Politica Internazionale

Politica Internazionale

Cerca nel blog

lunedì 4 luglio 2016

After the release of Britain, the European Union has to think to prevent its dissolution

After much analysis on the output of Britain by the European Union, no one can not make some considerations about the future of Brussels, especially in preventive optics. If, on the one hand, it is all too clear that the greatest danger for the union is to a slow dissolution, mainly we need to focus more on the causes that led to this situation and think of appropriate adjustments to prevent the unity of European countries but only of those who believe with conviction to this possibility, as an opportunity. On British output causes have been said so many things: certainly the role of Cameron, one of the worst politicians in British history, it was important, since it has sacrificed the future of a country and the situation in several other states, your calculation of political expediency, moreover we are making a completely wrong prediction. However the decision to cameron to make the referendum is not the point of arrival to departure. The most significant social, which must also apply to the remaining countries in the union, is the increasing distance between the ruling classes and the population, especially the one with fewer opportunities and lower and lower available income. The intention of the founding fathers of a united Europe, there was the clear objective of improving the overall health of the citizens of the old continent and not to worsen in favor of banks and financial institutions or a single country. Would it take to emphasize that the political orientation expressed from London, both with Labour, and with the Conservatives, has never taken this direction, choosing, rather, a way that favored the increase in inequality. England has always had an ambiguous attitude with Europe, maintaining a gap that resulted from poor and pro-European conviction that Brussels has held hostage for fear of losing London; so is a special relationship is favored for the UK, characterized by reluctance to enforce the rules in London and generating unequal treatment compared to other EU members. But even these advantages goals were enough to convince the British people of the need to remain in Europe and this just because the British governments have decided to channel these best positions to the company but to the finance and substantially to the already wealthy classes. This is not a simplistic analysis, but the aversion explanation in Brussels, which granted too much freedom to the executive not imposing a more equitable redistribution of the results of policies granted to England. We understand that this is an example not to be repeated; the perception, which unfortunately corresponds to reality, the distance of the European institutions is the first enemy to fight if you want to maintain European unity. In this context the political clout of Germany must be reduced, even by virtue of the gross domestic product numbers delivered. It is true that Berlin is Europe's economic powerhouse, but its gross domestic product is 27%, much less than that of France, Italy and Spain combined, arriving at 50%. Certainly for Germany is easy to take advantage of divisions and uncertainties of countries, which also serving a domestic political situation is often unstable, but continue to retreat on a position of fiscal and economic intransigence, tending to compress investment, it could be lethal even for its economy. So, if daun operate the instrument side of the expansive economy, it is an essential barrier to the European dissolution, turns out to be just as necessary a rigid policy towards those members who do not want to comply with European regulations. Several eastern European states, but also Austria, in fact, have a very similar behavior to that of English: they tend to reap the economic benefits of Europe, increasingly rejecting the obligations. The case of reception of migrants only had the merit of discovering the real behavior of the Eastern governments, which already had distinguished themselves for the approval of anti libertarian standards and restriction of civil and political rights. If you need a Europe that wants to embark on a path of unity it is also necessary that this concern be shared, otherwise it's better to reduce the members and rationalize resources. At the same time you need to keep an attitude of absolute firmness with England, that should not lead the negotiations for the release: London must not be built very favorable conditions, who goes by the Union should know that he can not enjoy special status, for this does not create previous absurd, able to bring new elements of disturbance, on the already difficult alignment of Brussels.

Nessun commento:

Posta un commento