Editorial. EMU and chaotics

Citation

Coleman, J. (1998), "Editorial. EMU and chaotics", European Business Review, Vol. 98 No. 2. https://doi.org/10.1108/ebr.1998.05498bab.001

Editorial. EMU and chaotics

Edited byJohn Coleman

Editorial

EMU and chaotics

It is an amazing coincidence that Adair Turner's article arrived at the same time as Georges Anderla's memorable piece on "chaotics", especially in the light of the fact that the latter contributor was Head of the EC Information Technology Directorate. His manner of thinking is clearly reflected in the contribution of the Director-General of the CBI.

One sentence from Georges Anderla's article goes straight to the heart of it. He speaks of giving up "determinism, linear models and other cherished family treasures" and provides an alternative for those who are responsible for thinking about the future of Europe. In fact both of these highly intelligent men are warning against the kind of linear thinking that does not match the reality in Europe, and yet both cannot be described as other than very positive Europeans. If the British Government is to revamp the EU image during its presidency, as Charles Bremner tells in The Times (10 February 1998), it would do well to take on board the ideas of these two men, and revamp not just the image but also the fundamental linear thinking on which the European construction has been based in the latter half of the twentieth century.

In the light of this, the report of the Centre for Economic Policy Research needs little explanation, except to mention that it is a conscious effort to bring EMU into the area of serious analysis and look at the actual implications of the various options which the UK faces. What Britain must not do is to bury its head in the sand. And that is surely the one thing that Professor David Bagg, Francesca Giatazzi and Richard Portes firmly refuse to do.

In his letter Ted Dunn, a fairly frequent contributor to New European, plays the wild card in the pack ­ he considers the Eastern European countries. The longer-term impact of widening the European Union cannot be side-stepped. The widening of Europe cannot be brushed aside as an attempt to destabilise the present Union. The existence of a strong, rich economic bloc in Western Europe beside the poorer Eastern European countries would lead to a divided Europe, and thence to a dangerously destabilised continent with, as has been hinted, a gold curtain where once the iron curtain ran. The ideal of the European Union will never be achieved until the "barriers" are removed not just in the West, but over the whole of Europe, and until co-operation between all of Europe, as well as with the whole of the world outside, becomes the guiding principle of its relations.

As usual, Thomas Ország-Land's article, which has just arrived from Hungary, is a further reminder of the importance of Eastern Europe. It is about a corner of Europe which has shaken the foundations of modern civilisation: Yugoslavia. Only the greatest wisdom on the part of the West, after earlier miscalculations, can avert future disaster.