In Germany there is a habit, on Easter Eves almost all over the country are organized peace marches in all major cities. This year, with the participation of tens of thousands of Germans. At the same time the Berlin tripartite government has radically changed its economic policy by rapidly increasing its army’s re-armament. The other end of the Franco-German axis, Paris, just the other day recalled, a few days after the Macron report on the possibility of sending troops to Ukraine, that France has long-range nuclear missiles. Poland also under Tusk, just yesterday announced that it was preparing and re-emerging for a large-scale war. As for the European Council at its last meeting, the need for the Member States of Europe to increase their arms budgets immediately to levels capable of facing a large-scale war conflict was underlined. The European Council of the EU. It is ‘prepared’ in other words for war, not in words, but in concrete reorientation of economic policy in Europe, from the ‘green transition’ to the war re-armament of its member countries. Have we realized this or is our attention completely absorbed in the internal political “games” of the domestic economic-political establishment? The seriousness of this war threat at European institutional level becomes even more clear and deafening even for the “political” … heavy, with the announcements of economic activity actors – such as the Houses of Evaluation – at this level, with Reports to investors internationally and from partner to governments, with recommendations to adjust their policies. The reason is for Moody’s recently released report (29/3) which warns investors that NATO countries’ turn to an unprecedented arms race “will complicate debt reduction efforts and could weaken their credit profile”. Stressing that this could lead to an increase in the level of social tensions. It explains very clearly that under the present circumstances governments in Europe are obliged to finance the increase in equipment costs through the proportional reduction of public expenditure on Health, Education and Social Policies. It becomes particularly specific for economies with high current debt servicing needs. Moody’s “compositions” did not fall from the sky. Already a decade ago the Wall Street Journal had reported that Europe – and EU governments – are obliged to choose whether to support their defence or protect social spending in their budgets… And of course, if, under the current extremely difficult budgetary conditions, governments choose the ‘sacrifice’ of social expenditure in favour of increasing equipment costs, the political consequences will be the consequent change in the political scene. The choices as some commentators have pointed out at European level are not much. If social costs for defence are sacrificed, social conflicts will be the direct consequence. If the ‘defensive’ expenditure increases are attempted at the same time without a reduction in social policy, then the only way out is to increase debt. But the consequences in this case on the market side will be direct at the level of debt service costs. And of course the EU is not a USA, which can “load” – up to a certain point – these consequences through the dollar to “foreigners”… In any case the ‘environment’ in Europe is changing and the Europeans who are invited to go down to the polls in two months do not seem to have realised the upcoming ‘threat’…
The EU is “ready” for war do we know that? And Moody’s “says” how our budgets must be adjusted
—