Showing posts with label Financial Times. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Financial Times. Show all posts

Monday, 25 March 2013

The finance moralist is a failed politician


Jeroen Dijsselbloem might not know where Bangui is located. Most likely, he had also no idea up to recently where Nicosia is. But like the Séléka rebels in the Central African Republic, he managed today to create chaos and uncertainty. His interview with Reuters and the Financial Times shows that he has the same level of political tact and experience as the leaders of Séléka. And he managed to do what the CAR rebels are very good at: to divide what should be united. They split the country along ethnic lines, a tradition in that part of the world. Djisselbloem split Europe, separating the good people of the parsimonious North from the prodigal boys from the South. And undermining bank recovery in the lands of such bad boys.

Then, later in the day, maybe after a serious caning by Angela, the man said that his words about the Cyprus programme being a template for future financial crisis were not meant to mean what they indeed mean, as each country situation is a special case.

He is the one that could be considered a special case.

Maybe the UN – at a time when its presence in Bangui is being seriously challenged –should consider sending him as an envoy to CAR. The country is at least a safe place for the markets as there is no Reuters or Financial Times correspondent around. 

Thursday, 10 January 2013

UK's national interest and the EU

From today's Financial Times:

Britain needs to adopt a hard-headed approach founded on the national interest – and hold a referendum

I love the idea of "national interest". But I am afraid it is one of the vaguest ideas on the market. It is subject to so many interpretations. The "national interest" as perceived by a banker in London is very different from the one understood by a shop floor vendor in Birmingham, or a a young graduate in Durham. Not to mention people in Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland. Even a staff writer at the Financial Times will see it differently from a journo at The Sun next door.

Is there a good step-by-step guideline on how to define the "national interest" of a given country? I don't think so. But in a case like this one, the future of the relationship between the UK and Europe cannot just be defined by Conservative politicians or by a coalition government that is above all a marriage of convenience. It would require ample debate at Westminster and a broad consensus in the Commons.