Whither Europe?
October 12, 1992
EUROPE ting the possible forms of social dumping in the sectors open to the world market. Nothing, on the contrary, has been done to stop the overexploitation of the expanding informal sector. Meanwhile, the argument of equality between the sexes has been used to
ACCORDING to the rules of referenda, approval of the
Maastricht treaty by 35.6% of the French electorate (51% of those who voted) gives the green light to the pursuit of
European economic and monetary union. In the long term, the
"yes" vote settles no more than a "no" would have done. But it provides the European governments with an additional margin of political manoeuvre within which to speed up the implementation of their austerity plans.
Each government needs to act quickly and decisively, partly to fulfil the criteria of monetary union but primarily to deal with the effects of the recession. A decisive "yes" victory in
France would, in this respect, have helped the governments in
Rome, Madrid, Lisbon and elsewhere. The narrow "yes"
victory has rendered their ambitions more modest without however halting the overall dynamic. The way in which
European union is being implemented means that the various
"national" efforts to manage the crisis have a mutually reinforcing effect, to the advantage of the governments and the employers.
Effective opposition to the Maastricht Europe must therefore be based on both a determined challenge to the austerity drive in each individual state and attempts to build cross border links between movements of resistance.
CLAUDE GABRIEL
HE underlying question in this
T referendum was: "do you wish to rationalize the means of capitalist restructuring and to further the coherence of austerity policies throughout
Europe" and the obvious socialist answer to this was of course "no".
A "no" victory would not, however, in itself have cleanly represented a new social polarization, so complex and contradictory were voters' motivations. Nonetheless, a
French rejection of the Maastricht Treaty would have imposed a new and long stage of renegotiation, this time under the surveillance of populations much more watchful than in the past.
Nobody can prophesy the future of the monetary union; too many imponderables enter into play. The recent monetary crisis was obviously not brought about solely by the uncertainty of the French referendum.
Capitalism continues to float on an ocean of debt and the recession has not yet been surmounted. The project can still be torpedoed.
But in the final analysis it is the behaviour of the social classes themselves which will determine the outcome of the project: the resistance of the workers to violent attacks on the one hand; the convergence of ruling class projects to go beyond a simple free trade area on the other. The technical questions of European Monetary Union will not outshine the venerable class struggle in
The tranquil satisfaction of the French supporters of a "yes" vote on the evening of September 20 was accompanied by the obligatory paternalist remarks about those who had voted "no", whose concerns, it was said, "can be understood". Consequently, it is necessary to "explain" things better in the future and to concentrate more on the social dimension of European construction. But why on earth had they not thought of this before? The Single Act, ratified in 1987, was to be completed by a progressive social charter. This, indeed, was the "mandate" on which French president François Mitterrand congratulated himself during the period of the French presidency of the Community. So far the results have been zero.
### Minimal social measures
The only social measures have been some minimum regulations in the areas of rights, hygiene and security which, ten years ago, might have looked radical in countries like Portugal and Greece. This amounts to little more than regulating competition by limireintroduce night work for women in industry. Above all, no measures have yet been taken to further rounding up social protection.
A lot of fuss has been made about the agreement between the European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC) and the European employers' organizations over the possibility of negotiating some "directives" without the arbitration of the Brussels Commission.
But this only reflects the "pure" relation of forces between bosses and the workers' movement in the current period, without the intervention of a political "third party": given the spinelessness with which the trade union bureaucracies making up the ETUC have supported Maastricht it can be easily understood why intervention by the political institutions is no longer felt indispensable to limit the pressure of union demands.
It is, moreover, incongruous to present this as the forerunner of imminent collective conventions on the European level at a time where such bargaining procedures are in decline in all the countries of the community, with a trend towards the growing fragmentation of negotiations.
No revival of employment
The Single Act was to open a period of revival of employment. Now that this has been shown to be nonsense, we are being told that, without full scale monetary union and above all a single currency, the measures of the Single Act can only be incomplete and unstable. There is some truth in this. The European monetary system can only be a transitional phase in a regime of free circulation of capital. To prevent turbulence, a quick move to fixed exchange rates
But fixed exchange rates cannot be achieved without the prior convergence of the economic performance of the countries involved. In a country like Italy, where the probity of the ruling class is well known, the public debt, now at 104% of the GDP, is to be brought down to 60%. The workers of this country are going to pay very dearly for the chaos of the regime.
The capitalist world is not out of crisis. It is once more afflicted by overproduction -with a crisis of market outlets, loss of solvency of indebted households, blockage of investments. And the criteria imposed to proceed to EMU could substantially aggracal uncertainty with its attendant poverty 3 This is what lies behind the current politiand unemployment. The advocates of a
October 12, 1992
EUROPE / SWEDEN "yes" vote in France have not said a word about the Europe that they themselves have been building for ten years, where 53 million people live in poverty — defined as having less than half of a country's average income - and 9.5% are unemployed, accompanied by a growing crisis of public services and social disengagement by the state, and corruption and private appropriation of public goods. All this feeds a loss of social identity, prejudice and racism.
The crisis of the state, the institutions and parliamentary representation is going to continue. It will not be overcome by the great European plan, indeed the contrary is true. The decomposition of the bourgeois political system is intimately connected with the development of the world economy and its crisis. And the perspective of European political union is much too distant to offer a
The sum of Europe's democratic deficits
Much has been said about the "democratic deficit" of European construction. But this finally only represents the sum of the "democratic deficits" in each state. Recall how the signing of the Single Act, on which the whole edifice of Maastricht rests, took place with only the most meagre democratic consultation in most countries. Or again, take the recent demand by the Italian government for special powers in economic sketching out of the alternative anti-capitalist Europe we wish to build. This difficulty is only temporary.
In the face of innumerable attacks and rampant social violence there will be much resistance and many struggles. However, it is necessary to understand the objective circumstances, and the confused nature of the initial responses.
The rise of the extreme right is an example of the problems we face. The neofascists exploit, in their own way, the revolt and social distress of our societies. The monopoly on this should not be left to them. It is necessary to build social movements which present themselves clearly as subverters of the current system. We have to take up the whole range of issues, including the housing crisis, education, health, the environment, the fight for the reduction of the working week and the demand for civic equality of all the immigrants.
We need to expose the lies behind so-called citizenship and democracy in the current system. The Europe of Maastricht exists for the powerful and corrupt. The invisible hand" of the market is perhaps less and less invisible, but it is, on the contrary, more and more totalitarian.
This indicates the need to show in each struggle the importance of generalized social control and direct democracy. It will be increasingly important to link the diverse social movements and make them converge towards a global objective of the overthrow
We must counterpose our internationalism to their idea of European union. Here, things still progress too slowly. But coordination already exists between feminist movements. Contacts and meetings have already taken place between trade union lefts. The "network" of anti-racist organizations has taken its first European initiative by proposing demonstrations on the evening of November 9. The coordination of social movements and the working out of united responses should form the axis of our response. It is necessary to bring movements in Eastern Europe and the Third World on board.
No compromise But the battle will be very long. Those who will see it through will be those who make no compromise with the lobby mentality of the Brussels administration and remain faithful to the social and political interests of the great mass of people, workers, women
It is certainly necessary to avoid analytical simplifications. Nothing would be more fatal than to be content with the old reflexes of yesteryear to respond to such objective changes.
Leftwing political organizations, as much as the social movements, need to do everything possible to go beyond national impressionism at a time when capital itself is raising the barriers. Internationalism is more urgent than ever. * matters for three years.
One should not, therefore, denounce
"Brussels" (the seat of the European Com-