That is because you clearly did not follow the events when they were unravelling. If you think that Wolfgang Schauble(German Finance minister) and Angela Merkel were spoonfed stuff from the ECB and the IMF, then clearly you have read Varoufakis and all these events quite wrong. Schauble and Merkel would at times dismiss everyone from the room(including the ECB, IMF and all the other finance ministers) and sort things out in person
with the Greeks. Can you conceive of what that actually means in practise?
When Varoufakis says "finance ministers were kept in the dark" he means that he
was kept in the dark because he was not a neoliberal, like the rest of them and Schauble would not inform him
like he was informing and lobbying the rest, that is why he was eventually ordered to depart the room itself and that is why everyone was voting with Schauble and not with Varoufakis during these sham meetings. What he means is that this informality, where a finance minister cannot be informed before hand formally through the EU
is what is wrong. Varoufakis explicitly wants to strengthen EU institutions. The rest were informed informally
through national channels and were ready to vote with whatever Schauble had in mind. Schauble and Merkel are rightwing neoliberals elected by the German people, not
Steven American wrote:YVDV your vision does vary.
Can you please avoid abbreviations? I do not understand your abbreviation and I assume noone reading this thread understands it either.
Steven American wrote:My take was that we finance ministers were kept in the dark and spoon fed what they were going to rubberstamp.
The IMF, ECB, and whatever the 3rd one was didn't provide any info on paper and talked for 30 min. [10 min. each] and then the decision was reached.
And who was forcing the finance ministers to vote with Schauble and not with Varoufakis?
Steve_American wrote:They got rid of him because he complained and told the truth.
He said all these after
he was removed so evidently that cannot be the reason. Which truth are you referring? They got rid of him, just like they had got rid of Papandreou a few years earlier and whom Varoufakis was advising before he joined SYRIZA and became a Finance Minister, and they did it because they were both the only pro-EU social-democrats with the balls and intellect to stand up to the Germans and call for Eurobonds
and EU solutions to EU problems instead of ad-hoc solutions involving the IMF, invented by the Germans.
Lastly if you have any doubt whatsoever about my interpretation
, then allow me to show you what Varoufakis is clearly stating himself:
Yanis Varoufakis wrote:Wolfgang Schäuble may heave left the finance ministry but his policy for turning the eurozone into an iron cage of austerity, that is the very antithesis of a democratic federation, lives on.
What is remarkable about Dr Schäuble’s tenure was how he invested heavily in maintaining the fragility of the monetary union, rather than eradicating it in order to render the eurozone macro-economically sustainable and resilient. Why did Dr Schäuble aim at maintaining the eurozone’s fragility? Why was he, in this context, ever so keen to maintain the threat of Grexit? The simple answer is: Because a state of permanent fragility was instrumental to his strategy for using the threat of expulsion from the euro (or even of Germany’s withdrawal from it) to discipline the deficit countries – chiefly France.
Deep in Dr Schäuble’ thinking there was the belief that, as a federation is infeasible, the euro is a glorified fixed exchange rate regime. And the only way of maintaining discipline within such a regime was to keep alive the threat of expulsion or exit. But to keep that threat alive, the eurozone could not be allowed to develop the instruments and institutions that would stop it from being fragile. Thus, the eurozone’s permanent fragility was, from Dr Schäuble’s perspective an end-in-itself, rather than a failure.
EN EL ED EM ON
...take your common sense with you, and leave your prejudices behind...