Finlandia prefiere abandonar el euro antes que pagar las deudas de otros

Jutta Urpilainen, ministra de Finanzas de Finlandia.

HELSINKI, 6 (EUROPA PRESS)

Finlandia, una de las últimas economías de la eurozona que aún conserva la calificación 'Aaa', ha elevado el tono de sus críticas a los recientes acuerdos europeos tras afirmar su ministra de Finanzas, Jutta Urpilainen, que el país estaría dispuesto a plantearse abandonar la zona euro antes que verse forzado a pagar las deudas contraídas por otros.

"Finlandia está comprometido con su papel como miembro de la eurozona y pensamos que el euro es útil para Finlandia", asegura Urpilainen en una entrevista concedida al diario financiero finés 'Kauppalehti', donde, sin embargo, asegura que "Finlandia no se colgará del euro a cualquier precio y está preparada para cualquier escenario".

Asimismo, la titular finlandesa de la cartera de Finanzas reiteró su postura de que una unión bancaria fundada sobre la asunción conjunta de responsabilidades no funcionará.

"La responsabilidad colectiva respecto a la deuda, economías y riesgos de otros países no debería ser lo que estuviéramos preparando", añade Urpilainen, quien en declaraciones al rotativo 'Helsingin Sanomat' señala que, a pesar del espíritu constructivo con el que Finlandia aborda la resolución de la crisis, el país "no está dispuesto a cualquier cosa".

The Greek debt that became Cyprus' Trojan Horse

Euronews

Now is Cyprus - Bailout may equal half its economy

www.msnbc.msn.com/

NICOSIA — Cyprus, the fifth euro zone country to seek emergency funding from Europe, may need a bailout of up to 10 billion euros — over half the size of its economy — officials said on Tuesday.

The Mediterranean island, with a banking sector heavily exposed to debt-crippled Greece, said on Monday it was formally applying for help from the European Union's rescue funds.

Cyprus is the euro zone's third smallest economy but it joins Greece, Ireland, Portugal and Spain in seeking EU rescue funds to try and stay afloat, and is the latest sign that policymakers have failed to stop the debt crisis spreading.

European leaders will meet at a summit on Thursday and Friday but they are not expected to come up with a lasting solution to the region's problems that have also sent Italy's borrowing costs soaring.

Exact amount undecided Two euro zone officials said that a package of up to 10 billion euros was being considered for the 17.3 billion euro Cyrpriot economy.

"The exact number has not been decided yet. It was to be 6 billion for the state financing and 2 billion for the banks but that is optimistic — it is more likely to be seven and three — up to 10 billion euros in total," one euro zone official said.

A second official confirmed the amount was likely to be up to 10 billion euros, a massive bill for Cyprus.

EU chief at G20 Summit: We’re not here to ’receive lessons from nobody!’ [BUT YOUR MONEY]

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Read >>

Pro-bailout party wins Greek election

By NBC News, msnbc.com staff and news services

Updated at 4:49 p.m. ET: ATHENS - The pro-bailout New Democracy party came in first Sunday in Greece's national election, and its leader has proposed forming a pro-euro coalition government.

"The Greek people voted today to stay on the European course and remain in the euro zone... there will be no more adventures, Greece's place in Europe will not be put in doubt," New Democracy leader Antonis Samaras said.

He said voters chose "policies that will bring jobs, growth, justice and security."

His party beat the anti-bailout Syriza party, which wanted to cancel Greece's international bailouts.

Syriza chief Alexis Tsipras conceded the election but vowed to continue its fight against the punishing terms of an EU/IMF bailout saving the country from bankruptcy.

"From Monday, we will continue the fight," Tsipras told supporters. "A new day for Greece has already dawned.

An official projection released by the interior ministry showed conservative New Democracy taking 29.5 percent, with the radical leftist Syriza bloc just behind at 27.1 percent. The PASOK Socialists were set to take 12.3 percent.

Because of a 50-seat bonus given to the party which comes first, that result would give New Democracy and PASOK 161 seats in the 300-seat parliament, in an alliance committed to a 130 billion euro ($164 billion) EU/IMF bailout keeping the country from bankruptcy.   More >>

’Putinization’ spreading in Europe, US group warns

By F. Brinley Bruton, msnbc.com

LONDON -- The leaders of Hungary and Ukraine are following in the footsteps of Russian President Vladimir Putin and imperiling the young democracies, U.S.-based non-governmental organization Freedom House said in a report on Wednesday.

"Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban and Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych, under the pretext of so-called reforms, have been systematically breaking down critical checks and balances," Freedom House's president David Kramer said in a statement.

"They appear to be pursuing the 'Putinization' of their countries, which is ironic, given that in Russia itself Putinism has been largely discredited over the past year, as ordinary Russians increasingly seek guarantees of government accountability and transparency," he added. 

A wave of demonstrations have swept through Russia in recent months, with citizens protesting corruption and the Putin government's growing power.

On Wednesday, Russian lawmakers voted through a controversial bill that dramatically increases fines for those accused of participating in banned public protests. The bill was proposed in response to big public rallies against Putin's second term as president.

Hungary president quits in plagiarism scandal

The autocratic tendencies seen in the post-communist democracies pointed out in the Nations in Transit 2012 report risk taking root elsewhere among the European Union's newest members and aspiring members, Freedom House warned. Five other EU members in the region -- Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Lithuania, Romania, and Slovakia -- also have seen a decline in democratic practices and traditions over the past five years, according to Freedom House.

Alexey Nikolsky /Ria Novosti /Pr / EPA

Russian President Vladimir Putin (R) talks to Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych (L) during their bilateral talks in Moscow, Russia, on May 15.

Hungary's anti-democratic lurch, made worse by the economic downturn, was deemed the worst in the region by Freedom House. 

The report cited a swift dismantling of democratic checks in Hungary, made easier by a weak opposition and the ruling supermajority in parliament. 

Huge rally in Prague against austerity measures, alleged corruption

"Hungary’s precipitous descent is the most glaring example among the newer European Union members," the report added. "Its deterioration over the past five years has affected institutions that form the bedrock of democratically accountable systems, including independent courts and media.  More >>

Nigel Farage: Hablando claro en el Parlamento Europeo [Correo]

The Irish referendum: A battle of conflicting emotions

EconomistMagazine

So much for ’the Spanish dream’: Euro crisis turns suburbs into ghost towns

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Read >>

In the Name of Austerity, Stimulus and Growth, Amen!

ClubOrlov/

Paul Kuzhynski

Here's some food for thought. If you've been listening to the muffled and incoherent noises coming from the G8 and the surrounding political chattersphere, it's starting to sound like a prayer meeting: “In the name of Austerity, Stimulus and Growth, Amen!” And if you look at the individual leaders, what is there for them to do except pray?

Starting from the bottom, there is The Man Who Wasn't There: the newly reinaugurated Russian president Vladimir Putin. He didn't even show up, but sent his obedient deputy Medvedev instead, who made positive noises about how wonderful the meeting was. Putin is a lonely man: he's been seen in public with his wife a total of twice over the last two years; his two daughters are living incognito somewhere in Europe, there are mobs of people outside chanting “Russia Without Putin!” over and over again, and even the VIPs present at the inauguration seemed to be half-concealing a message behind their idolatrous smiles: “Wish you weren't here, Vova!”

The situation in the US isn't that much better: even his (once) ardent supporters see Obama as slightly worse than ineffectual, while many others are happy to vilify him for things he had nothing to do with. One thing is certain: the office changed him far more than he has managed to change the office. Even if he gets reelected, it will be four more years of ineffectual waffling, futile attempts to stay the course laid in by his manifestly incompetent predecessor, and frontal assaults on our remaining civil liberties. And if his opponent gets elected, it will much the same, except without the thin plastic veneer of pretending to give a damn.

Germany's Angela Merkel doesn't have much of a reason to be cheerful either. Her political support is eroding with each election. The task of pleasing the Germans while holding Eurozone together is an impossible one: the Germans are fed up with carrying the weaker European countries on their shoulders, but if they don't, then all fall down. The European dynamic is different because there the states that make up the EU negotiate with each other directly rather through the opaque proxy of Washington. If New York and California had a choice as to whether to give Louisiana, Missouri and Arkansas an endless series of financial piggyback rides, they would tell them to go ask Jesus for a loan, and then these three states would be worse off than Greece. But eventually something has to give, both here and in Europe.

The new face, the freshly elected socialist François Hollande, hasn't had a chance to do much yet, but, uncharacteristically for an elected official, he seems to want to fulfill his campaign promises: he said that he will withdraw French troops from Afghanistan by the end of 2012, as promised. But his hand is weak: financially, France is not far ahead the Eurozone laggards; politically, Marine Le Pen's National Front is breathing down his neck.

And so, all they can do is pray: “In the Name of Austerity, Stimulus and Growth, Amen!” Growth is the holy grail, and austerity and stimulus will help us find it. But how?

Austerity is meant to bring deficit spending under control, curb the uncontrolled expansion of public debt, and avoid national default. But it has the unwelcome effect of triggering a severe recession, shrinking the tax base, and causing budget deficits to increase, not decrease.

Stimulus is meant to provide a way to kick-start economic growth, but the money for stimulus spending has to be borrowed, and this results in the expansion of public debt. And even an economist will tell you that a higher debt-to-GDP ratio results in lower growth.

This brings us to growth. The world is resource-constrained: the supply of most of the essential industrial commodities cannot be increased without triggering a price spike, which, in turn, will trigger another, even deeper, recession. Even with all the deep-water drilling (and spilling), fracking, tar sands and so on, there just isn't much growth potential for the US or the Eurozone, with their already high levels of per capita resource consumption.

Contrary to the ardent prayers of the world's leaders, the three-legged stool of austerity, stimulus and growth is a rickety piece of furniture: no matter which combination of legs they try put their weight on, they will end up sitting on the floor, and we will end up sitting on the floor with them. Now, sitting on the floor does not have to be uncomfortable. Perhaps, instead of praying, they should try some yoga: I am thinking of the lotus position. Repeating the same thing over and over again doesn't seem to be working; let's try meditating instead. Growth is over; now what?

American Lessons (for Europe)

Daron Acemoglu and James Robinson/

Thomas J. Sargent’s Nobel Prize lecture, “United States Then, Europe Now,” draws an important parallel between the United States - the Articles of Confederation of 1781 and the ratification of the U.S. Constitution in 1788 - and Europe today. In both cases, polities were joined in a currency union under the tutelage of a weak central government, without the power to tax and conduct fiscal policy, and with all the free-rider problems that this creates. Sargent takes the reader through a tour of some basic dynamic general (macro-) equilibrium modeling, emphasizing the importance of the government’s budget constraint — even the government’s debt has to be paid and that determines the value of its bonds.

But the bottom line comes down to how the U.S. Constitution sorted out the quagmire by giving the central government the power to tax and transferring the debt obligations of states to the central government (i.e., “bailing out” the states). This arrangement was not only more stable (because it avoided the free-rider problems) but also enabled the U.S. government to establish a reputation as a credit-worthy borrower, thus reducing its future borrowing costs. Sargent also notes the importance of the federal government not bailing out the states once more when, after 1829, many states started running large government deficits, which they were not able to sustain — Sargent suggests that this decision led to fiscal discipline at the state level.

Sargent draws the conclusion that the current situation in Europe is also likely untenable in the same way that the United States was in an unstable arrangement before 1788.

Though there is much to agree with Sargent’s conclusions, one thing in his discussion is notable in its absence: political economy.

Was the transition from the Articles of Confederation to the U.S. Constitution just a process of better (albeit slow) understanding and learning by clever and well intentioned leaders? Sargent implies that the answer is yes.

But one could have developed a political economy perspective where this transition was shaped by its economic and political implications for different groups.

In fact, one such perspective was developed in 1913 by Charles A. Beard in his imminently original and seminal An Economic Interpretation of the Constitution of the United States.

Beard started by dismissing explanations for the unique sequence of events leading to the U.S. Constitution based on some distinctive cultural characteristics of the American people. He also dismissed accounts that only emphasized the genius of the founding fathers. Instead, he wrote (p. 16):

class and group divisions based on property lie at the basis of modern government; and politics and constitutional law are inevitably a reflex of these contending interests.

So Beard argued that a defining set of factors leading to the U.S. Constitution were the political powerful groups who stood to benefit from it. Or in his words (p. 63):

Large and important groups of economic interests were adversely affected by the system of government under the Articles of Confederation, namely, those of public securities, shipping and manufacturing, money at interest; in short capital as opposed to land.

Importantly, Beard doesn’t deny that other factors were at play, or that the economic system that the U.S. Constitution created was more “efficient” — meaning that it created fewer instabilities. But the point is that this wasn’t the only or even perhaps the most important reason why the U.S. Constitution was adopted and ratified. It was ratified because those who stood to gain — the creditors, the manufacturers, the merchants and the politicians — were sufficiently powerful. (Some of the details of Beard’s account are hotly debated, see, for example, this paper, though the general political economy approach to constitutional design he advocated seems to have withstood the test of time).

The lessons for Europe are little more complex than a story like Sargent’s where institutional changes took place because they were finally understood to be more efficiency-enhancing. First, the coalitions in favor of a stronger fiscal union may be different today (for example, banks rather than capital owners in general may be the main beneficiaries of bailing out indebted countries). Second, the same economic interests may not be sufficiently politically powerful or may be facing a more determined opposition in Europe than in the United States 230 years ago. Third, the redistribution that a move towards a fiscal union will entail and the accompanying further bailouts of constituent polities may be more extensive and thus more difficult to pull off. Fourth, the institutional heterogeneity and the institutional weaknesses in some of the European countries such as Greece may be more dramatic today, making a fiscal union less attractive or less feasible.

One implication of all this is that what was a political equilibrium in the founding of the U.S. Constitution may not be a political equilibrium today in Europe, at least not in a form that includes all members of the European Union — even if such an arrangement would be efficiency-enhancing and growth-promoting.

This can be seen from the fact that what was a political equilibrium in the United States turned out not to be one in Latin America. After independence, Latin American countries also faced similar problems, including decisions on how to pay off the debts that had built up during their independence wars and how to build nations from smaller and sometimes competing polities. Some places like Argentina did manage to create a federal state, though Buenos Aires opted out for some time. Even in this case, as we point out in Chapter 13 of Why Nations Fail, they did it with a centralizing constitution that created many perverse incentives, shaping the future problems that Argentina would face. In other places, such as the putative Federal Republic of Central America, which lasted between 1823 and 1838, and Gran Colombia, which lasted only a decade between 1821 and 1831, no such agreement turned out to be stable.

So the sort of union that emerged in the U.S. Constitution and helped solve the free-rider problems and build government reputation in financial markets is not the only possible endpoint. Where Europe will end up will ultimately be determined not so much by what is the best arrangement for Europe as a whole but the political equilibrium between and within countries.

World braces for messy impact from Greek turmoil

Sergio Perez / Reuters

A trader reacts on the floor at the Madrid Bourse. European shares sank to new 2012 lows in a broad-based sell-off as concern over contagion from Greece gripped investors.

By John W. Schoen, Senior Producer

As Greece teeters on the edge of financial collapse, European officials have a new task before them: preventing the financial turmoil from spreading across the continent, across the Atlantic and around the rest of the world.

The fear is that Greece’s financial turmoil could spread beyond its borders despite European efforts to create a “financial firewall” to contain it.

 “The spillover effects, the chain of consequences are very difficult to assess,” said International Monetary Fund President Christine Lagarde on Wednesday. “We can certainly assume that it would be quite messy.”

Lagarde, whose agency has been among those providing financial support for Greece, said the IMF has begun making “technical” preparations for Greece’s  possible departure from Europe’s common currency, the euro.

Greece’s exit from the eurozone seems more likely every day. A two-year standoff deepened this week between Greek voters, 1 in 5 of whom are unemployed, and European officials, led by German Chancellor Angel Merkel, who are insisting on continued “austerity” by the Greek government in exchange for a financial lifeline. 

After deep budget cuts sent the Greek economy into a painful recession, voters ousted the former government that agreed to measures that would inflict even more pain on Greece’s banks, businesses and households.

Merkel and Lagarde remain steadfast in their insistence that continued financial aid depends on whether Athens adheres to tight-fisted spending policies.

"Nobody is going to give the Greeks a penny unless they put a government in place which implements austerity,” said David Roche, president of Independent Strategy, a London-based investment research firm.

Depositors have already begun pulling their euros out of Greek banks as the odds rise that Athens may soon exit the common currency. 

 

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

More >>

KRUGMAN: Here's How The Whole Eurozone Could Unravel In Just A Matter Of Months

Read >>

France's Strategy

By George Friedman/

New political leaders do not invent new national strategies. Rather, they adapt enduring national strategies to the moment. On Tuesday, Francois Hollande will be inaugurated as France's president, and soon after taking the oath of office, he will visit German Chancellor Angela Merkel in Berlin. At this moment, the talks are expected to be about austerity and the European Union, but the underlying issue remains constant: France's struggle for a dominant role in European affairs at a time of German ascendance.

Two events shaped modern French strategy. The first, of course, was the defeat of Napoleon in 1815 and the emergence of Britain as the world's dominant naval power and Europe's leading imperial power. This did not eliminate French naval or imperial power, but it profoundly constrained it. France could not afford to challenge Britain any more and had to find a basis for accommodation, ending several centuries of hostility if not distrust. Read More »

Greece's uncertain future

By EconomistMagazine

El candidato a gobernar Grecia amenaza con impagar la deuda

Libertad Digital/

El presidente griego, Carolos Papulias, se ha entrevistado este martes con el líder de la segunda formación más votada este domingo, Alexis Tsipras de Syriza (izquierda radical) para encargarle la tarea de formar gobierno, tras el fracaso del líder de Nueva Democracia, Antonis Samaras, que anunció ayer su imposibilidad para configurar un ejecutivo de coalición. Si Tsipras tampoco logra una coalición, Evangelos Venizelos, del Movimiento Socialista Panhelénico (PASOK), tendrá la responsabilidad de cerrar un pacto o Papoulias se verá obligado a convocar unas nuevas elecciones.

Pero la espita ha saltado tras la reunión mantenida entre Papulias y Tsipras. Y es que, el actual candidato a gobernar Grecia ha lanzado un órdago a la línea de flotación de la zona euro. El líder de Syriza declaró que los compromisos de Grecia con la comunidad internacional ya no son válidos, ya que la mayoría de los griegos ha votado a favor de los partidos que se oponen a los términos del segundo rescate heleno acordado con la troika hace escasos meses.

De hecho, tras advertir que las condiciones del rescate internacional ya no están en vigor, Tsipras abogó por crear una comisión internacional para que se pronuncie sobre si la deuda de Grecia es o no legal. Señala que las condiciones acordadas con la UE para recibir el auxilio financiero son nulas y sin efecto y, por ello, exigió una moratoria (suspensión temporal) en el pago de la deuda pública.

También recomendó a Antonis Samaras y Evangelos Venizelos (los líderes de Nueva Democracia y Pasok, los partidos tradicionales) que escriban a Bruselas diciendo que los compromisos adquiridos a principios de este año (las medidas de austeridad a cambio del segundo rescate de 130.000 millones de euros) ya no son válidos.

Además, anunció que su objetivo es nacionalizar toda la banca griega. El discurso del líder izquierdista ha alarmado a los mercados, haciendo que el euro perdiera la cota de los 1,30 dólares tras dichas declaraciones. Pese a ello, no está claro que Tsipras logre formar gobierno con otras formaciones, ya que el líder del partido comunista (KKE) se ha mostrado reticente.

Alemania pide un gobierno "sensato"

Mientras, el Gobierno alemán apremió este martes a los partidos políticos de Grecia a lograr la formación de un "gobierno sensato", al tiempo que ratificaba su respaldo a las reformas emprendidas en Atenas. El Ejecutivo de Berlín sigue "con gran preocupación" la situación surgida tras las elecciones parlamentarias del domingo, indicó el ministro de Asuntos Exteriores, Guido Westerwelle. "Llamamos a todos los implicados en Grecia a buscar una solución rápida para que pueda formarse un gobierno sensato y estable", añadió el ministro.

Westerwelle, del Partido Liberal (FDP), garantizó que Alemania está dispuesta a la "solidaridad" con Grecia, pero dijo que para ello es preciso que se observen los compromisos suscritos por Atenas en cuanto al programa de reformas. El titular de Exteriores aludió así a la incertidumbre creada en Atenas, después del fracaso del líder conservador, Andonis Samarás, por encontrar los apoyos necesarios para formar gobierno, tras lo cual corresponde ahora intentarlo a la Coalición de la Izquierda Radical, Syriza.

Desde las filas de la Unión Cristianodemócrata (CDU) de Angela Merkel, el presidente de la Comisión de Exteriores del Parlamento, Ruprecht Polenz, advirtió del peligro de tener recurrir a elecciones anticipadas, en caso de no lograrse formar un gobierno. "En muy raras ocasiones se logra una mayoría estable en tan corto plazo. En la mayoría de los casos, salen reforzadas las posiciones extremas, lo que haría aún más compleja la situación", apuntó, en declaraciones a la radio pública alemana.

La canciller alemana calificó ayer la situación creada por los resultados de las parlamentarias griegas de "no está exenta de complejidad", tras el avance de las formaciones hostiles a los ajustes y duro programa de austeridad al que Atenas está comprometido con sus socios de la UE. "Vamos a ver cuál es la constelación del gobierno resultante", dijo Merkel, para recordar que su formación compete exclusivamente "a los griegos", informa Efe.

Miedo entre los inversores

Grecia colocó este martes 1.300 millones de euros en Letras del Tesoro con un vencimiento a seis meses, a un interés del 4,69%, ligeramente superior al 4,55 % que pagó el pasado 10 de abril, según informó en Atenas la Autoridad de Gestión de la Deuda. Según esta institución, la demanda superó en 2,6 veces la cantidad inicialmente ofrecida de 1.000 millones de euros.

Esta ha sido la primera emisión de deuda tras las elecciones del domingo, en las que ningún partido obtuvo la mayoría absoluta, y que ha sumido al país en una nueva incertidumbre ante la posibilidad de que la falta de acuerdo para formar un Gobierno de coalición obligue a convocar nuevos comicios.

Spain Is the New Greece

FrontPage Magazine/  by Arnold Ahlert

The socialist-inspired traveling circus more commonly known as the EU debt crisis is moving from Greece to Spain. Last Friday, Spanish Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy announced that a deepening recession in that country would make it impossible to meet the EU-mandated deficit reduction target of 4.4 percent of GDP for FY2012. He proposed a target of 5.8 percent instead. The latest “readjustment” is similar to the one that occurred in 2011, when Spain’s target of 6 percent gave way to the reality of 8.5 percent. Ironically, Rajoy made his announcement on the same day 25 European leaders signed a fiscal pact–aimed at strengthening budgetary discipline among its member nations.

Yet it is the choice between budgetary discipline that would require previously prepared sanctions against Spain, or once again making them an exception to those rules that reveals the EU’s Catch 22 dilemma: new sanctions would undoubtedly induce further unrest in a nation already beset by a 22.85% unemployment rate and an economy that has contracted economy by 0.3% on a year over year basis. On the other hand, another exemption to supposedly rigid budget rules would likely undermine confidence in the EU’s overall recovery plans, as yet another incarnation of  ”too big to fail” would be playing itself out on the world stage.

The actual numbers are daunting. In 2011, Spain’s national and state governments spent $120.72 billion more than they took in during 2011. This is only a modest reduction compared to the $129.75 billion budget deficits the country ran in 2010, underscoring the reality that austerity measures imposed on that nation have yielded precious little in the way of genuine savings. Adding to the uncertainty is the fact that two-thirds of the current shortfall was accrued by the nation’s regional–and autonomous–governments. Absent the ability to compel regional governments to fall in line, the idea that Spain’s national government can meet fiscal targets imposed by the EU appears dubious at best.

Yet if the EU insists that Spain adhere to the promises it made on December 30th, an additional $33 billion of deficit reduction must be found on top of the $19.8 billion in savings already accrued from a combination of $11.9 billion in spending cuts, and $7.9 billion in tax increases. That number represents a staggering increase of 167 percent of additional austerity measures imposed only two months after the original pledge. In addition, Spanish economic output will fall 1.7 percent this year, making a mockery of the 1 percent drop recently forecast by the EU, along with the 1.5 percent predicted by the Bank of Spain only two weeks ago. And unemployment is now expected to hit a mind-boggling 24.3 percent in 2012.

Rajoy insists that Spain remains within the proposed EU guidelines because it intends to meet the public deficit goal of 3 percent of GDP by 2013. Yet it reportedly rankled many EU leaders when the Prime Minister publicly announced his intentions without first holding private negotiations with the European Commission. Last November, the European Commission demanded the power to override budgets enacted by individual EU nations, and its members are no doubt irked by Rajoy’s characterization of his failure to meet the 2012 guidelines as a “sovereign decision by Spain.”

An official not authorized to discuss the issue described the move as reflective of Rajoy’s political inexperience. “He thinks that most of the people around the table are political allies who will support him,” the official said. “But here you put your political considerations away because the dynamic that counts is that of national interests.”  More »

 

Germany's Role in Europe and the European Debt Crisis

Stratfor/  By George Friedman

The German government proposed last week that a European commissioner be appointed to supplant the Greek government. While phrasing the German proposal this way might seem extreme, it is not unreasonable. Under the German proposal, this commissioner would hold power over the Greek national budget and taxation. Since the European Central Bank already controls the Greek currency, the euro, this would effectively transfer control of the Greek government to the European Union, since whoever controls a country's government expenditures, tax rates and monetary policy effectively controls that country. The German proposal therefore would suspend Greek sovereignty and the democratic process as the price of financial aid to Greece.

Though the European Commission rejected the proposal, the concept is far from dead, as it flows directly from the logic of the situation. The Greeks are in the midst of a financial crisis that has made Greece unable to repay money Athens borrowed. Their options are to default on the debt or to negotiate a settlement with their creditors. The International Monetary Fund and European Union are managing these negotiations. Read More »

European Parliament backs Croatia membership

Israel-Iran: La Guerra que Occidente debe evitar

Los halcones de Israel pueden estar muy cerca de desatar una guerra a gran escala con Irán. El pasado lunes 28 de noviembre, las fuerzas de operaciones especiales israelitas mas como conocidas como la "Mano de Dios", hicieron estallar una parte de la instalación nuclear iraní  de Isfahan.

 

En otro incidente, una explosion en Teheran provoca la muerte de un general irani.

De acuerdo con el Times de Londres, Dan Meridor, ministro de inteligencia israeli, implicitament asumio la responsabilidad con los hechos: "Hay países que imponen sanciones económicas y hay países que actúan de otra manera para hacer frente a la amenaza nuclear iraní."
     

Por su parte el mayor general Giora Eiland, ex director de la seguridad nacional de Israel, declaro a la radio del Ejército de Israel que la explosión Isfahan no fue un accidente: "No hay muchas coincidencias, y cuando hay tantos eventos es probable que haya algún tipo de mano que guía, aunque tal vez es la mano de Dios"

 Otro ex funcionario de inteligencia israelí, menciona al menos dos otras explosiones que habrian neutralizado bases de lanzamiento del misil de alcance medio Shahab-3.

La respuesta "oficial" de Iran llego en la forma del ataque de los estudiantes extremistas a la embajada del Reino Unido en Teheran.  No hay ojo por ojo no por deseos de venganza de los halcones y la jerarquia eclesiastica, sino por imposibilidad de ejecutarla en proporcion a la incursion israeli. No es prudencia o sabidura politica sino impotencia que inflama las llamas de una guerra casi inevitable por parte de los protagonistas principales.

Al margen de las altisonantes declaraciones de los halcones israelies, el pequeno pero poderoso enclave judio en el corazon del medio oriente islamico, no puede actuar a gran escala en solitario. 

 

Ahora mismo los estados mayores politico-militares de un Occidente envuelto en la mayor crisis economica desde la gran recesion [en un escenario optimista] deben estar evaluando cuidadosamente pero  con toda celeridad los impactos que sufririan si una guerra de estas caracteristicas llegara a desatarse.

Considerando solo la variante energetica [a lo que habria que anadir la reaccion del mundo arabe y musulman no solo de la region y el rol que China y Rusia adoptarian ante la conflagracion] de unas economias donde precios de $150 dolares el barril de crudo, provocan una recesion inmediata en sus maltrechas economias, la disminucion de la oferta diaria en el mercado mundial petrolero estimada en mas de 10 millones de barriles como resultado del conflicto, lanzaria los precios por encima de la barrera de los $200 dolares.

Enfrentados a movimientos sociales si bien poco organizados pero desestabilizadores como el Occupy Movement en muchas de las principales metropolis, huelgas de mas de dos millones de trabajadores publicos en el Reino Unido, una Zona Euro en crisis estructural cronica que amenaza su desintegracion, mientras su poblacion volcada en las plazas rechaza la aplicacion de los programas de austeridad previstos y una Union Europea que acaba de ser apuntalada por los bancos centrales occidentales para atenuar los negativos impactos en sus respectivos mercados, no es un escenario alentador para apoyar una incursion israeli en gran escala contra Iran.