Archive for March, 2010

Some reading today

March 30, 2010

– From the Economist (latest issue): ‘Forget core against periphery in Europe: the true divide is north against south’.  And it goes on: ‘…no economy, north or south, can be considered peripheral’. My question: Is probably the term ‘semi-peripheral EU’, more applicable and/or more pragmatic?

– Wolfgang Muenchau in FT today (29/03) seems to be very sceptical over the ’emergency funding agreement’ of Greece. He stresses the existing lack of an effective EU mechanism -powerful enough to resolve the problems deriving from the eurozone’s imbalances. My comment: Too late for optimism, too early for pessimism…Hmmm What I would like to think about is whether such ‘agreements’ can have a positive impact upon the minds of the people. Being European is not only about ‘think European  but also about ‘feel European’. Can such agreements boost the European feeling? Only time can tell.

The Gods Weep

March 28, 2010

The Gods Weep by Dennis Kelly @ Hampstead Theatre. Some thoughts triggered by the play yesterday night:

– the collapse of a personal ‘empire’ makes you re-appreciate the ‘moment’

– being strong -like Colm, beautifully played by Jeremy Irons,- is not about strength

– ‘we’ve been waiting since the birth of the Earth for that exact moment’

– constant pursuit of success and constant state of madness

– nemesis follows? (not sure about that)

I don’t know if the play echoes King Lear -as suggested by some reviews-, not sure  how corporatism, armed conflict and total chaos were synthesised in the second part, but I have the feeling that apocalyptic nemesis (third part of the play) is not always the case.

Greece’s ‘death’ and EU’s ‘rebirth’

March 27, 2010


Following the news on Greece’s current crisis I am wondering what kind of lesson can be learnt. Is Greece becoming the driving force for deeper European integration? After all:                                                                                                                  

 1. the suggestion about the initiation of the European Monetary Fund -no matter how realistic – seems to attract some interest ( and opposition of course)

2. Van Rompuy is offered the chance for an enhanced status and reputation (so….does the Lisbon Treaty matter?)

3. antieuropean voices get the chance to be justified (oh yes, they have a good case study now)

4. proeuropean voices get the chance to raise the old arguments on ‘common destiny’ (EMU  ‘was far more than a monetary arrangement….was a community that shares a common destiny’ Mr Trichet said on Thursday night)

5. Germany and France redirect their roles (or stabilise them) in the continent (and not only?)

6. limits in EU are openly recognised (but recognition is about autognosis and therefore the beginning point of systematic re-orientation of aims etc) 

7. defense mechanisms for saving the traumatised economies, designing common strategies and  taking collective action are studied on daily basis. The question ‘to be or not to be European?’ is a real one and so challenging

8. Finally the weakest of all Piigs states (Greece) has an unmissable opportunity (quite late of course): to open a deep dialogue with itself and answer the long awaiting questions such as: ‘where to?, ‘why?, ‘How did we get here?’.