Veronica De Romanis, economist out of the box and polite but very combative host of many television talk shows as well as a professor at Luiss and Stanford University in Florence, has always been a supporter of German Chancellor Angela Merkel. She appreciates his leadership style and political strategy. And he explained the reasons in two of his many books: both the one written for Marsilio in 2009 ("The Merkel method. Pragmatism at the helm of Europe") and the one written in 2013 by the same publisher ("The case of Germany. So Merkel saved Europe"). De Romanis has certainly not changed her mind now that Merkel is in great difficulty both in Germany and outside her, to the point that there are those who argue that hers was hers is fatally fading away. And she feels that the Chancellor is a bit like the phoenix, always ready to rise from the ashes. But what would happen in Germany and in Europe if Merkel really left the scene? And would it be better or worse for Italy? Here's how Veronica De Romanis thinks in this interview with FIRSTonline.
61% of German voters are asking that migrants with asylum applications filed in another country be expelled from Germany and the Bavarian Minister of the Interior, Seehofer openly challenges the Chancellor, also bombed by Trump with unprecedented violence, to find a agreement in Europe on migrants threatening, otherwise, to start the tough policy of rejections: the leadership of Angela Merkel seems to be in serious danger for the first time in 13 years. Is it the end of an era or will the Chancellor be able to find a wing?
“Be careful of underestimating Angela Merkel. In these thirteen uninterrupted years at the helm of Germany, the Chancellor has gone through various difficulties, but she has always gotten back up. Surely this is a delicate moment for the holding of her fourth government. Seehofer has declared that he intends to proceed with automatic pushbacks at the borders - and not with a case-by-case assessment as requested by the Chancellor herself - in the event that an agreement is not found at the European Council at the end of June. Merkel is determined to seek a European solution but it is clear that, at this point, a rift with her Interior Minister cannot be ruled out. Given such a risk, finding a compromise would be in everyone's interest. Indeed, a government crisis in Germany would create strong instability in the entire euro area. The other member states would also pay the price".
The migrant emergency seems to be the loose cannon capable of really splitting Europe: on this terrain Merkel appears to be in serious difficulty at home in the face of the tug of war with Seehofer but, for the first time, rather isolated even in Europe. On immigration, the Chancellor has shown great solidarity and foresight, but she has not convinced public opinion: have you got your political accounts wrong?
“Probably he made few political calculations when in September 2015, in a situation of absolute emergency, he decided to "open the doors" to refugees in the name of the values of solidarity and acceptance. "Germany," he said, "is a great country that must be able to welcome those fleeing war and torture." The provision was adopted without warning the other European states and, above all, without providing the necessary explanations and reassurances to a German public opinion disoriented by the mass arrivals. Merkel soon understood the consequences deriving from the management of almost two million people and tried to remedy with restrictive measures (crackdown on expulsions, greater controls, etc.) but also with the allocation of funds for integration. However, you were only able to partially recover the lost consent. Riding the wave of discontent was, however, Alternative for Germany (AfD), xenophobic ultra-right force, which obtained full votes in last September's elections, entering for the first time the Bundestag, the German parliament. Despite the decline in her party, the Chancellor has never succumbed to the temptation to go after the populists, imitating them or making some instances her own. She continued on her own path, explaining that there are no simple solutions to complex problems such as that of migrants (the Afd proposes the use of force at the borders). In your opinion, these challenges are not solved with walls because sooner or later walls fall, and you know it well, having lived thirty-five years in East Germany. It is clear that with such a position the bill to pay can be high. He remains, however, the most popular politician in Germany ”.
What would Germany be like without Merkel's leadership and what effects would the Chancellor's departure have on the whole of Europe?
“The Chancellor has been leading Germany since 2005. In her first mandate, with the reforms of the pensions, the federal system and the public administration, she completed Agenda 2010 desired by her predecessor Schröder. In the second and third mandates you managed the European crisis, partially slowing down the reform drive. The results, however, are there: the country is growing, unemployment is at historic lows, the accounts are in order. At the national level, much remains to be done, in particular to tackle the increase in inequality. At the European level, the Chancellor has managed to convince her fellow citizens to take steps that were once unimaginable. Just think about the Quantitative Easing (QE), a tool disliked by the Germans who have always feared inflation. Merkel supported the European Central Bank - in respect of the independence of the Institute -, without creating tears with the president of the Bundesbank Weidmann, strongly opposed to QE. As regards aid to countries in difficulty, you managed to get the 5 bailouts approved by reassuring the Germans that this would not give rise to a Transfer Union prohibited by the Treaties (Germany is the country that has contributed most to this bailout). He proceeded in small steps, sometimes wasting precious time, but he always supported the creation of all the tools necessary to make the Union more resilient. He pursued the interests of the Germans, as is natural in a Union that is not a political Union, but always with the aim of strengthening Europe. After all, the interests of the Germans correspond to those of a strong and stable Europe. An exit from the scene of Angela Merkel would therefore have the effect of weakening the construction of Europe: it is difficult to imagine a more pro-European successor than her. The Chancellor, however, is the only leader who can boast long-standing experience. She has been involved in endless negotiations: she knows the rules and the importance of alliances. And then, never as in this moment, the ability to find compromises, a distinctive trait of her way of doing politics, represents an indispensable tool for progress in an increasingly divided Europe ".
Although the shared management of migrants in Europe supported by Merkel is the only possible support for an Italy that has long been asking to relocate migrants arriving in Italy, the sentimental divorce that has taken place over the years between the Chancellor and the Italian public opinion on the ground of austerity, real or presumed, and of European economic policy seems difficult to remedy, to the point that the Chancellor has become the enemy of the Lega-Cinque Stelle government: what effects would the end of the was it Merkel?
“The end of the Merkel era would mean a more closed Germany on the immigration front. From this point of view, the Chancellor is our best ally. The Master plan of Seehofer consists in sending back around 66 migrants who entered Germany with documents obtained in other countries. It should be specified that the majority of these people should return to Italy, the opposite result of the objective pursued by the government in Rome. On the austerity front, blaming Germany doesn't help much. When sharing a currency, fiscal rules are necessary because one country's action can have negative effects on others as well. These rules have also been signed by us and put into the Constitution - like the Fiscal Compact – even though it wasn't required. Moreover, who today calls for the abolition of the Fiscal Compact must be aware that it is precisely thanks to this agreement that the European Central Bank was able to give the green light to theOutright Monetary Transactions (OMT) and then al Quantitative Easing, which has allowed Italy to save tens of billions of interest expenses. Moreover, in the absence of rules, the Frankfurt Institute would not have been able to purchase securities of countries with a public debt not yet stabilized such as ours. Abandoning these instruments would therefore mean weakening the euro project. Whoever asks should remove this ambiguity”.
Combative and irreducible as she is, Merkel is trying to the last minute to relaunch Europe also in terms of reforms and the strengthening of the Eurozone, building an axis with Macron's France, as emerged from the Meseberg pact, but not the it seems that it is too late and that the closures manifested in the past by Germany and Merkel on European economic policy and in particular on the completion of the banking union have jeopardized the relationship with Italy of the League and the Five Stars and made reform more difficult of Europe in today's bleak continental landscape?
“There is little talk about these issues in Italy and instead they are fundamental. On the banking union, after having accepted the complete package, Merkel decided to curb the implementation of the third pillar, the single guarantee for deposits. You ask that the "sharing" of the risks take place only after the "reduction" of the risks. From her point of view, too little has been done. Italy should try to favor an agreement: completing the banking union is essential for strengthening the European project and, in particular, for a country like ours. To be credible at the negotiating table, however, the government in Rome must start reducing the debt, that is precisely the risk that the Chancellor wants to limit. In this regard, continuing to ask for further budgetary flexibility (after having already obtained 40 billion) does not help".
Between disputes over migrants, differences over economic strategies and trade wars with the USA, Europe has never been so weak and so divided as it is today: in such a complicated situation, the future of the euro is truly irreversible, as the president of the Does the ECB Mario Draghi or is it likely, sooner or later, to jump – as the sovereignists hope – together with the whole European construction?
“The future of the euro depends a lot on Italy, which is the third European power. The failure of the euro project would be a disaster for everyone. It would mean being small and isolated in a globalized world, where challenges such as immigration, terrorism and Trump's protectionism must be faced: no economy, including Germany, has the strength to face them alone. Moreover, just talking about leaving the euro, as recently stated by President Draghi, creates instability because the markets are starting to bet on a "real and proper exit". Just think of what happened in Greece in the weeks leading up to the referendum on the third aid package: the images of desperate pensioners queuing at empty ATMs should make us think. In conclusion, the crisis has shown that solutions can be found. And, in fact, the euro is still alive despite the fact that its death is often talked about”.
