West European Ostpolitik in
IN THE WAKE of the opening of the Berlin wall, François
Mitterrand, now serving his turn as chair of the European
Economic Community (EEC), declared: "We are coming out of
EUROPE
For the moment, the market envisaged is essentially for producers' goods, based on loans, foreign aid and relocation of plants or joint-ventures in order to exploit comparative advantages and cut risks. As an established order, and we cannot define the new equilibrium; in fact we are going to live for a time without one." The whole Western "upper crust" had been crowing endlessly over the evolution in Hungary and Poland. Was this not, from their point of view, proof that capitalism and the market had won out once and for all over "communism"? But all that had to happen to set all this charming company worrying and wondering was for millions of East Germans to cross over freely to the West for a weekend and then go back.
CLAUDE GABRIEL
O JUDGE from the consternation of Bush and Thatcher and the perturbed look of Mitterrand, you would almost have thought that these rakish Berliners, proud of their revolution, had become more dangerous than the Warsaw Pact armies.
Lech Walesa's call for bankers was answered by Jacques Delors, chair of the
European Commission, with the paternalistic observation that the Poles have first to learn "economics," that is, learn capitalism. The Hungarian government, which is expecting financial aid from the EEC, got an explanation from the French foreign minister, Roland Dumas, that Budapest had first to reach an agreement with the
IMF. He added that the Hungarian government had to get the support of the opposition to apply a program of economic reforms that would be very hard on the population. Isn't this reminiscent of relations with the third world?
Loans will be made under market conditions
The loans to Poland and Hungary envisaged by the European Investment Bank will be made under market conditions, and thus for the moment will not go very far, in view of these countries' indebtedness. The Brussels Commission has started to negotiate easier access to the EEC market for agricultural products from the
East European countries.
But lo and behold, the Western European professional associations concerned are making protests.1 discreet
The West German industrialists are showing an interest in making investments, referring to the attraction of low wages. The French, German and Italian bosses are talking about the need for stepping up sales to the East European countries, but they are demanding first that their respective governments assure the solvency of potential customers through loans! Doesn't this resemble point for point the relations of the Twelve with the African, Caribbean and Pacific countries (ACP)? 2
Danger of new forms of dependency
The official fine speeches about democracy and a greater Europe are astonishing. Are the Hungarian, Polish and East German workers who have risen up against the unequal forms of exchange between their countries and the Soviet Union and decried losses of "national sovereignty" going to sit back and watch a new form of dependency being established? 3 One can hardly count on that now. In fact, we will see the same reactions as we have in the third world when the IMF imposes draconian austerity policies.
The capitalists want guarantees. They want profitability and profits and the right to fire people. That is certainly not the idea of the "market" that the Hungarian workers have when they shout that they do not want "communism" any more.
So, what is in question is not a widening of the EEC or a future "social democratic" greater Europe. Over and above the speechifying, it is the European capitalists who shape the real policies. As far as they are concerned, nothing more is involved than new opportunities for investment in accordance with the profits expected. The limited solvency of the populations concerned reduces the possibilities for a buoyant consumption of intermediate in the third world, the bosses are going to try to get their governments to insure them against the risks of social and economic instability. It is precisely because it is flesh-and-blood capitalists who are calling the tune, and not just the Brussels institutions, that what is happening in East Germany and elsewhere is destabilizing the project of the Europe of the Twelve.
Behind the Single Act, behind the "political will" that the heads of government talk about so often, behind even the overall economic imperatives, there is a real social class — the bourgeoisie. The big common-market project corresponds to the general interests of capitalism in the medium term — cutting costs, free circulation of capital, deregulation and so on.
Patterns of behaviour of ruling classes The persistent pattern of behavior of European ruling classes and the various capitalist groups that make them up is another factor that has to be studied. The overall project does not mechanically rep-
"European boss class," nor a European state. Even if the various EEC governments are looking for greater political integration, they can only pursue this in accordance with what is happening concretely at the core of capitalist industry. But on this level, all the signs are that the bosses' choices in the various industries and lines remain highly diversified, both inside and outside of the EEC.
The threats hanging over the cohesion of the EE today do not come from some "natural" slide of West Germany toward central Europe. The German enterprises have worldwide strategies, like all the European multinationals. They have no 1. For the moment, the lifting of the quotas for some non-sensitive goods, that is products that are not very competitive with EEC industry, is projected for Poland in 1994 and for Hungary in 1995. 2. Sixty-six countries in Africa, the Caribbean and the Pacific (ACP) signed an economic and commercial agreement with the EEC, the Lomé Convention, which notably includes conventions on access to the Community for the primary products exported by these contries, on the basis of exemption from tariffs. 3. Already today, the bulk of these countries' exports to the EEC consists of raw materials and semi-finished goods, exchanged for imports of technology and producers' goods. The EEC exports 10,443 million Ecus to the East European countries (excluding the USSR) 15 and imports 11,499 million Ecus from these countries (1 ECU equals approximately 1 dollar).
----- pull-quotes on this page -----
turmoil
International Viewpoint #75 • December 11, 1989
EUROPE looking zernen like the favorites to win this race
Western governments have justified enormous military spending by referring to the dangers of German "revanchism" or a
OCEANS
A FRI for markets. There is nothing surprising either about Kohl wanting to symbolize the strength of German imperialism by quickly raising the question, in his own way, of German
Soviet attack. The capitalists have benefitted from this manna from heaven in terms of credits and markets. Thus, the national budgets have financed immense profits for the bosses, to say nothing of the practical by-products for scientific research, which has been to an extent focused on military needs.
The Berlin Wall, as a symbol of the "war threat," entirely suited Boeing, Siemens-MBB, Thomson, Rolls Royce and
GERMAN! BVLGA special ideology that would incline them to look fondly to "Mitteleuropa." On the other hand, they are on the lookout for new markets or new comparative advantages. Thus, they can "take a plunge to the East" *4, in order to get in ahead of their competitors.
The Europe of the Twelve no doubt has a "big market" project. But there is still no single European imperialism. In order for that to exist, there would have to be a higher level of integration and economic cohesion, real "European" multinationals and a corresponding state apparatus. For the moment, none of these things exists. Companies count on national governments
As the example of the setting up of the Lomé Convention linking the EEC and the ACP countries has shown, over and above the general choices of the Twelve, competition rages between the enterprises over markets for producers' goods. And most of the companies count on their "national" governments to give them a hand. Thus, the shares of the market won (in the ACP countries and tomorrow in East Europe), and above all the evolution of these shares, correspond to the relationship of forces among the various European economies. 16 today's Europe about the German Kon there is nothing surprising ir reunification. Competition is going to rage, and the already fragile EEC edifice is going to crack a little more. Howpredictions of the end of the Single Z scheme would be SCA hasty speculation. Immediate and long-term interests cannot persistently conflict. More than East Europe, the world-market and the international conditions for realizing capital will be decisive. In the immediate future, it is clear that the new stakes and the competition they generate can only aggravate the internal tensions in the EEC. The whole argument over economic and monetary union, largely centered on the question of common currency and the sovereignty of the member states, is going to heat up.
Enthusiasm for German re-unification
However, the policy of the governments themselves is not proof from upsets, once it is faced with new economic and strategic stakes. Are the military blocs in question? It was amusing, to say the least, to see Kohl and Mitterrand waxing enthusiastic for German reunification without saying a word about the Western military deployment in West Germany. How can they continue to justify the immense military arsenal accumulated in Germany and in Europe? How in France can they justify maintaining the nuclear "striking force"? How can they defend maintaining NATO troops in West Germany? Bush, Mitterrand, Kohl and the others will have some difficulties in explaining themselves on such questions.
They are already evoking the dangers OI CIVil war in Central Europe and the possibility that Gorbachev may be overthrown. The essential problem, however, is not there. For more than 40 years, the son, and all the firms that profited from military spending. And now you have thousands of East Germans starting to pass freely through the Wall to have a beer in West Berlin!
Moreover, this whole affair is now caught up in the European debate, because the European Community is far from being a homogeneous entity from the standpoint of military policies. The EEC, NATO, the West European Union, the group of the four countries responsible for the status of Berlin - which authority is the appropriate place for resolving these contradictions? What is going to happen to the "European defense" project? How, finally, can the military-industrial complex be re-adapted?
Working people bring down
Berlin Wall
The future of Europe, fortunately, does not depend only on the big Monopoly game played by the bourgeoisie. The Berlin Wall collapsed because the East German working people brought it down. More than ever, the only alternative is internationalism, that is, organized and concrete links among activists able to bind together struggles independent of governments, crossing the borders of countries and "blocs."
Workers' struggles, youth and cultural movements, environmental movements and struggles against all forms of oppression and militarism are more and more issues on which it is possible and necessary to cross frontiers in order to fight together. That sort of Europe does not resemble the one of Delors or Kohl. Nor does it resemble the "common home" that Gorbachev talks about. Above all, it is not a Europe built on the "values" that Gorbachev claims now to share with President Bush or Mrs. Thatcher. * 4. A slogan thrown out by Roger Fauroux, French ministry of industry, to the French bosses in October 1989. 5. The West German companies already are well ahead of in the East European countries. Moreover, East Germany, the biggest industrial power in East Europe after the USSR, is already selling three times as much to West Germany than to the 11 other members of the EEC. The trading relations between East Germany and the EEC are already very close, and largely go through exchanges with West Germany.
----- photo credits and running heads -----
THIC
Are negotiations on the way?
ON 16 November, F.W. De Klerk, the new South African
President, announced that certain racial segregation, notably on the beaches and in hospitals ("petty" apartheid laws),
SOUTH AFRICA earlier tactics. A qualitative leap has been made, which has to be explained in order to understand what will happen in the near future.
For the moment, the agenda is confined would "soon" be abolished. This decision has been welcomed as a "great step forward" by the world press. However, the past ten years have seen the abolition of numerous discriminatory laws. But the basic laws of apartheid remain unchanged, and the state of emergency is still in force. The important laws governing residence (the amended Group
Areas Act), segregated schools, land ownership, registration by "race" (the Population Registration Act) remain, as well as the segregated elections for whites, Coloreds and Indians, and the absence of any right to vote for Africans. The limited
"liberalization" measures that have taken place need to be put in the context of discussions about a "negotiated settlement"