We always need to have a sense of proportion monsieur Sarkozy. Image Source: The Guardian

In a joint press conference with Italian Prime Minister Mario Monti, French President Sarkozy said the following (by Reuters):

We do not have the right to drop Europe, we do not have the right to let the euro be destroyed. The euro is the heart of Europe. If the euro is destroyed, it’s the whole of Europe that goes up in smoke. If Europe goes up in smoke it’s the peace of our continent that will be one day or another be called into question.

First of all the French President errs fundamentally on considering the Euro, the EU and Europe as one entity. These are three distinct entities, even though one might relate and influence the other. Considering them as one is misleading, while any statement along these lines, verges on being propaganda. Some clarifications on this:

• The Euro is above all a currency union – an institution in broad terms – that 17 European countries have accepted, in order to unify their fiat monetary systems. Currencies of all sorts and varying monetary systems have existed throughout history. The euro is not the first and will certainly not be the last. Currency is just a means humanity uses to facilitate economic activity.
• The European Union is broader than the Euro as it has a much wider scope while it encompasses a larger number of countries (27). The EU has existed long before the Euro and will continue to exist no matter what will the fate of the euro be, as it is established on a vastly rich legal corpus comprised of international treaties (EU Treaties), secondary legislation (European regulations, directives, decisions) and case law (ECJ decisions). To dismantle the European Union, all those pieces of legislation need to be annulled and this cannot happen by the mere disintegration of a currency (the euro if it collapses after all).
• Europe is a continent which is much broader in all respects than the EU and the euro. It is a big lie to argue that peace in Europe exists thanks to the EU, since wars have taken place all over the continent until (very) recently. The bloody disintegration of Yugoslavia is only one of the many examples.

The view of the French President is not new in European political talk. For decades now we hear a similar narrative over how the European Union has managed to bring peace to the war-torn European continent. In my view this is one of the greatest myths of contemporary European politics (for specific reasons that need not be analyzed within the context of this article). For such a statement to hold true one needs to prove a correlation between the EU and war, something that none has proved, other than the obvious and yet coincidental fact that no war has taken place among EU member-states ever since WWII.

After the end of WWII European peoples realized that bloody conflicts do not lead to any good. That war brings humanity to a suboptimal level, making everyone worse off. The two Great Wars effectively killed off the romantic nationalism that was dominant ever since the 19th century, while they signal the end of the imperial-colonial era, as traditional imperial/global powers lost their power. The destruction caused by the last major war left scars in the social psyche that never wished to experience something similar again. As such people realized that dialogue and the promotion of common interests are the only way to achieve a better living for everyone’s sake. While the values of democracy, human rights, self-determination and all other liberal achievements of our time were commonly accepted as the best institutions (the word is used in the philosophical sense – see Cornelius Castoriades: The Imaginary Institution of Society) to bring peace and prosperity for all.

In addition the emergence of enterprises that can operate at an international level, with cross-country activity, in conjunction with the improvements in technology that are contributing towards a more globalized world, suggested that economic interest can only be served through peace, dialogue and political stability, which are essential to any form of investment. “Not war, but peace, is the father of all things” as Ludwig von Mises said – an axiom that best describes the dynamics of our time.

The only truth ever since WWII is that democratic states seldom if ever go to war with one another and this holds true on a global scale, not just within the EU. If we consider this as a “natural rule” of democracy, then the only way the French President could be correct, is for European democracy to deteriorate into other, less tolerant systems of government. To argue along these lines, in order to defend the euro is I think extreme and I am sure that Sarkozy had no such intention.

The fact that peace exists among EU member-states is related to the lessons we learned from our past together with the economic, political and social interests we all share. It is not the “nature” of the EU, as an abstract entity that ensures peace. It is each one of us, either that be citizens or politicians or governments that prefers peace. If we all together wanted war, no EU institution or directive could change the course of things. Towards that end we must understand that people are those who guarantee peace and this holds true regardless of the currency they use.

Sarkozy is totally wrong over the connection he attempts to make between the Euro and peace in Europe. Cultivating myths and fears is not how European politics will move onwards. We thus need to have a sense of proportion which the French President lacks. Whether that is done intentionally to serve particular ends, or unintentionally is irrelevant.

Source: Protesilaos Stavrou