Sicherheit und Risiko

ESPRIT St.Gallen Business Review
projects (as opposed to the build-up of productive capacities)
did not accomplish their implied objective of
stimulating domestic economic growth and ultimately
transforming Greece into a competitive export nation.
Hence, Greece’s economy remains dependent upon its
flagging tourism industry and agricultural production.
When compared with the economic landscapes
of advanced industrialized Western states like Germany
and France, Greece’s manufacturing, technology,
and financial sectors seem all but non-existent.
This apparent failure to develop now manifests
itself in the identification of corruption, rent-seeking,
and wastefulness as the hallmarks of Greek national
character. Additional financial support for a supposedly
irresponsible government has been difficult to
come by, and more often than not has come with unbearable
and devastating conditions. Greece’s lenders
in the EU and the IMF have not been kind, demanding
steep spending cuts and austerity measures in return
for additional financing necessary to maintain the
state. On October 9, amid raucous protests in Greece
and elsewhere and just three days before the Nobel
Committee’s Peace Prize announcement, Eurogroup
chairman Jean-Claude Juncker, speaking to a group
of finance ministers of the 17-nation single currency
area, touted his advocacy for what amounts to highstakes,
high-risk political blackmail: “We stressed that
before the next disbursement Greece clearly and credibly
should demonstrate its commitment to fully implement
the programme - and 89 prior actions from
March should be implemented by the 18th of October
at the latest.“ Most recently, German finance minister
Wolfgang Schäuble referred to Greece‘s state finances
as a “bottomless pit.”
While over a quarter of the Greek labor force remains
unemployed, public funds continue to go toward
shooting water cannons and teargas at protesters
who demand that their government refrain from
implementing further austerity measures under the
pressure of Northern European creditor states. As
one Greek protester puts it, “They are rich, they have
everything and we have nothing and are fighting for
crumbs, for survival.” Given its initial starting point,
its competitors’ inherent advantages, and the zerosum
logic of the European common market, one must
ask: How could anyone expect Greece to become the
next story of successful capitalist development, when
this small nation on the southern periphery of the EU
was competing with the likes of Germany and France?
Risk and Security
As we examine the EU’s current political circumstances,
it bears acknowledgement that it is primarily
the heads of northern European states (and financial
market analysts, for that matter) who frame the
myriad manifestations of social discontent currently
found in Europe as matters of “risk” and “security”
(the journal‘s topic of discussion in the present issue).
Ultimately, it‘s all about perspective. For Greek
workers, subjected to budget cuts and austerity measures,
and stereotyped and slandered as “lazy” by media
around the globe, the hypocrisy of awarding the
Nobel Peace Prize to the European Union is justifiably
reason enough to engage in violent protests. Their anger
is directed not only at the Greek government and
domestic economic elites but also toward the wealthy
states of northern Europe, and at the EU itself. Over
time, competition in the common market produced
winning and losing states in the EU. And these differences
that emerge from competition are about to
be institutionalized insofar as national governments
of debt-ridden European states are expected to cede
part of their fiscal sovereignty to the EU, which is effectively
run by two nations: France and Germany. As
it stands, unless there is a major structural overhaul
of Europe‘s economic system on both the national and
supra-national level, responsibility for the consequences
to the continent‘s heightened risk and increasingly
volatile security environment will lie squarely with
the European Union.
About the Author
Patrick Hamm is a
Lecturer on Sociology at
Harvard University, where
he currently teaches a
course on inequality and
poverty in capitalist societies.
Born in Germany, he
holds a Bachelor‘s degree
in Ethics, Politics & Economics from Yale University
and received both a Master’s Degree and Ph.D.
in Sociology from Harvard University, where he
focused on the areas of political economy and economic
development. Most recently, his research
documenting the adverse consequences of privatization
policies in former socialist economies was
published in the American Sociological Review‘s
April 2012 issue (with co-authors Lawrence P.
King and David Stuckler from the University of
Cambridge).
Website: http://www.wjh.harvard.edu/soc/faculty/hamm/index.html
Email: phamm@fas.harvard.edu
Winter 2012 39