Rafael Behr is right that Greece’s tragedy does not invalidate the case for the EU (The EU is not a conspiracy against democracy, 1 July). But he is too kind to Europe’s leaders, who display precious little humility or respect for national feeling. As well as demanding payments that Greece cannot possibly make and seeking remedies that will further weaken its economy, they are causing huge suffering to many of their fellow Europeans.
Their behaviour is not only stupid, it is also immoral. So there is a morality tale here, and you do not have to be either a Ukip supporter or a member of the “hard left” to feel distaste for the bullying, supercilious approach of Jean-Claude Juncker et al. The yes campaign in Britain’s EU referendum may well achieve a reluctant acceptance that staying in is better than getting out. But after the EU’s desperate mishandling of the Greek crisis, it is very hard to feel much enthusiasm for what used to be called the European project.
Shaun Spiers
Labour and Co-operative MEP 1994-99
• Rafael Behr unfairly caricatures the attitudes of those of us who think the policy of the European leaders on Greece is misguided, intransigent and leading to a crisis in the wider European project. The Greek situation may be an “accident” but major accidents require analysis, lessons to be learned and then change implemented. The eurozone policies on Greece since 2010 ignored the truths of mainstream (Keynesian) economic theory on recessionary crises in capitalism, and instead relied on (balanced budget) approaches discredited both empirically and intellectually in the 1930s.
After five years these policies have failed on all fronts. Greeks have suffered. The Greek economy has not recovered. Greece’s creditors have bigger debts. Fine leaders will admit failure and change course. (As Keynes reputedly said “when the facts change I change my mind”). European leaders have refused to face up to their mistakes, tell their electorates the truth and change tack. It is morally fatuous to suggest that the Greeks must suffer further because Irish, Latvians and other European citizens have also suffered (unnecessarily) from the same wrong-headed approach. It is also self-defeating, because restoring the Greek economy to stability and growth will help citizens across the EU. The failure of European leaders to change their approach is what threatens the future of the EU and its ability to control capitalism for the common good. Indignation (whether surplus or not) is the right and moral emotion. It should properly make us support actions, whether here or in Greece, designed to achieve that change. This is democracy in action and not conspiracy.
Martin Cox
London
• If we listen only to comments attributed to members of the troika, it’s easy to get the impression that the Greek government is being intransigent in the face of reasonable offers of assistance, and that its problems could be addressed if only it agrees to tighten belts even more. But since the start of the financial crisis in 2009, the “help” offered to Greece by its European partners, the European bank, and the IMF, has led to a fall in GDP by 25% – from €237bn to €179bn – and an increase in national debt as a percentage of GDP – from 127% to 180%.
How can it be reasonable for the EU and its institutions to insist that the Greek government implements ever tighter fiscal controls when its chance of ever repaying its debt appears to be receding? Is it any wonder that it should spurn more “help” of this kind? Surely the banks should forego some interest and cancel some of the debt that they have made Greece accumulate by their earlier measures?
Alan Fraser
Cardiff
• As a retired economics lecturer, I find the lack of understanding in much of the current discussion of the plights of Greece, UK etc, baffling. Economics as a discipline has, rightly, received a rather bad press in recent years, but I thought there might be agreement about some fundamentals, which are scarcely more than common sense. Considering these economies now and during the Great Depression, it is clear that they are and were producing well below what they were capable of. The UK is still producing (real GNP) less than it was seven years ago, with at least the same level of productive resources. Moreover, there is no real reason why this should be so, in the sense that there is nothing disrupting production, such as war, extreme weather or oil crisis. It is an irrecoverable waste. There can be no benefit from operating at such levels, regardless of anything else, such as indebtedness.
Whatever one thinks of the Keynesian approach, it surely cannot be beyond human ingenuity to move an economy back towards what it is capable of. Keynesian economics, of course, says that “austerity” does the opposite. The appropriate policy is quite simple: create money as in quantitative easing, and spend it on, say, infrastructure, rather than bonds. In the case of Greece, the ECB should be creating money and spending it in Greece.
There is also too much concern about the national debt, a high proportion of which can be considered a kind of equity in the public sector, the two being interchangeable to some extent. Privatisation, for example, effectively converts debt into equity. Much of the debt is backed by valuable assets, just as mortgage debt is backed by a house.
John Levi
Abingdon, Oxfordshire
• The troika can pull Greece back from the brink of leaving the euro and simultaneously demonstrate its commitment to the common good. The European commission and the European Central Bank should forgive Greece’s debt equal to a portion of the value of the untapped oil and gas reserves in Greek waters in return for a permanent moratorium on new drilling in those waters. There are an estimated 25bn barrels of oil in the Ionian and northern Aegean seas. To pay off its €200bn debt, Greece will almost certainly exploit these reserves. However, by trading debt forgiveness for a drilling moratorium, Greece and the leaders of the EU would sacrifice short-term benefit for a better future for all. Such an agreement would be a powerful step towards preventing climate change and could put an end to the acrimonious negotiations that have eroded confidence in Europe’s leaders.
Delia Kulukundis
New York City, USA
• I am appalled at the arrogant, bullying behaviour of the IMF and European Union in their response to Greece, and the failure of progressive politicians and media across Europe to publicly insist and insist again that the real issues here are: 1) the bona fide rejection of austerity as an economic policy, which is why Syriza was elected, and which is widely supported at the grassroots in Greece and across Europe (viz the huge demonstrations here in the UK on 20 June); 2) the right of every government to implement the policies it was democratically elected to implement; 3) the failure of the EU to fulfil what should be its main raison d’être, which is to support and unify – not insult, manipulate and crush – its members. The personalisation of the rejection of Greece’s proposals, via personal attack on Syriza’s leaders, and the failure to provide debt relief and act to relieve the suffering of the Greek people, is a sign of utter moral bankruptcy (with the emphasis on banks) at the top. If strangulation of Greece is the final outcome of the bullying, the EU is finished in my book. I will vote no to staying in when we have a referendum here. Stand tall, Syriza, you have done your best in impossible circumstances.
Marge Berer
London
• Aditya Chakrabortty rightly highlights the EU’s democratic deficit in the context of the Greek financial crisis (Opinion, 30 June). Where is the will of the European people in this crisis? Where is the voice of the European parliament? How can I, a (British) citizen of the EU, register my opposition to its financial institutions inflicting further suffering on the Greek people, my fellow EU citizens?
Roger Harvey
Hemel Hempstead, Hertfordshire
