That Greece was unfit to enter the eurozone was predictable. That Greece would default on its international debt commitments was predictable.

However, how can one explain the persistent smiling Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras throughout the long months of negotiations?

Obviously, he thought he had only to stay put, waiting for the other side to yield convinced that Europe would not allow a historically important member to exit the eurozone.

The causes of the crisis are known. After 2008, the GDP growth rates were very low. The deficit was huge, with expenditure increasing by 87 per cent as against an increase in revenue of only 31 per cent.

Clearly also, the government was recklesssly dishing out benefits. The country’s debt-level deteriorated in and after 2009.

Budget compliance was disastrous as the government seemed unwilling to take unpopular measures to control expenditure. Problems with unreliable official data had existed since Greece entered the eurozone in 1999.

A few months ago, I wrote in this newspaper that France in the 1860s had created a so-called Latin Monetary Union with the aim of establishing uniform currencies between consenting states. The Union was at first succesful.

It started to grow weak with the entrance of other less disciplined states, notably that of Greece which started printing more paper money, thereby debasing its currency in relation to other nations.

Will today’s crisis lead to the collapse of the euro? Most probably not. Today’s politicians, financiers and bankers are much more experienced and knowledgeable than those who in the 1860s created the Latin Monetary Union.

Maybe, with Greece out it will be able to start the long-term process of mending its own currency on its own terms while the eurozone would start on a steady course of growth and strength by regaining the much desired stability.