How to Save the Euro

At The Economist, "It requires urgent action on a huge scale. Unless Germany rises to the challenge, disaster looms":

SO GRAVE, so menacing, so unstoppable has the euro crisis become that even rescue talk only fuels ever-rising panic. Investors have sniffed out that Europe’s leaders seem unwilling ever to do enough. Yet unless politicians act fast to persuade the world that their desire to preserve the euro is greater than the markets’ ability to bet against it, the single currency faces ruin. As credit lines gum up and outsiders plead for action, it is not just the euro that is at risk, but the future of the European Union and the health of the world economy.

Keep reading. The piece keeps mentioning the "restructuring of debt," which follows from the fact that some European states simply can't make good on their obligations, and sovereign default would hammer commercial banks and cause even deeper economic turmoil. But the larger issue is whether EU members deal with the crisis in multilateral fashion or retreat to narrower self-interest, casting off Greece to its own misfortunes, and so forth...

RELATED: At New York Times, "Suddenly, Over There Is Over Here" (via Memeorandum).

Meetings on European Debt Crisis End in Debate, but Little Progress

This story's interesting beyond the financial crisis itself. Europeans snubbed Tim Geithner, but why? They think he's a clown? They think the Obama administration's a joke? Or America's weakened structurally, and it wouldn't have mattered who was Treasury Secretary?

See New York Times:

WROCLAW, Poland — European finance ministers ended a two-day meeting here Saturday without making substantial progress toward solving the region’s debt crisis, or any pledge to recapitalize Europe’s banks.

The meetings were highlighted by the appearance by Timothy F. Geithner, the United States treasury secretary, whose advice, and warnings, drew a tepid reaction from the euro zone’s finance ministers. And Mr. Geithner’s rejection Friday of a European idea for a global tax on financial transactions prompted a debate about whether Europe should go ahead on its own.

Meanwhile, with an October deadline looming for international lenders to agree to the release of around 8 billion euros, or $11 billion, of aid to Greece, without which it could default on its debt, George Papandreou, the Greek prime minister, canceled a trip to the United States.

“The coming week is particularly critical for the implementation of the July 21 decisions in the euro area and the initiatives which the country must undertake,” Mr. Papandreou said in a statement on Saturday.

The attendance of an American official at Friday’s meeting was unusual, and Jacek Rostowski, the finance minister of Poland who invited Mr. Geithner, said it showed “unity within the transatlantic family.”

That glossed over the grumbling about Mr. Geithner’s comments from several European ministers Friday, including Maria Fekter of Austria, who publicly said she was unimpressed with Mr. Geithner’s contribution.

Yet the American plea for urgent decisions to shore up the euro zone was echoed Saturday by two European ministers whose nations have stayed outside the single currency.

Roman Gladiator School Found in Austria

This is cool.

At National Geographic, "Huge Gladiator School Found Buried in Austria" (via Maggie's Farm).

Also at Daily Mail, "Archaeologists discover remains of a Roman gladiator school in Austria."

Unseen Photographs Throw Light on First World War

At Independent UK, "Exclusive: The unseen photographs that throw new light on the First World War."

A treasure trove of First World War photographs was discovered recently in France. Published here for the first time, they show British soldiers on their way to the Somme. But who took them? And who were these Tommies marching off to die?

The slideshow display works pretty well. Scroll forward to picture #46 to see a black artillery soldier flanked by two white comrades. That's gotta be trippy for 1915.

NATO is No Go Without American Power

At Wall Street Journal, "NATO Strikes Show Europe Defense Dilemma":

The military campaign over Libya has delivered a serious blow to a project long nurtured at the heart of the European Union: a European military capability independent of the U.S., defense analysts and officials say.



For years, the EU sought to build what came to be called its Common Security and Defense Policy as some nations, led by France, wanted the freedom to act militarily without Washington's interference.



For Paris, this meant creating a military command structure and forces separate from the U.S.-dominated North Atlantic Treaty Organization. This vision has never come close to fruition, not least because the U.S. and U.K. saw it as duplicating NATO's role.



Ironically, it was the first-ever NATO military operation to be led by Europeans, with the U.S. deciding to take a back seat, that suggests that ambition may never be fulfilled.



Central to this has been the move in 2009 by French President Nicolas Sarkozy to reverse the 1966 decision of President Charles de Gaulle and reintegrate France into NATO's military command.



On Wednesday evening, Mr. Sarkozy told assembled diplomats in Paris that NATO "has shown itself to be an indispensable tool in the service of our military operations." The success of military operations over Libya was possible because France had reassumed its position in NATO's military command, he said.

More at that top link.



Madeleine Albright once called the U.S. the "indispensable nation", and for all of our difficulties, world events keep proving it over and over.

To the Shores of Tripoli

From Robert Kagan, at Weekly Standard:

... the end of Qaddafi’s rule is a great accomplishment for the Obama administration and for the president personally. It is a shame that some administration officials are trying to downplay the role of the United States in this whole affair, absurdly trying to turn the “leading from behind” gaffe into a kind of Obama doctrine. In fact, the United States was not “leading from behind.” By far the most important decision taken by any world leader in this entire episode—the decision that made all the difference—was President Obama’s decision that the United States and the world could not stand by and see the people of Ben ghazi massacred.



That American choice was the turning point. All praise to France’s Nicolas Sarkozy and Britain’s David Cameron for being ahead of the president in seeing the need for armed action—just as Margaret Thatcher was ahead of George H.W. Bush in seeing the need for action against Saddam Hussein in 1990. But here is the plain and critical truth of the matter: None of this could have been done without the United States leading the way.



Only the United States has the military capacity, the weaponry, the surveillance technology, and the skill to open a safe path for the air and ground war against Qaddafi’s forces. France and Britain alone would not and probably could not have done the job without unacceptable risk to their forces, which were very thin to begin with. In the early days, especially, American A-10 and AC-130 ground attack aircraft were critical in pummeling Qaddafi’s armored vehicles and forcing them to halt offensives against rebel positions. In the last days of the conflict, American high-tech surveillance allowed the rebels to pinpoint the positions of Qaddafi forces in and around Tripoli. Throughout months of fighting, prowling American Predator drones forced Qaddafi and his men to keep their heads down.



The president and his secretary of state also carried out an adept diplomacy that eventually garnered not only European but, remarkably, Arab support as well. This in turn forced both Russia and China—fearful of Arab wrath—to acquiesce. There were costs, of course: a U.N. resolution inadequate to the task at hand and the usual problem of trying to keep many players on board during a mission. On balance, however, it was worth it. The administration was surely right that the intervention would be more effective if it did not appear to be exclusively an American operation and that the combination of European and Arab support for removing Qaddafi was enough of a prize to warrant some compromises.



But the larger point is that, again, only the United States could have pulled all these disparate political and regional forces together. No other nation, not France, not Great Britain, not even a united EU (which German opposition prevented) could have managed this global diplomatic task. In this allegedly “post-American” world, the United States remains both indispensable and irreplaceable.

That's a dramatically different take than Max Boot's, "Did Libya Vindicate 'Leading From Behind'?" Boot doesn't love America's reserve role in these interventions, especially since success requires American military power to begin with. Why shrug off our leadership role and argue "we've got your back"? Kagan just calls it an American victory no matter how you slice it. But all along I've found Victor Davis Hanson's arguments to be the most compelling, which hold, for example, that the Obama administration hadn't the slightest clue about toppling Gaddafi, as evidenced by the administration's pathetic flip-flopping on the goal of regime change or not.



In any case, Kagan and Boot agree on one thing: The war's not over yet.

Libya War Not Yet Over

Well, I need to start watching MSNBC more often. I just love Reva Bhalla, Director of Analysis at STRATFOR:

And at Telegraph UK, "Gaddafi releases new audio message," and "Gaddafi vows to 'let Libya burn' as he defies calls for surrender."



Plus, "Libya: rebels prepare to seize Bani Walid."

Israel Largely Vindicated by U.N. Marmara Report: Turkey Expels Israeli Ambassador, Threatens Legal Reprisals

At New York Times, "Report Finds Naval Blockade by Israel Legal but Faults Raid." The report was issued last month but its release delayed while Ankara and Jerusalem sought to patch up differences. Good luck with that, it turns out. See Israel Matzav, "Turkey expels Israeli envoy," and Jerusalem Post, "Turkey vows legal action against Israelis involved in raid":

Turkey said on Friday it will seek to prosecute all Israelis responsible for crimes committed during an Israeli raid on a ship bound for the Gaza Strip that killed nine Turks in May 2010.



"Turkey will take legal actions against the Israeli soldiers and all other officials responsible for the crimes committed and pursue the matter resolutely," Turkey's embassy in Washington said in a statement.



The threat follows a UN report that confirmed the legality of Israel's naval blockade of Gaza but said Israel had used unreasonable force in the raid. Both Turkey and Israel disputed some of the conclusions of the so-called Palmer Report.



The names of the Israeli marines involved in the raid have not been released, so only ranking commanders overseeing the operation could be identified if Turkey follows through with the legal action.



The full text of the UN report, which was leaked on Thursday, was delivered to Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon's office on Friday and will soon be officially published, UN spokesman Eduardo del Buey told reporters.

Of course, Turkey would have acted precisely as Israel did if faced with the same situation. And click on that New York Times piece. Turkey's mad that Israel has the right under international law to impose a blockade.



ADDED: At Astute Bloggers, "IS ISLAMIST TURKEY ATTEMPTING TO INSTIGATE A NATO WAR AGAINST ISRAEL?‏"

The Invasion of Poland, September 1, 1939

I posted on this last September:

Berlin Copes With Car Burning Surge

Via Google, here's the headline at Wall Street Journal, "Berlin Authorities Struggle to Stop Car Burning Surge."

BERLIN — German authorities are scrambling to contain and make sense of a surge in car torchings in the nation's capital that have raised fears that the vandalism spree could escalate into the broader, more dangerous forms of street crime that have recently hit other pockets of Europe.



Setting cars on fire has become a popular form of class protest and petty crime in recent years in Berlin, triggered in part by tensions over fast-rising rents and other forms of gentrification in this relatively poor city compared with other major German cities. But the latest spate—including some 60 cars torched in four nights—marks a sharp surge in the arson attacks. While previous car burnings were largely confined to Berlin's up-and-coming working class neighborhoods, such as Kreuzberg and Friedrichshain, the latest spate has rapidly spread to its more affluent western districts.



They also come amid a wave of street violence across other parts of Europe—most notably riots in London and other U.K. cities this month—that so far has largely left Europe's largest economy relatively unscathed. Elsewhere on the Continent, violence has erupted in countries chafing under austerity measures, such as protests marred by police clashes in Spain and Greece and the deadly firebombing of an Athens bank building just over a year ago.



In Berlin, the circumstances behind the rash of car torchings appear largely local, but many residents and crime experts believe growing economic tensions within the city limits play a role. While Germany's national unemployment rate hovers around 7%, in Berlin it remains stuck at 13.5%. Meanwhile rising rents and real-estate prices are displacing more of its poorer residents from its central and increasingly trendy neighborhoods.

And checking back at that Google search, a number of articles have mystified titles, such as "Is 'Tourism Fatigue' Behind Berlin Arson Wave?", at Spiegel, and "Berliners Still Can't Work Out Who's Torching Their Luxury Cars," at Business Insider. But c'mon, there's no mystery. Business Day nails it, "Berlin’s far left vents fury on ‘fat cat’ cars":

ARSONISTS had set fire to 26 cars in Berlin in the past two days, mainly Mercedes-Benzes, BMWs and Audis, police said yesterday, bringing the number torched in the city this year to at least 138.



Far-left extremists were targeting German luxury cars, symbols of the country’s wealth and export prowess, police said.



"The arsonists want to hit what they say are ‘fat cats’," Berlin police spokesman Michael Gassen said. A special unit was investigating the fires as political crimes after the police received letters claiming responsibility that derided globalisation, gentrification and rising rents, he said. No arrests have been made in the most recent string of attacks.



The fires come amid worsening economic data and political discontent in the country. German growth, last year the motor of Europe’s recovery, almost ground to a halt in the second quarter. Gross domestic product, adjusted for seasonal effects, rose 0,1% from the first quarter, the Federal Statistics Office said this week.



Almost two years into the European debt crisis , restiveness over Germany’s contribution to rescues is weighing on Chancellor Angela Merkel’s coalition as voters rebel over providing aid to fellow euro-zone countries.



When Germany in 2009 experienced its worst recession since the Second World War , a record 221 cars were torched.



A key factor in the unrest is that about 40% of youths are either without a high school certificate or a paying job, said Johannes Becker, head of the Centre for Conflict Studies at the University of Marburg. "In Britain … people are predisposed to jumping on the bandwagon . They see that something is up and want to be part of it, to add some fuel to the fire, as it were. With these cars in Berlin, they are in contrast consciously trying to send a message."

See? That wasn't hard. Far left groups are seizing the moment to heighten revolutionary tensions, but since it's not likely any of the European democracies are at risk of their governments being overthrown, the violence ends up being purely anarchist and nihilist. And that's all you're going to get from the progressive, neo-communist left. It's all of a piece. And it's not only murderously destructive, it's morally reprehensible. Freakin' ASFLs.

Why Won't Germans Have More Babies?

At Der Spiegel, "A Land Without Children."



A lot with children is a land without laughter and vitality.



But sure to read down to the bottom for Parts II and III.

Pat Condell on the London Riots

Via Blazing Cat Fur:

The New Britannia

From Mark Steyn, at National Review:

The trick in this business is not to be right too early. A week ago I released my new book — the usual doom’n’gloom stuff — and, just as the sensible prudent moderate chaps were about to dismiss it as hysterical and alarmist, Standard & Poor’s went and downgraded the United States from its AAA rating for the first time in history. Obligingly enough they downgraded it to AA+, which happens to be the initials of my book: After America. Okay, there’s not a lot of “+” in that, but you can’t have everything.



But the news cycle moves on, and a day or two later, the news shows were filled with scenes of London ablaze, as gangs of feral youths trashed and looted their own neighborhoods. Several readers wrote to taunt me for not having anything to say on the London riots. As it happens, Chapter Five of my book is called “The New Britannia: The Depraved City.” You have to get up pretty early in the morning to beat me to Western civilization’s descent into barbarism. Anyone who’s read it will fully understand what’s happening on the streets of London. The downgrade and the riots are part of the same story: Big Government debauches not only a nation’s finances but its human capital, too.

Keep reading.



It's really astounding, the prophecy in that book. Don't miss it.

Rioters to Be Stripped of State Benefits in Britain's Online Petition

At Telegraph UK, "UK riots: we will make criminals suffer, say MPs." Also, at Montreal Gazette, "Britons call for looters to lose benefits":

And at London's Daily Mail, "Rioter's family is first to be kicked out of their council house because of teenage son's 'looting'."

UK Riots: Young Yobs Back on Streets Despite David Cameron's Pledge

At Telegraph UK (via Theo Spark).

Prime Minister David Cameron Vows Crackdown on Rioters

Cameron wants to go after street thug anonymity, "Social Media, and Facemasks, Are Targets After British Riots." The full text of the prime minister's speech at BBC, "Riots: David Cameron's Commons statement in full."



Social media's not the problem. And amazingly, some folks are still debating the causes of the rioting, as if sheer hooliganism and evil needed further explanation. More at London's Daily Mail, "Unmask the thugs! Looters will no longer be able to cover up, says PM as he also promises a crackdown on social media AND cash for the rioters' victims."

'Descent Into Evil'

I had this at the blog-item finder, and now it's an essay at New York Post, from John Hinderaker:

What makes the present such a frightening time is that a number of nightmarish phenomena that we had thought consigned to the dustbin of history are reappearing. Rioters in the streets. Burning buildings. Plunging markets and the threat of depression. The scent of socialism in the air.



Who, as of, say, 1989, could have imagined that in barely 20 years, what was then known as the Free World could sink so far?



What we are seeing in London and other English cities is an outpouring of evil. To try to explain evil as the result of something else is almost always a mistake.

Norway's Anti-Semitism

From Caroline Glick, at Jerusalem Post, "Norway’s Jewish Problem" (via Israel Matzav):

In the wake of Anders Breivik’s massacre of his fellow Norwegians, I was amazed at the speed with which the leftist media throughout the US and Europe used his crime as a means of criminalizing their ideological opponents on the Right. Just hours after Breivik’s identity was reported, leftist media outlets and blogs were filled with attempts to blame Breivik’s crime on conservative public intellectuals whose ideas he cited in a 1,500 page online manifesto.



My revulsion at this bald attempt to use Breivik’s crime to attack freedom of speech propelled me to write my July 29 column, “Breivik and totalitarian democrats.”



While the focus of my column was the Left’s attempt to silence their conservative opponents, I also noted that widespread popular support for Palestinian terrorists in Norway indicates that for many Norwegians, opposition to terrorism is less than comprehensive.



To support this position, I quoted an interview in Maariv with Norway’s Ambassador to Israel Svein Sevje.



Sevje explained that most Norwegians think that the Palestinians’ opposition to the supposed Israeli “occupation” is justified and so their lack of sympathy for Israeli victims of Palestinian terrorism was unlikely to change in the wake of Breivik’s attack on Norwegians.



Since my column was a defense of free speech and a general explanation of why terrorism is antithetical to the foundations of liberal democracy – regardless of its ideological motivations – I did not focus my attention on Norwegian society. I did not discuss Norwegian anti- Semitism or anti-Zionism. Indeed, I purposely ignored these issues.



But when on Friday, Norway’s Deputy Foreign Minister Espen Barth Eide published an unjustified attack on me on these pages, he forced me to take the time to study the intellectual and political climate of hatred towards Israel and Jews that pervades Norwegian society.



That climate is not a contemporary development.



Rather it has been a mainstay of Norwegian society ...

Continue reading. It's a devastating indictment of Norway.



The Espen Barth Eide commentary is here.



I've said it once or twice, but I refrained from blogging on Norway's Labor Party, and the youth camp activists gunned down by Breivik. The agitprop on display on Utoeya that day was pro-Palestinian and pro-terror. Caroline Glick gets down to the bottom of it, and anti-Jewish tendencies there have a long pedigree, sadly.

'I don't call it a riot... I call it an insurrection of the masses of the people...'

When the riots first broke out I checked over at a couple of the anarchist "occupy everything" blogs and it seems like a lot of them are silent, apparently frustrated at the slow development of revolutionary consciousness. But one needn't look too hard to find deep sympathy for the hooligans (at Comment is Free, for example). Hard-left progressives see in the micreants' criminal thuggery some long needed blows against the capitalist state, even if those were mostly just some deviant losers robbing the shelves blind of goods for which they actually had enough money to purchase. It's not deprivation driving unrest, but hatred of conventional goodness, nurtured by decades of socialist progressivism, manifest in the left's deliberate breakdown of the common family structure, which has left generations of "yobbers" free to destroy property and the sense of sanity in society. Jawa Report posted this video, of Darcus Howe, in which he calls the unrest some kind of dialectical historical moment, "London's Thuggery, Murder, Neo-Marxist, Socialist, etc., etc. Mahem + USDayofRage."

Not surprisingly, BBC is now apologizing for suggesting that the bloke might have been involved. See Telegraph UK, "London riots: BBC apologises for accusing Darcus Howe."



We are witnesses the Mad Maxification of society in the early 21st century.

London Calling to the Zombies of Death

That second clip is actually Elvis Costello jamming with Bruce Springsteen and Stevie Van Zandt.



And at Telegraph UK, "11-year-old looter in court as PM condemns 'sick society'." Also, at New York Times, "Cameron Threatens Sustained Police Measures in Riots."