Money and power: the roots and future of Europe?

The origins of the EU as it currently exists were forged in the post-war years. The aim of the Union was to make future wars between members impossible by eliminating competition for natural resources through the common market, and bringing about mutually beneficial economic relationships. Later on, monetary union – the creation of the euro – was designed to make that even easier and bring members even closer together.

Those are the roots of the EU and the euro. There was a shared vision of what Europe could be and the flow of money from one country to another was used as a kind of social glue to align the interests of members and prevent future tensions erupting.

So it is ironic that the misuse of money now threatens to pull apart the Eurozone and the EU. Rather than a means to closer integration, it feels as if money has become an end in itself. That emphasis on the economy and the single-minded focus on the repayment of debt means Europe is losing the memory of why it was created. Instead of a shared identity, facilitated through money, it is forging a new kind of culture – an adversarial us-and-them approach that makes the euro club one in which equality is only paid lip service.

This change did not happen overnight. It has been going on for years behind the scenes but was only revealed at the financial crisis. (As Warren Buffett remarked, ‘Only when the tide goes out do you discover who’s been swimming naked.’) To take the most newsworthy example, the Greeks should not have borrowed so much, but neither should their lenders have kept throwing money at them, in the knowledge that they were almost certainly not creditworthy. That is not the behaviour of a friend who has your best interests at heart.

Debt almost inevitably involves a relationship of power. As Proverbs 22:7 reads, ‘The rich rule over the poor, and the borrower is slave to the lender.’ This is an observation, not the ideal, since the Bible also lays down requirements for lenders as well as borrowers. In practice, the demands made of the Greeks in the bailout negotiations effectively deny them sovereignty over their own country.

Taking a step back from the Greek crisis, then, the question of debt and money highlights a far deeper one about identity and culture: what kind of a union are we a part of? And what kind of club do we want to be a part of? Its purpose – implicitly if not explicitly – has surely shifted over the past several decades.

As the UK considers its position in the EU, we have to see the stated aim of closer integration for mutual benefit against the backdrop of how debt and money are being used in practice – and what our future role in those complex and fraught relationships might be.

About the author

Guy Brandon is the Research Director at the Jubilee Centre in Cambridge. He is a trained counsellor and freelance writer, and has a degree, MPhil and PhD in Old Testament theology from Cambridge University.