation if they are not part of the Union? I doubt it, unless they renegade on their principles and respect for human life, together with their EU membership.
In this sense, what happened with the austerity measures in Greece mirrors what is happening across Europe. The solutions that Europe offered Greece were the sensible if difficult solutions. But what realistic solutions were available for Greece five years ago? Should Europe have built a wall then and let Greece sink in debt? The answer is clearly no. Neither should we build that wall now.
www.facebook.com/Roberta.Metsola
Twitter: @RobertaMetsola
Roberta Metsola is a Nationalist MEP and Opposition spokeswoman for EU and foreign affairs.