Il-“flessibilità” fil-mod kif jitħaddmu r-regoli ta’ tmexxija taż-Żona Ewro qed issir kwistjoni kritika. Żviluppata l-aktar meta xi sentejn ilu, deher ċar li Franza mhux se tkun tista’ tlaħħaq mal-miri ssettjati għaliha taħt ir-regoli, il-kunċett tal-“flessibilità” beda jiġi invokat biex ikopri s-sitwazzjonijiet speċjali li ekonomija tkun qed tiffaċċja intortament. F’sitwazzjonijiet hekk, intqal, ir-regoli jippermettu konċessjonijiet ġodda favuriha.
Minn dak iż-żmien lil hawn, l-istess ħsieb ta’ flessibiltà ntuża għal Spanja u l-Portugall.
Issa l-Gvern Taljan qed jippretendi li jingħata l-istess trattament, anke jekk il-baġit li ħejja jikser b’mod ċar miri li kienu maqbula. Il-gvern qed isemmi ċ-ċirkostanzi eċċezzjonali li l-Italja kellha taffaċċja bil-wasla ta’ refuġjati u immigranti oħra, u bit-traġedji tat-terremoti. Imma l-aqwa problema tiegħu hi r-referendum kostituzzjonali li se jinżamm f’Diċembru.
Id-dilemma hi: Sa fejn tista’ tittieħed il-flessibiltà mingħajr ma tiżvixxra r-regoli ta’ tmexxija minn kull siwi?
****
Xi jridu l-Għawdxin?
F’konferenza reġjonali li l-uffiċċju tiegħi organizza f’Għawdex f’isem il-grupp tas-soċjalisti u d-demokratiċi fil-Parlament Ewropew, ħarġu żewġ spunti kontradittorji.
Minn naħa tqanqal l-ilment li ta’ spiss jagħmlu ż-żgħażagħ li m’hemmx futur xieraq għalihom f’Għawdex għax hemm nuqqas ta’ impjiegi.
Minn naħa oħra, tqajjem l-ilment li numru ta’ impriżi Għawdxin, speċjalment fit-turiżmu, mhumiex isibu lil min jimpjegaw f’Għawdex. Qed ikollhom saħansitra “jimportaw” ħaddiema Ewropej.
Ħaġa ċara li se tqum ir-risposta: Jekk imprendituri ma jkunux lesti jħallsu tajjeb, x’jippretendu? In-nies bilfors tibqa’ lura.
Tajjeb li wieħed jara jekk din it-tweġiba tagħtix l-ispjega kollha ta’ x’jinsab għaddej.
****
Bidla fir-reġim
Fil-kontroversja dwar is-Sirja bejn ir-Russja u l-Unjoni Ewropea mal-Istati Uniti, differenza fondamentali hi li tal-aħħar iridu jneħħu lil Assad mit-tmexxija tal-pajjiż, u r-Russja prattikament alleat ruħha miegħu.
L-Ewropej u l-Amerikani jridu bidla fir-reġim. Hu l-istess għan li tpoġġa għall-interventi tagħhom fl-Afganistan, fl-Iraq u fil-Libja. Fl-Afganistan wara l-atroċità fi New York ta’ Settembru 2001, forsi dil-ħaġa kellha tkun. Imma fl-Iraq u l-Libja, kull ma nkiseb bil-għan li jinbidel ir-reġim kienu imwiet ta’ ħafna nies innoċenti u instabbiltà ma taqta’ xejn fiż-żewġ pajjiżi.
Il-mod kif mexjin l-Ewropej u l-Amerikani fis-Sirja ma tantx jagħti tama li l-politika tagħhom se jkollha riżultati aħjar. Iridu jibdlu lil Assad (wieħed jista’ jaqbel li r-reġim tiegħu hu oppressiv ġieli b’mod barbaru) imma l-alternattiva li għandhom għalih xejn ma tipprometti għaqda u progress.
Mingħajr ma wieħed jaqbel mat-tattika Russa fir-rigward tal-belt ta’ Aleppo, xorta jista’ jikkonkludi li r-Russi għandhom raġun dwar is-Sirja ħafna aktar milli lesti jikkonċedulhom Ewropej u Amerikani.

English Version – Flexibility

“Flexibility” in the manner by which eurozone rules are being run has become a critical issue. As developed some two years ago, when it became apparent that France would not be able to meet the targets set for it under the rules, the concept of “flexibility” has been invoked to cover the special conditions that an economy could be facing for reasons ouside its control. In such situations, so it was announced, the rules do allow for new concessions in favour of that economy.

Since then, the same approach to flexibility has been used for Spain and Portugal.

Now, the Italian government is expecting to be given similar treatment, even if the annual budget it has prepared clearly breaches aims that were already agreed. The government is referring to the exceptional circumstances that Italy experienced with the arrival of refugees and other migrants, and the earthquake tragedies. However its major concern is the constitutional referendum due in December.

The dilemma is as follows: how far can the flexibility concept be taken without undermining irreparably eurozone management rules?

***

Gozitan expectations

During a regional conference my office organised in Gozo on behalf of the S & D group in the European Parliament, two contradictory points emerged.

On the one hand, the claim was raised, as is frequently done by young people in Gozo, that there is no future for them there due to a lack of jobs.

On the other hand, the point was made that a number of Gozitan enterprises, especially in tourism, are failing to find employees from Gozo. They are actually having to “import” European workers.

Clearly, the reply to this will be: if entrepreneurs are not willing to pay decent salaries, what do they expect? People will just keep back.

It is a good idea to explore whether this reaction explains satisfactorily all aspects of what is going on.

***

Regime change

In the ongoing controversy about Syria between Russia, and the US plus the EU, a fundamental cleavage arises from the latter’s objective to remove Assad from office. Meanwhile, Russia considers him to all intents and purposes, as her ally.

Europeans and Americans want regime change. It is the same objective they set for their interventions in Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya. In Afghanistan, following the atrocity of September 2001 in New York, perhaps they had no alternative. However in Iraq and Libya, all that regime change brought about was the death of many innocent people and persisting instability.

What Europe and the US are achieving in Syria hardly gives hope that they will get better results there. One can agree that the Assad regime they want to overturn is oppressive and operates in barbaric mode. But the alternative they have does not hold much promise for unity and progress in the future.

Without having to condone Russian military tactics in dealing with the siege of Aleppo, one can still conclude that about Syria, Russia’s position has much more to commend it than the Europeans and Americans would like to admit.

Facebook Comments

Post a comment