Respecting the rules

” “” “From the ethical perspective of European Unification policy, solidarity plays a particularly significant role. A few days ago, on a daily newspaper, an article on the ongoing, profound crisis and the developments of the monetary Union, underlined the conclusions reached to this regard by the reflection group that in the first 1990s had been tasked by the then President of the European commission Romano Prodi with delving into the unifying elements of the European Union.” “How should Member States behave towards each other, given that some of these States plunged into a crisis situation, with heavy repercussions on their economic and social sectors while others are living a phase of wellbeing in the interest of the EU as a whole? Obviously, through solidarity! What does this mean in political terms? Solidarity isn’t born on its own, neither is it the result of appeals to the good will of those in positions of responsibility. ” “In a community whose action is based on cohesion, solidarity must be based on reciprocity. Solidarity isn’t a one-way street. In the political relations of the States – and between individuals – solidarity isn’t "free of charge" for neither of the parties involved. An important requisite in showing solidarity for one’s partner is the respect of the rules that a community adopted for its coexistence. For the European Union in its present structure, this means that the willingness to show solidarity to one of its members undergoing a difficult situation is possible only if the latter in turn is willing to contribute to overcome such situation while respecting the agreements ratified with its partner countries. This commandment is true for all Member States. In the ongoing situation, however, this principle is especially valid in the case of those countries that inflicted serious damage to themselves and to the rest of the community owing to excessive indebtedness, to national budget deficit and to the unwillingness to undertake reforms. The growth of these countries is deadlocked, while competition and performance are below their expectations and needs. These countries ought to change course and deserve the community’s solidarity by showing their willingness to introduce reforms, with savings and sacrifice. Solidarity versus solidarity. ” “The tendency to escape responsibility thwarts change. The crisis that hit European countries didn’t happen by chance. The stereotyped explanation, according to which it’s a European, international or even global phenomenon, ascribes responsibility to an anonymous force. Moreover, the crisis became European, international and global when too many states nourished it within their borders, through mistaken policies, because of the lack of seriousness, owing to unlimited squandering and irresponsible popularism. The responsibility of the States doesn’t only lie in the governments that under normal conditions give concrete expression to social expectations. In democracy, citizens elect their governments. And also entrepreneurial associations and trade unions come into play. At the end of the day, these subjects drew advantages from the politics that caused the crisis. This explains why the populations of the respective Countries are the victims of budget redress and reforms for growth. It’s a requisite to overcome the crisis and for economic recovery. Crisis evolution in recent years shows that partners’ solidarity is directly linked to the willingness to do sacrifices.” “But apart from all of this, if we want it to be longlasting, solidarity must be further institutionalised. The market doesn’t produce solidarit, because the reasons of competition prevail. And a Monetary and Economic Union cannot provide reliable forms of solidarity unless it has a political framework in which decisions are taken on the basis of federalist and democratic principles, bearing in mind the interests and the capacities of all participants. Creating this framework is the challenge of the near future. ” “” “