WHO is having a better or worse Covid-19 crisis? The comparisons will continue through and beyond the crisis: did authoritarian regimes do well or badly, did the south-east Asian democracies get it right, why were the US and UK so tardy, might the EU collapse?
For the European Union, the multi-faceted crisis has exposed it on multiple flanks. Health is mostly a member state responsibility, not an EU one. Yet calls for action by Brussels, and criticisms of its slow response, took off sharply in March. The EU’s single market, and its Schengen border-free zone, took a rapid hit as individual states haphazardly put up border controls.
And the deep fault lines within the Eurozone, barely healed from last decade’s euro crisis, sprang back into prominence with a furious row in the last couple of weeks. Hard-pressed and angry Italian and Spanish political leaders said the future of the EU itself was in doubt. Jacques Delors, the 94-year-old former Commission leader, put out a rare statement underlining the EU was in mortal danger.
Yet, last Thursday night, as the EU paused for the long Easter weekend, bad-tempered and hard-to-coordinate video calls between the EU’s finance ministers, in true EU style, partly found a way forward and partly kicked the ball further down the road. The finance ministers’ deal resolved, for now, the bitter stand-off between north and south – epitomised as an Italy-Netherlands fight (with Italian paper La Stampa apparently even taking the Netherlands off its weather map for a couple of days).
A €500 billion pandemic support package should now be signed off by the EU’s leaders next week. It limits conditionality on financial assistance from the European Stability Mechanism – a key demand of Italy, not wanting to be treated as Greece was in the euro crisis. But it leaves the divisions over corona bonds and mutualisation of debt in the post-crisis recovery as a battle for the weeks and months ahead.
Is this a failing EU or this is a typical Brussels muddling through? Perhaps a bit of both. Hard-fought eurozone fights are nothing new. But the inadequacies of the eurozone’s fiscal tools in a crisis have been cast into the cruel light of day yet again. And the intensity of the corona crisis in Italy and Spain, and their sense of European neighbours taking time to come to their assistance (though they did in the end), has sharpened the political and public sense of a lack of solidarity at the moment when it was most needed.
How this plays out depends on the path the crisis takes next – in its health, economic, political and social dimensions. The Italian government is happy with the support deal for now. And the European Commission has stepped in to coordinate restrictions on external borders, proposed a €100bn unemployment reinsurance scheme (part of the €500 billion package), and coordinated joint medical procurement amongst other actions.
But member states have pushed back on the Commission’s intended joint lockdown exit proposals – overstepping its powers on a core issue. And Hungary’s unlimited emergency powers have yet to see a robust Brussels response.
In a crisis like no other, the EU has managed in way that is perhaps true to form. Slow at the start, big public rows, divergent member state responses – yet in the end moving forward. Will it be enough? Time will tell – but don’t write the EU off for now.
Kirsty Hughes is Director, Scottish Centre on European Relations
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here