Spain and Italy block the conclusions of the European Council

Spain and Italy say no. The countries most affected by the coronavirus pandemic, the ones that are most infected and dead, those that have been closed for the longest and those that foresee the most severe economic repercussions have planted this Thursday before their European partners . As happened in June 2012, with Rajoy and Mario Monti, today Pedro Sánchez and Giuseppe Conte, after four long hours of teleconference with the heads of state and government of the EU, have said that they did not accept the conclusions, the document with the minimum terms agreed among the 27 on the reaction against the coronavirus. At least as they are.

Madrid and Rome prefer that there be nothing in writing at the highest level than insufficient measures and indirect mentions of bailouts with 'men in black' supervising the national accounts. A lazy role, of course with no Marshall plan in sight. No mutualization of draft. No credible route hour to equip the Eurozone with the necessary mechanisms for precisely situations like the current one. A decision that in view of what happened on the eve was not entirely unexpected but it is forceful. It is rare and shows without makeup how the closest allies are broken in one of the most delicate moments.

After almost five hours of teleconference, the President of the European Council, Chales Michel, is trying to find a solution, looking for some cession from the countries of the north to avoid the blockade of the south. It seems complicated, and from Rome the messages seem definitive, but Michel has not yet thrown in the towel.

In the real world, that of the hundreds of millions of Europeans suffering the worst pandemic in a century, a meeting of the heads of state and government of the 27 to make urgent decisions with which to try to minimize the effects of an imminent and brutal contraction (and perhaps depression) has to end with clear economic decisions, a powerful message of unity and words that calm. However, in the real world, realistic but more alien to reality, things do not work that way. The European Councils continue to be meetings with a regulated and restricted agenda, codes and procedures. Useful in peacetime, the only way that has been found after decades of trial and error to move forward, albeit slowly. But insufficient before challenges like the current ones.

The European Council has not responded this Thursday and leaves more doubts than certainties. The image that is transmitted is one of passivity, inefficiency . Of completely different division and interpretations of the severity of what happens. With a deep fracture, again, between north and south. That goes beyond the conjuncture, the way of understanding the role of public spending or which debt and deficit thresholds generate the best return in a shock like the current one. This is a separate Union in its lowest hours and not ready to respond as a block, with the forcefulness of the United States. Without learning from past mistakes. Some speak of "moral hazard", others fear reaching 1,000 deaths per day.

What for politicians and diplomats are important steps forward and essential technical work, for public opinion is a slap in the face. Fuel for anti-Europeanism and cynicism. The expected result of the European Council, as usual, was a document of conclusions , a paper of a few pages in which the ambassadors of the 27 before the EU and the so-called 'Sherpas', the trusted experts of the first ministers, they work for weeks. It is one of the most powerful and revered instruments in the community world, for which every word, every comma is fought. Every inclusion and omission. After apparent obviousness there are sleepless nights of discussion, because they hide legal, political and economic consequences, although few understand them outside Brussels .

And that has happened this week. The conclusions of this European Council had six pages and little more than 1,500 words, and were entirely dedicated to the coronavirus, except for passing references to the opening of accession negotiations with North Macedonia and Albania or the situation on the Greek border. with Turkey. There were reflections, welcomes, and good wishes on future research, reaction, and investment plans in the drafts, but little else. If on Tuesday the Eurogroup passed the hot potato to the leaders, today they were going to do exactly the same thing back. But Spain and Italy have preferred to block it.

The delegations of the 27 and the institutions have been trying for more than 10 days to define what is the necessary strategy. Eurobonds (or coronabonds) that mutualise risks. Rescue programs through the Mede, the European mechanism created in the previous crisis precisely for that, and which entail hard conditionality and structural reforms. Credit lines from the same Mede, but trying a symbolic conditionality or that the 27 sign up at the same time to request it to prevent the stigma of the most affected, which was the favorite option for many. Emergency mechanisms of the European Commission or the EIB. On the table many options. The Eurogroup on Tuesday seemed to find "broad consensus" on the Mede credit line option, but there is no unanimity. And on Wednesday, nine countries sent a joint letter to Charles Michel asking for joint issues, Eurobonds or Coronabonds.

There was and is no consensus on the next phase either. Spain or Italy, the most pressured, want not only a quick emergency plan, which could include those credit lines if there is nothing better, but also a Marshall Plan, a massive investment strategy and unprecedented since the Second World War to reactivate. But there is little appetite and the fight over his mention in the conclusions was also important. The Netherlands and Germany, Austria, with the same dynamic as in 2008 or 2012, continue to say no to almost everything. They believe that by allowing more spending at the national level, what was approved last Monday in Ecofin by temporarily freezing the Stability and Growth Pact, the main thing is done. And they don't want any more firm steps until they really know what the extent of the economic devastation is.

Much of the discussion in the hours leading up to the meeting revolved around a couple of expressions. The draft with which the day started read: "We appreciate the progress made by the Eurogroup on measures to support the pandemic, within the provisions of the Mede Treaty. We invite the Eurogroup to comply without delay and develop the technical specifications needed next week. " However, the mid-afternoon one was different: "We note the progress made by the Eurogroup in supporting measures against the pandemic. We invite the Eurogroup to comply without delay and develop the necessary technical specifications in the coming weeks."

For the untrained eye the difference is minimal. Instead, experts see a fierce fight. Madrid and Rome refused to constrain any future decision to the Mede framework . Allowing that role would have given the hawks arguments not to reopen even the discussion of mutualized emissions or something much more aggressive. If it is not in the leaders' text, it does not exist. So they demanded to withdraw the mention of the rescue mechanism. But it is that in addition, the word "Treaty" was the way of the Hanseatics to impose conditionality, the one that now appears in the norms, without any nuance. For five hours the leaders argued. And although there seemed to be a consensus to withdraw any mention, those from the south have lost patience before what they see a lack of bleeding solidarity and a very short vision.

There was also a logistical question. In a normal summit, bilateral meetings can be stopped, organized and improvised. And the 'Sherpas' swirl on a piece of paper to find common points . Being remote, by teleconference, the option to start rewriting everything was almost impossible. And yet it has been tried, separately, while Josep Borrell, high representative, addressed the issue of Turkey.

The reaction of some countries has in any case been curious, to say the least. Conte's environment, which is under extraordinary internal pressure, with a large part of its Parliament completely closed to the possibility of using the Mede, an instrument that the Lega has managed to turn toxic, explained to the press that his Government wants him to be resurrected the Five Presidents Report , a very ambitious 2015 document calling for a deepening of the Eurozone that is light years from the current appetite.

And he wants there to be, on that basis, a new proposal in 10 days, something impossible and that seems a challenge to the Dutch orthodox position. Stretch the maxima so that the center moves a little to your side. The European Council, the rulers, never got to "take note" of that report, something that seems insignificant to ordinary citizens but is the closest thing to an angry offense in community language. A maximum contempt showing that he had it and would not have any route.

When their offices were seated this afternoon, all the leaders had already read the Mario Dragh i article in 'Financial Times'. He warned them that taking on higher public debt and taking it away from private debt was inevitable. He warned them that the decisions they make now are going to change the lives of millions of people. And he warned them that "vacillating, now, can have irreversible effects." Unfortunately, it seems that many of them were not paying attention.

According to the criteria of The Trust Project

• Eurogroup
• Spain
• Italy
• Turkey
• Madrid
• Albania
• European Comission
• WWII
• Austria
• Germany
• Pedro Sánchez
• Greece
• Josep Borrell
• U.S
• Macedonia
• Mariano Rajoy
• Mario Draghi

AlicanteBenidorm, sunny day and party a few hours after the total closure due to the coronavirus

CoronavirusTransportes admits "crowds" in Cercanías and attributes it to "inevitable" technical problems

InterviewLuis Garicano: "What happened in France and Germany hoarding medical supplies has been one of the most serious attacks on the EU"