Welcome to the new version of European Tribune. It's just a new layout, so everything should work as before - please report bugs here.

Merkel's nationalegotism

by Migeru Sat Sep 29th, 2012 at 02:01:08 AM EST

Thursday evening, ZDF talkshow hostess Maybrit Illner invited "the" former Chancellor (as Helmut Kohl is out of commission) Helmut Schmidt and the current president Joachim Gauck to her show. Among the most intense moments is this:

"Warum noch an Europa glauben?" - ZDF.de "Why believe in Europe still?" - ZDF.de
Altkanzler Helmut Schmidt (SPD) hat der Bundesregierung erneut vorgeworfen, in der Europapolitik zu nationalegoistisch zu agieren. Wenn Bundeskanzlerin Angela Merkel (CDU) anderswo in Europa mit einer Hakenkreuzbinde karikiert werde, sei das "zum Teil ihre eigene Schuld", sagte Schmidt in der ZDF-Sendung "maybrit illner". Merkel habe in der Finanzkrise "eine viel zu starke Zentralisierung der ganzen Fragenkomplexe auf ihre Person vorgenommen".Former Chancellor Helmut Schmidt (SPD) has again reproached the Federal Government for acting too 'nationalegotistically' in European politics. If German Chancellor Angela Merkel (CDU) is caricatured elsewhere in Europe with a swastika, that is "partly her own fault," Schmidt said in the ZDF program "Maybrit Illner". [According to Schmidt], in the financial crisis Merkel has "centralized around her person the entire complex of issues."


The linked page contains video of the entire show, and a selection of (sanitised) quotes.


ZDF has a separate 2-minute clip around that quotation (part of a longer segment starting at about 16'45" in the main video):

Helmut Schmidt: Merkels eigene Schuld - maybrit illner - ZDFmediathek - ZDF Mediathek Helmut Schmidt: Merkel's own fault - Maybrit Illner - ZDFmediathek - ZDF media library
Maybrit Illner Helmut Schmidt, wie egoistisch, wie nationalegoistish geriert sich die Deutsche Regierung?Maybrit Illner Helmut Schmidt, how selfish, how nationalegotistical is the German government projecting itself?
Hemut Schmidt Jedenfalls zu stark. Frau Merkel war daran beteiligt, als im Jahre 2008 gegen ende des Jahres, 20 Staaten der Welt sich an einen Tisch besitz haben und haben eine Reihe von vernünftigen Dingen beschlossen. Ein teil davon haben sie anschließend wieder vergessen. Von der Regulierung der Banken ist keine Rede mehr. Die war im Dezember 2008 beschlossen. Sie ist auch in Europa nicht erfolgt. Sie ist auch innerhalb der siebzehn Teinehmerstaaten des Euro nich erfolgt. Wenn Sie in den bilder gezeigt haben aus Griechenland oder aus Portugal oder aus Spanien, ich weiß nicht genau, welches Land das letzte war...Helmut Schmidt Too strongly in any case. Frau Merkel was involved when in 2008, before the end of the year, 20 states of the world sat at a table and decided a series of reasonable things. They immediately forgot one part of it. There is no more talk of bank regulation. Which was adopted in December 2008. It has not been done in Europe. It has also not been done within the 17 member states of the Euro. When you have shown in the images from Greece or Portugal or Spain, I'm don't know for sure what country was the last...
Maybrit Illner Spanien Maybrit Illner Spain
Helmut SchmidtDie Tatsache, dass sie in einem europaischen Land Frau Merkel mit einer Hakenkreuzarmbinde zeigen is zum Teil ihre eigene Schuld. Sie hat eine viel zu starke Zentralisierung der ganzen Fragekomplexe auf ihre Person vorgenommen. Ich muss hier mal darauf hinweisen: bis heute hat [sic] den Deutschen Bundeshaushalt kein einziger Pfennig, kein Penny, nach Griechenland uberwiesen worden, und ein Teil des Griechischen haushalts geworden. Die Deutschen reden über die Zukunft im hohen Tonen und streiten sich. Tatsächlich haben wir noch keinen Pfennig geopfert.Helmut Schmidt The fact that in a European country they show Merkel with a Swastika armband is partly her own fault. She has taken a much too strong centralization of the whole set of issues on her person. I must also point out here that, to date, not a single penny, not one, has been remitted from the [German] federal budget to Greece, and become part of the Greek budget. The Germans talk about the future in a high tone, and fight among themselves. In fact, we have not sacrificed one penny.


Gauck appears visibly disturbed at one point (between 1'30" and 1'40", after Schmidt says it's "her own fault"). In the main show page he's quoted defending Merkel (this is at about 14' in the main video):

"Warum noch an Europa glauben?" - ZDF.de "Why believe in Europe still?" - ZDF.de
Bundespräsident Joachim Gauck verteidigte dagegen den europapolitischen Kurs der Regierungschefin. Er sei überzeugt von "ihrer hohen Rationalität" und ihrem Handlungswillen. In vielen Nachbarländern Deutschlands gebe es "leitende Akteure in der Politik", die den Kurs Merkels richtig fänden. Die Kanzlerin führe die Europadebatte auch stellvertretend für andere Nationen.President Joachim Gauck defended the Head of Government's European policy stance. He was convinced of "her high rationality" and her willingness to act. In many of Germany's neighbours there is "senior actors in politics," who find Merkel's policy correct. The Chancellor also leads the European debate on behalf of other nations.

(Gauck says "to those who say Merkel is setting herself against the rest of Europe I say 'travel to the Netherlands, Denmark, Finland, Poland, Slovakia' where you will find leaders who agree with Merkel. So, literally, it's Germany's neighbours he was talking about.)

This debate - especially the bit about how Germany is "talking about the future in a high voice and infighting", recalls Ulrike Guérot's latest blog post at the ECFR: Germany in Europe: What Germany expects from France (28th September 2012)

Secondly, the Germans are wondering when France will start listening to (and answering) the German discussion about political union. Germans have understood that France is still hoping for Eurobonds - within the next five years - as French Finance Minister Pierre Moscovici recently restated in London - and Germans are trying to argue that these will not be `for free' but require a different set up of European democracy.  

In this respect, it was interesting to listen to Karine Berger, a member of parliament for the French Socialists, this week at a conference on European democracy and the way out of the crisis organised by the Heinrich Böll Foundation. In a panel discussion, Mme Berger stated repeatedly that she does not believe the euro has much chance of surviving if the eurozone does not ultimately enter a debt community and create Eurobonds. In essence, I agree. She said that if this does not happen, there would not be a common solution to the euro crisis. For the rest of the world, Mme. Berger continued, the currency union wouldn't exist anyway, as interests rates vary greatly again. If there is no debt community, there is no budgetary union and the euro would be finished. However, a budgetary union cannot exist without parliamentary control. Europe cannot take parliamentary control over budgets away at the national level and give it to non-parliamentary (and therefore non-democratic) institutions on the European level. So far, so good, and again I agree. But then the discussion touched on the point of the current Franco-German misunderstanding: when the moderator questioned her deeper about European parliamentary control, she answered that, indeed, the right of the EP to oversee the budget must be strengthened - but she meant the EU budget.

Germans however, are currently having a discussion on the topic and are mostly arguing that a debt community would necessitate common parliamentary control on the European level (however this might be organised), about national budgets, including, as van Rompuy's  report on a genuine banking union also requests, the introduction of a `budgetary ceiling' which ought to be under European and preferably parliamentary control.  This is probably also what ECB president Mario Draghi meant by the condition of `budgetary oversight' that he mentioned in his speech in Berlin this week at the Annual Conference of the German Industrial Association, BDI, though he did not provide an answer as to how this could and should be organised. Germans are having an intense discussion about how it could be organised. One idea is to create a Eurozone parliament, which would satisfy the requirements of parliamentary legitimacy and therefore qualify as a body for collective decision-making on both the discretionary spending of the Eurozone and the oversight of national budgetary ceilings. French ideas on this would be welcome, but they would need to go beyond strengthening the rights of the EP concerning its own budget. 

One could uncharitably describe this as Germany "Nazionalegotistically" forging ahead with a redesign of Europe to their own specification, and wondering why nobody else is following.

Display:
Corrections to my transcript or translation welcome...

I distribute. You re-distribute. He gives your hard-earned money to lazy scroungers. -- JakeS
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Sat Sep 29th, 2012 at 02:02:10 AM EST
Amazing how well you got Schmidt's mumbling although in a foreign language. There are some slight mistakes, though, and I have corrected them:

Jedenfalls zu stark. Frau Merkel war daran beteiligt, als im Jahre 2008, gegen Ende des Jahres, zwanzig Staaten der Welt sich an einen Tisch gesetzt haben, und haben eine Reihe von vernünftigen Dingen beschlossen. Einen Teil davon haben sie anschließend wieder vergessen. Von der Regulierung der Banken ist keine Rede mehr. Die war im Dezember 2008 beschlossen. Sie ist auch in Europa nicht erfolgt. Sie ist auch innerhalb der siebzehn Teilnehmerstaaten des Euro nicht erfolgt. Wenn Sie eben Bilder gezeigt haben aus Griechenland oder aus Portugal oder aus Spanien, ich weiß nicht genau, welches Land das letzte war...

I think, I would translate: ... bank regulation. Which was adopted in December 2008.

Die Tatsache, dass sie in einem europäischen Land Frau Merkel mit einer Hakenkreuzarmbinde zeigen, ist zum Teil ihre eigene Schuld. Sie hat eine viel zu starke Zentralisierung der ganzen Fragekomplexe auf ihre Person vorgenommen. Ich muss auch mal darauf hinweisen: bis heute hat [sic] aus den Deutschen Bundeshaushalt kein einziger Pfennig, kein Penny, nach Griechenland überwiesen worden, und ist Teil des griechischen Haushalts geworden. Die Deutschen reden über die Zukunft in hohen Tönen und streiten sich. Tatsächlich haben wir noch keinen Pfennig geopfert.

The spelling of "national" with a z is Italian, not German, btw.

by Katrin on Sat Sep 29th, 2012 at 05:28:38 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I forget what I made of the anschließend. I tried a couple of online dictionaries and didn't get anything that made sense...

I distribute. You re-distribute. He gives your hard-earned money to lazy scroungers. -- JakeS
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Sat Sep 29th, 2012 at 06:07:18 AM EST
[ Parent ]
You had "immediately" and that was a good translation. Stronger than "subsequently".
by Katrin on Sat Sep 29th, 2012 at 06:21:53 AM EST
[ Parent ]
But that would be unmittelbar, oder?

I distribute. You re-distribute. He gives your hard-earned money to lazy scroungers. -- JakeS
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Sat Sep 29th, 2012 at 06:27:06 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Same thing. "Anschließend": without anything in between. Immediately. (In some contexts subsequently would be better, but I think no here)
by Katrin on Sat Sep 29th, 2012 at 06:33:46 AM EST
[ Parent ]
- In my opinion, Schmidt is telling some truths that are not heard widely enough in Germany, particularly this:

I must also point out here that, to date, not a single penny, not one, has been remitted from the [German] federal budget to Greece, and become part of the Greek budget. The Germans talk about the future in a high tone, and get angry. In fact, we have not sacrificed one penny.

I'm impressed, yet I fear he doesn't he isn't respected enough to make a difference.

-On Ulrike Guérot's post:

On the one hand, the principle of democratic accountability is definitely sound. And the idea of a Eurozone parliament could be a way forward.

However the detail of German proposals always seems to come back to one euro (mark?) one vote, rather than one person, one vote. And that is extremely anti-democratic.

Further, all of this involves big constitutional changes everywhere and this puts it on a long time scale. We have an immediate crisis, we need to agree on action now, not make action contingent on a process that will take years to complete.

by Metatone (metatone [a|t] gmail (dot) com) on Sat Sep 29th, 2012 at 02:38:27 AM EST
The respect Schmidt commands can be seen in the ending segment of the program, from 56'30"-58'.

I distribute. You re-distribute. He gives your hard-earned money to lazy scroungers. -- JakeS
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Sat Sep 29th, 2012 at 04:03:41 AM EST
[ Parent ]
The attitude towards Schmidt shows how deeply we are sitting in the shit: it's horrible that he is the one who makes more sense than our current lot of politicians. When he was chancellor nobody expected the SPD could move farther to the right! There are polls showing that a very large majority would elect Schmidt rather than a contemporary, if he would run. Isn't that horrible?
by Katrin on Sat Sep 29th, 2012 at 05:32:52 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I always claim that the right wing of the SPD would nowadays drive out Schmidt as an dangerous lefty. He is only still counted in because of grandfathering.
by IM on Sat Sep 29th, 2012 at 05:54:38 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I hope you notice that he shifted his position to match the current SPD position (especially that of his buddy Steinbrück). In the video Schmidt says that all economists agree that 2% inflation was normal, and so the present 3% were no reason to worry. Lame, wrong, and he knows better. Compare that to Schmidt's famous riposte as chancellor when he was criticised for inflationary policies: "Better 5% inflation than 5% unemployment".
by Katrin on Sat Sep 29th, 2012 at 08:05:51 AM EST
[ Parent ]
it's horrible that he is the one who makes more sense than our current lot of politicians

He also says that the ECB could not solve the crisis because we have the politicians we have, and that the change of faces (Hollande replacing Sarkozy) makes little difference to crisis resolution because it's the same political class.

I distribute. You re-distribute. He gives your hard-earned money to lazy scroungers. -- JakeS

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Sat Sep 29th, 2012 at 06:15:29 AM EST
[ Parent ]
At the same time he vilifies direct democracy as an appeal to the emotions and uneducated decisions of the great unwashed. He does not get the fact that representative democracy allows the political class to leave the people behind. That's why we have the political class we have. In my opinion politicians who aren't scared don't work properly.

Small wonder that he has a problem with Hollande, he has always had a problem with French socialists, who are to the left of the SPD.

by Katrin on Sat Sep 29th, 2012 at 06:27:04 AM EST
[ Parent ]
He does say that the Euro crisis cannot be resolved through a referendum, and I think he's right on that. Representative democracies resort to referenda in order for the political class to cheat. Direct democracies are different.

I distribute. You re-distribute. He gives your hard-earned money to lazy scroungers. -- JakeS
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Sat Sep 29th, 2012 at 06:30:35 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Yes, but his problem with direct democracy is deeper, it's not that this current problem is better solved without a referendum, he doesn't want it at all. And he doesn't see that direct democracy enforces something like a dialogue between representatives and voters.

His principle is wrong, and has always been. And now we have a generation of politicians who are even worse. Damn.

by Katrin on Sat Sep 29th, 2012 at 06:38:02 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Schmidt was the great buddy-buddy of economic liberal French president Giscard d'Estaing.  
by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Sat Sep 29th, 2012 at 07:37:14 AM EST
[ Parent ]
We have an immediate crisis, we need to agree on action now, not make action contingent on a process that will take years to complete.
That's another point Schmidt makes (when asked whether the measures the ECB is deciding now could have been more cheaply undertaken earlier). He says we should not focus on what might have been, or on an idealised future, but on solving the crisis here now, and living with the consequences of past mistakes.

Also, at a different point, that insight is better than enthusiasm (i.e., we don't need to be enthusiastic about the European project). He also says he was never enthused (begeistert) by the European project, but convinced (überzeugt), when he reminisces about Jean Monnet and his time as Chancellor.

I distribute. You re-distribute. He gives your hard-earned money to lazy scroungers. -- JakeS

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Sat Sep 29th, 2012 at 06:13:56 AM EST
[ Parent ]
With his biography his mistrust against enthusiasm is understandable, but it is wrong. He uses that to defend all alternatives to his view as irrational. This quote belongs in the same box as the famous: "those who have visions ought to get medical help."
by Katrin on Sat Sep 29th, 2012 at 06:30:45 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I fear he doesn't he isn't respected enough to make a difference.

Nah, respect isn't the problem. He is greatly respected, as also idnicated by the idiotic custom to let him flaunt smoking bans in the studio. But he gained this wide respect because his SPD-conservativeness appealed to conservatives, too, who will just respectfully ignore when he strays from that line. Especially when he is paired with Gauck, who acted in the show as Merkel's speaker.

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.

by DoDo on Sat Sep 29th, 2012 at 08:54:13 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Schmidt has even harder-hitting words which would also fit in a 2-minute clip but ZDF hasn't cut out into its own video. It's between 23' and 25' in the main program. It is sanitised like this in the main program page
Deutschland stehe für den Kontinent mehr in der Verantwortung als alle anderen europäischen Staaten, sagte Schmidt und fügte hinzu: "Weil wir sechs Millionen jüdische Bürger fabrikmäßig umgebracht haben." Die europäischen Nachbarländer, die die deutsche Besetzung während der Nazizeit nicht vergessen hätten, hätten heute das Gefühl, Deutschland dränge wieder ins Zentrum Europas. Dieser Eindruck müsse vermieden werden.
Germany is more responsible for the Continent tan all other European States [though he does say all 27 peoples are responsible for the EU], said Schmidt, and added: "Because we have industrially killed six million Jewish citizens." The European neighbours, who have not forgotten the German occuption during the Nazi era, feel today that Germany is puching itseld again into the centre of Europe. This impression must be erased.
But rhetorically, Schmidt goes much further as he says "twice in history there was an impulse to unify Europe under a single centre, Napoleon who almost succeeded and than failed spectacularly, and Hitler".

This language was too strong for Gauck, too.

I distribute. You re-distribute. He gives your hard-earned money to lazy scroungers. -- JakeS

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Sat Sep 29th, 2012 at 03:18:16 AM EST
Also a discussion of financial solidarity from 37' (Schmidt from 40'), direct democracy and sovereignty. There's also mention of "mistakes made in Maastricht" (after 44')

I distribute. You re-distribute. He gives your hard-earned money to lazy scroungers. -- JakeS
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Sat Sep 29th, 2012 at 03:50:47 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Migeru:
"twice in history there was an impulse to unify Europe under a single centre, Napoleon who almost succeeded and than failed spectacularly, and Hitler"

You could probably also discuss the Holy Roman Empire, but otherwise that statement looks right to me.

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Sat Sep 29th, 2012 at 07:41:49 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Where was the "single centre" of the Holy Roman Empire?
by Katrin on Sat Sep 29th, 2012 at 07:57:34 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Charlemagne's court?

I distribute. You re-distribute. He gives your hard-earned money to lazy scroungers. -- JakeS
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Sat Sep 29th, 2012 at 02:11:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]
The holy roman empire was hardly a project to unify europe.

The more ambitious emperors wanted to unify Italy.

At the apex of the habsburgs were was the universal monarchy concept but even that was more a slur of protestants.  

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_monarchy

by IM on Sat Sep 29th, 2012 at 01:12:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Most of the time, the Holy Roman Empire was too decentralised to follow an expansionary policy. However, with more or less cooperation of the Vatican, there were expansionary policies, in particular towards the East: the conquests, the crusades, and the establishment of settlements/cities/mines beyond the subjugated lands. (More than 90% of pre-Vienna-Congress Prussia belonged to Slavic and Baltic tribes/kingdoms in the early 10th century.)

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Sun Sep 30th, 2012 at 03:17:39 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Fighting the heathens and unifying christian europe are two different things. And expansionism and trying to unify europe are two different concepts two.

Furthermore the state of the teutonic order was not even a part of the empire and the expansion of the empire was very  much a work of sub-units, not he cebtral government.

And all this was not really an attempt to unify europe. The polish-lithuanian commonwealth e. g. had its centuries of eastward expansion too. But I doubt that even the attempt to install the false demetrius can be counted as an attempt to unify europe.  

by IM on Sun Sep 30th, 2012 at 01:52:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]
As I see it, most of history of Europe from Charlemagne on is the pursuit of a unification. Not necessarily in a conscious form, but implicit in dinastic policies.

res humà m'és aliè
by Antoni Jaume on Sat Sep 29th, 2012 at 03:57:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]
From Charlemagne? What about Justinian the Great, or Attila, or Augustus?

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Sun Sep 30th, 2012 at 03:24:14 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Or Charles V.

I distribute. You re-distribute. He gives your hard-earned money to lazy scroungers. -- JakeS
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Sun Sep 30th, 2012 at 05:47:53 AM EST
[ Parent ]
But Charles V is part of the "history of Europe from Charlemagne" :-)

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Sun Sep 30th, 2012 at 08:21:25 AM EST
[ Parent ]
As DoDo says, he's posterior and is an integral part of these dynastic policies.

res humà m'és aliè
by Antoni Jaume on Sun Sep 30th, 2012 at 11:56:09 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I've no idea of what Attila thought, as for Augustus and Justinian they were more concerned with the Mediterranean world than with an Europe for which I don't think they had a proper concept. Then the first kingdom that formed on the western Roman empire remains were mostly a grab of power without even an aspiration to reunify. Until Charlemagne that is.

res humà m'és aliè
by Antoni Jaume on Sun Sep 30th, 2012 at 11:52:30 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Augustus was the last Roman leader launching a war on the northern borders with the aim to conquer all German tribes. The ambition for northern expansion faltered and Mediterranean focus kicked in after the defeat in the Battle of the Teutoburg Forest (9 CE).

As for a proper concept of Europe, I don't think Charlemagne had one, either. He was bent on expansion, and with his coronation he symbolically re-created the Roman Empire, claiming (like Justinian) authority over both East and West (a claim not recognised by the Byzantine Empire), though he also conquered the (then largely Saxon) areas where Augustus failed (and where Attila started from the other direction).

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.

by DoDo on Sun Sep 30th, 2012 at 04:40:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Well, the concept of Europe goes back to at least Herodotus, who had a view of the world that looked something like this (no map in the book, but this matches my image too):

Note that the eastern Mediterranean looks pretty much as we know it. The division of the world in Europe, Asia and Africa (as it was later known) is basically a division of the eastern Mediterranean into North, East and South. So they all probably had a concept of Europe. Wheter anyone intentionally set out to unify Europe before is another thing. Neither Napoleon or Hitler limited themselves to this continent, so apart from individuals and civil movements like the Paneuropean Union I think the EU is the first political project that sets out to unify Europe (and nothing else).

A vote for PES is a vote for EPP! A vote for EPP is a vote for PES! Support the coalition, vote EPP-PES in 2009!

by A swedish kind of death on Wed Oct 3rd, 2012 at 03:08:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]


Display:
Go to: [ European Tribune Homepage : Top of page : Top of comments ]