On Jan 6, 2015, at 1:41 PM, raghu <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 11:05 AM, Marv Gandall <[email protected]> wrote: > Financial Times columnist Wolfgang Münchau sees a contradiction at the heart > of Syriza’s program - a determination to negotiate an orderly default on > Greece’s unsustainable debt while remaining in the eurozone. [...] > > “While Syriza is right about debt restructuring, it is also disingenuous by > ruling out a eurozone exit”, he says. "If you advocate debt restructuring, > you would need to answer the question of what you would do if the > negotiations fail." > > > Munchau is full of shit. It is true that Syriza would need to "answer the > question of what you would do if the negotiations fail". But they would only > need to answer it for themselves. Why does Munchau think they would or should > publicly disclose their negotiating strategy? > > There is no contradiction here. It is a gamble - maybe even a bluff - on > Syriza's part that the EU can be forced into supporting an orderly debt > default without submitting to austerity policies.The EU is not going to like > that, but why assume that it will be Syriza rather than the EU who will be > forced to capitulate?
If Tspiras and the other Syriza leaders were bluffing, they would be boldly announcing their intention to leave the eurozone unless the debt was radically restructured, not offering assurances to the other side that this was not an option . If they were considering it as an option, they would be preparing their base and the people for that possibility. They’re doing neither because, contrary to Munchau and despite Merkel’s bluster, they are clearly hoping that a compromise is possible. I expect Greece would do better if it left the eurozone and restored a sovereign currency, making its industries more competitive and giving the state the wherewithal to implement a full-blown program of social spending and job creation. I doubt Syriza’s leaders would privately dispute this. Apart from the elites, most Greeks, and not only on the far left, think eurozone membership has been a disaster. The hesitation of the current leadership is therefore political. An independent socialist Greece would undoubtedly inspire the masses throughout Europe in the same way that the Russian Revolution did nearly a century ago. But as in the case of Russia, it would equally alarm the ruling classes in Europe, the US, and elsewhere, and they would quickly act to isolate and overthrow the new regime from within and without. It ia all a question of the relationship of forces, including for the Syriza leadership. It is not confident enough of the outcome to risk a confrontation it thinks it would lose, and so it would rather seek a compromise. Its left-wing critics, on the other hand, believe that not to act boldly is a recipe for defeat, and that radical action is necessary to favourably alter the prevailing relationship of forces inside and outside the country. Both sides can draw on history to support their claims. Unfortunately, whether a strategy proves to be disasterously "opportunistic" or "adventurist" is not something which can be foretold with any degree of certainty. It only becomes obvious in retrospect, and you need to be deeply engaged in the struggle to make what is at the time only an educated guess about your prospects. _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
