Back in September 1994, three highly experienced politicians belonging to the conservative faction in the German parliament, or Bundestag, published a working paper.
Judy Dempsey
More from this author...Despite its spectacularly bland title, “Reflections on European Policy,” the paper was anything but dull. It was radical.
The three authors—Wolfgang Schäuble, Karl A. Lamers, and Theo Waigel—proposed a multi-speed Europe. At the same time, a “core Europe” consisting of Germany, France, and the Benelux countries would take the lead in further integrating what was then a bloc of twelve countries.
Schäuble, a key player in making German reunification possible after the Berlin Wall was torn down in November 1989, has never wavered from his support for a more integrated Europe.
But as Schäuble prepares to relinquish his role as finance minister in Chancellor Angela Merkel’s next coalition government to become president of the Bundestag, he will leave behind a deep intellectual and political gap. It will be felt not only among the eurozone finance ministers and EU leaders, but in the German government itself.
Wolfgang Schäuble, who since 2005 has served as German interior minister and then as finance minister in Merkel’s three cabinets, has been the only convinced European in each government coalition.
Within the EU itself, it is hard to find another politician, perhaps with the exception of French President Emmanuel Macron, who never doubted Europe’s direction. For Europe to be strong and competitive it had to be more integrated. If that necessitated a core group of countries to lead such integration, then so be it. For Schäuble, now seventy-five years old, procrastination and muddling through are no longer options Europe can afford.
Muddling through was certainly not Schäuble’s style as the Greek, Spanish, and other eurozone finance ministers well knew when their country’s economy and banking system were near collapse during the euro crisis.
With Merkel hardly saying anything memorable about Europe, or the economic crisis for that matter, the chancellor delegated the future of the eurozone to Schäuble, not to the European Commission, the EU’s executive.
How the German finance minister was pilloried, particularly by the Greeks, for imposing very tough austerity measures. Pensioners and teachers, young people and the public sector were left struggling to make ends meet. Germany was accused by the Greek media of taking over Europe. The Nazi era was invoked. Cartoons showing Merkel dressed in a swastika uniform were not uncommon.
Schäuble was unremitting. For him, Europe’s economic crisis provided the EU with two opportunities: turn the eurozone into a bloc of competitiveness, not inefficiency and unsustainable high budget deficits. And use the crisis, and now Brexit, to push through more monetary and economic integration in the core.
The former is slowly happening, although Schäuble warned in an interview with the Financial Times on October 9 that soaring levels of debt and liquidity were major risks to the world economy.
The latter—Europe’s future direction—has not yet been clarified. This is because the EU is divided over its direction. There are those, like Jean-Claude Juncker, the European Commission president, who, depending on how you read his State of the Union address, believes that the EU can be inclusive. But Juncker’s definition of inclusivity is qualified: non-eurozone countries are obliged to eventually adopt the euro currency. And the Commission president wants more economic integration.
Then there are the “sovereignists,” such as Poland and Hungary, whose governments believe they can be independent. Yet they agreed to join the EU knowing full well that they ceded part of their sovereignty to Brussels and to the acquis communutaire, the battery of legislation that all EU members signed up to.
Then there is Schäubelism, which is a special sensitivity for Europe. Schäubelism is not based on sentimentalism. It is based on a hard-nosed realism that Europe’s future as a major economic and political player on the world stage will be reduced to a dwarf if a core group of countries, led by France and Germany but also the (underperforming) Netherlands, among other member states, do not take up the reins.
Macron cannot do it alone. It is unclear how far Merkel will go in realizing the French president’s policies for a stronger and more integrated Europe.
Populists and Euroskeptics, sovereignists and anti-globalists, anti-foreign as well as those who oppose a more open Europe, will balk at the idea of further integration.
But Schäuble is ready to engage and defend Europe’s values and what it has achieved since the end of World War II. As the incoming president of the Bundestag, Schäuble will have the unprecedented task of dealing with the Alternative for Germany (AfD), the first time that a far-right, anti-immigration, anti-Islam party with anti-Semitic strands, was elected to the federal parliament.
Schäuble never held his tongue as finance minister in the building that was once the Reich’s Aviation Ministry. Nor did he mince his words during meetings with eurozone finance ministers or the International Monetary Fund. Schäuble’s defense of Europe, its values, and Germany’s responsibilities are not issues that the incoming president of the Bundestag will allow the AfD to denigrate.
Comments(3)
Underperforming Netherlands? By what measure? Balance of trade, public debt, growth? Make your choice!
Schauble, with all the due respect, is the past. Macron is the future. Listening to Macron’s 100 minutes speech on YouTube is highly recommended, if not mandatory for anybody truly concerned about Europe’s future. It is the speech of an intellectual educated in the Sorbonne spirit, capable to understand 1000 years of history, and craft a continental strategy for the next century. For the killing fields of Europe, it is now evolving or oblivion. Oblivion could be the better outcome, future reality could be reversed-engineered gunboat diplomacy, with the dreadnought replaced by Arihant class submarines and big guns by hypersonic Brahmos missiles. The speech has everything: an enhanced social contract, long due economic harmonization, multilingual European citizens, technological leadership (long overdue) but above and beyond the idea of being a citizen of the EU. As always for Europe, it would be too good to be true for anybody to listen; critics already call him Jupiterian (kind he brought it on himself), and popularity is going down. Returning to Schauble, how was it possible for the EU/national regulators to miss the shaky foundations of CDO/CDS’s? How was it possible for anybody trained in Germany or a French “Grande Ecole” to really believe that a Cornell financial engineered CDO/CDS has any value (please note that done properly securitization is actually good for the economy), especially when the regulators (rating agencies) are not just incompetent, but making money on these? However, his FT interview is right on the mark. Where were the EU/national regulators when so much money was being borrowed, when we all know that the fundamental function of a bank is risk management? It is still not clear where all the hundreds of billions borrowed by Greece went?! One of the worst moments in Schauble’s Europe is what happened in Yugoslavia. Born at Versailles, martyred by the Wehrmacht (the weeks, fuel and bombs lost to take Belgrade, fortunately delayed the advance on Moscow), it was split along ethnic and religious lines, exactly the opposite what Europe should have been after millennia of exactly that. Worse, the connection from this civil war to IS is unfortunately linear, Srebrenica and Sarajevo (again) and more. However, the idea of a two speed Europe is aligned with reality (and with X if we talk geopolitics), and the newer members should recognize it until say they compete and win with South Korea for example (long overdue PISA results, always a good start).
Certainly Schauble's life is mostly over - and yet I for one, would far prefer to see him replace Merkel right now. I think Merkel would do anything to preserve the status quo coalition - anything. Certainly Schauble is no AfD symathizer, but I don't sense the same stark fear of minority government, the same fright at the possibility of a new election. And the inconclusive German election results should have caused Merkel to seek a new election and to do all she could to incorporate the AfD in her coalition. Anyone who looks at the history of minority parties in coalitions - realizes it's where they wither and die. If the German people have shown in voting that they WANT further restrictions on emigration (indeed deportations for the many false asylum seekers), and that they reject socialism as brutally as ever in its history - why not a CDU/CSU coalition with the Free Democrats and AfD - that would last under a non-nonsense leader like Schauble as long as possible - happily going to the people in a new election if too much of the party's agenda is defeated in the Bundestag? Surely the German people did not vote for the Socialists to run the Finance Ministry and other critical posts.
Comment Policy
Comments that include profanity, personal attacks, or other inappropriate material will be removed. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, steps will be taken to block users who violate any of the posting standards, terms of use, privacy policies, or any other policies governing this site. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.