The German interference against Greece, bankruptcy symptom Europe

The first greek Minister, on account of the improving economic data of the country, has decided to give a cash bonus in favor of the lowest pensions, those within the EUR 750 per month, and to block the planned increase of two points of ' value added tax. The measure, however, has been criticized, particularly hard, the German finance minister, who has identified an excessive danger to the system the decision in total autonomy, the Prime Minister in Athens, to take public money to support a non-planned expenditure and not agreed with financial institutions. Berlin, that is, again expressly and publicly exercised a veto on a decision of a sovereign state. It matters little that the decision to Tsipras was taken without consulting the bodies were put under protection the greek country, partly because those same institutions, and also Germany and the European Union, have done little or nothing to support Greece in difficult and forced BUSINESS mission and refugee management. Beyond the necessary considerations on the matter, it seems undeniable that the statements of a member of the German government, and official and personal, on a matter which concerns the decision-making autonomy of a foreign government are an invasion of the field that should not exist and that, however, recurs again in a very compromised continental framework for Brussels, which is invested by the criticism and anti-European populist. The statement by the German Finance Minister, as well as being an affront to international law is inopportune politically, because it can further damage the already low level of regard in which the European Union. In the old continent in 2017 it will be a year of elections particularly important and decisive for the future configuration of the Union: surely they will vote their own in Germany and France, with the possibility that Italy has to come to vote to decide a new government and a new majority. The affirmation real threat of anti-system movement is concrete in all these countries, partly because, often, the alternatives are not there, thanks to the financial sacrifice policies, imposed on citizens for crimes they did not, by parties that called themselves in favor of workers, and, instead, give the perception of defending the large banking interests and reduce the acquired rights relating to employment, via over-liberal policies. From the point of view of the regulations of relations between states and between states and the European Union, what you are proposing is an urgent need to be solved quickly, even if it is not on the agenda of the European parliament works; it is necessary, that is, to reconcile the autonomy and sovereignty of a state against any invasions, as in this case. This is necessary especially if the EU will maintain the current arrangement, both if it comes to a form of political union; in this second case it is however fundamental compliance with local people and it is necessary to find, through a certain law, a form of relationship between central and peripheral power, which does not humble the circumscribed territorially instances. Unfortunately, this case is just the latest in a series already too long and indicates the dangerous lack of consideration of equality of peoples, with their history and their peculiarities, submissive to the mere financial aspect value, assumed as the only valid parameter and consideration. We understand that this setting is an endogenous factor that contributes, in addition to those exogenous, to create higher levels of inequality, the aspect that should be better fought by the Community institutions. Brussels, remaining silent on the issue, it tacitly approves and this attitude contributes to the decline of confidence in it, opening the way to easy criticism, which will only result in an adverse liking inside the voting booths. The perception of a Europe that continues to contradict its own principles, is therefore stronger and stronger and this is reinforced by the violation of the most basic rules that should follow common sense, as well as the provisions of the European regulations and the same international law: in essence Brussels increasingly moves away from the common feeling, because it allows the overcoming of the stronger against the weaker, on different levels, and this consideration is the antechamber of the end of the European dream.