Editorial: Solidarity, not ideological fixations

The wealthy states of Northern Europe and especially Germany, the Netherlands, and Finland continue to stubbornly refuse to adopt bold economic measures in the midst of a deadly pandemic.

Just as in the 2008 economic crisis they maintain that there is a moral hazard, which means that countries protected in some way from risk will act differently than if they didn't have that protection.

They accuse most eurozone countries of not taking necessary steps to support their health systems in economically brighter times.

They maintain that these countries engaged in untrammeled consumer spending in order to serve their political clienteles and that now they seek full protection without assuming their obligations and responsibilities.

Essentially they are accusing the political class mainly of Southern Europe of fiscal imprudence and they are demanding specific commitments as occurred with the bailout programmes during the prior debt crisis. They are saying that they will not spend lavishly without the assumption of obligations.

This almost theologically dogmatic stance overlooks the extraordinary character of this crisis and does not accept any form of the principle of solidarity.

The three aforementioned countries even raised constitutional issues deriving from the Treaty of Maastricht, which has been enshrined in their constitutions and does not permit the assumption of the debt of other countries.

The real issue is that they do not want under any circumstances a mutualisation of European debt or additional risk.

The rich countries of the North are erring and defending their accumulated wealth without understanding that in the coronavirus pandemic one does not have the asymmetry of a debt crisis.

They cannot...

Continue reading on: