SHARE
COPY LINK

EUROPEAN UNION

Flagellating the Fatherland

The New York Times on Thursday blasted Germany for its reaction to the Greek debt crisis. But the paper’s criticism of Berlin is naïve and flawed, argues The Local’s Marc Young in an editorial rebuttal.

Flagellating the Fatherland
Photo: DPA

I know The New York Times is facing painful cutbacks these days, but putting a Bild story through Google translate is no basis for an inflammatory editorial.

America’s paper of record on Thursday published a blistering critique of Germany’s response to the eurozone emergency sparked by Greece’s debt woes. Titled “Germany vs. Europe,” the opinion piece painted an ugly picture of a callously selfish Germany returning to petty nationalistic tendencies in times of crisis.

It then quoted Bild, Germany’s biggest and – rather more importantly – most sensationalist paper, as evidence how the country was rife with absurdly anti-Greek sentiment.

The barbarous Germans are demanding the Greeks sell the Acropolis! The Germans want to kick the lazy Greeks out of the euro!

In truth, Bild’s anti-Greek campaign was simply a classic tabloid effort to sell papers with populism. Would the New York Times base an editorial on US healthcare reform on Fox News reporting? The boys in the Axel Springer tower must be giddy with glee for managing to hoodwink America’s most important daily with such transparently silly coverage.

On the back of this breathtaking journalistic lapse, the editorial goes on to attack Germany for refusing to simply open its chequebook and pay off the European Union’s problems as it has for much of the post-war era.

Certainly criticism of Chancellor Angela Merkel’s dithering approach to the Greek crisis is warranted. I’ve dished up some myself. But is the New York Times editorial page so naïve that it believes American politicians are above being guided by domestic concerns?

No one at the Times would ever have questioned the United States or France for sticking up for the national interest. It’s only when Germany suddenly decides to assert itself that a respectable paper can have the gall to speak of “nationalist illusions,” conjuring up images of jackbooted thugs marching across the Rhine.

Perhaps most absurdly, the Times faintly praised Germany for resisting the fiscal recklessness of some other EU nations – and the US – yet demanded Berlin now spend like a drunken sailor to save the global economy from certain disaster. Maybe the Midtown Manhattan pontificators would also like to suggest German consumers rack up some punishing credit card debt like their American cousins to spur domestic demand?

It’s likely no coincidence the paper published this piece the same day US Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner was in Berlin to push Germany to do more to boost the global economy. But it’s rather doubtful the editors at the Times did the Obama administration any favours with their ill-informed hatchet job.

The next time the New York Times op-ed page cares to devote so much space to Germany, perhaps they should read The Local first. We’d be happy to educate them about what’s going on here – and they wouldn’t even have to use Google translate.

Member comments

Log in here to leave a comment.
Become a Member to leave a comment.

BREXIT

OPINION: Pre-Brexit Brits in Europe should be given EU long-term residency

The EU has drawn up plans to make it easier for non-EU citizens to gain longterm EU residency so they can move more easily around the bloc, but Italy-based citizens' rights campaigner Clarissa Killwick says Brits who moved to the EU before Brexit are already losing out.

OPINION: Pre-Brexit Brits in Europe should be given EU long-term residency

With all the talk about the EU long-term residency permit and the proposed improvements there is no mention that UK citizens who are Withdrawal Agreement “beneficiaries” are currently being left out in the cold.

The European Commission has stated that we can hold multiple statuses including the EU long-term permit (Under a little-known EU law, third-country nationals can in theory acquire EU-wide long-term resident status if they have lived ‘legally’ in an EU country for at least five years) but in reality it is just not happening.

This effectively leaves Brits locked into their host countries while other third country nationals can enjoy some mobility rights. As yet, in Italy, it is literally a question of the computer saying no if someone tries to apply.

The lack of access to the EU long-term permit to pre-Brexit Brits is an EU-wide issue and has been flagged up to the European Commission but progress is very slow.

READ ALSO: EU government settle on rules for how non-EU citizens could move around Europe

My guess is that few UK nationals who already have permanent residency status under the Withdrawal Agreement are even aware of the extra mobility rights they could have with the EU long-term residency permit – or do not even realise they are two different things.

Perhaps there won’t be very large numbers clamouring for it but it is nothing short of discrimination not to make it accessible to British people who’ve built their lives in the EU.

They may have lost their status as EU citizens but nothing has changed concerning the contributions they make, both economically and socially.

An example of how Withdrawal Agreement Brits in Italy are losing out

My son, who has lived almost his whole life here, wanted to study in the Netherlands to improve his employment prospects.

Dutch universities grant home fees rather than international fees to holders of an EU long-term permit. The difference in fees for a Master’s, for example, is an eye-watering €18,000. He went through the application process, collecting the requisite documents, making the payments and waited many months for an appointment at the “questura”, (local immigration office).

On the day, it took some persuading before they agreed he should be able to apply but then the whole thing was stymied because the national computer system would not accept a UK national. I am in no doubt, incidentally, that had he been successful he would have had to hand in his WA  “carta di soggiorno”.

This was back in February 2022 and nothing has budged since then. In the meantime, it is a question of pay up or give up for any students in the same boat as my son. There is, in fact, a very high take up of the EU long-term permit in Italy so my son’s non-EU contemporaries do not face this barrier.

Long-term permit: The EU’s plan to make freedom of movement easier for non- EU nationals 

Completing his studies was stalled by a year until finally his Italian citizenship came through after waiting over 5 years.  I also meet working adults in Italy with the EU long-term permit who use it for work purposes, such as in Belgium and Germany, and for family reunification.  

Withdrawal agreement card should double up as EU long-term residency permit

A statement that Withdrawal Agreement beneficiaries should be able to hold multiple statuses is not that easy to find. You have to scroll quite far down the page on the European Commission’s website to find a link to an explanatory document. It has been languishing there since March 2022 but so far not proved very useful.

It has been pointed out to the Commission that the document needs to be multilingual not just in English and “branded” as an official communication from the Commission so it can be used as a stand-alone. But having an official document you can wave at the immigration authorities is going to get you nowhere if Member State governments haven’t acknowledged that WA beneficiaries can hold multiple statuses and issue clear guidance and make sure systems are modified accordingly.

I can appreciate this is no mean feat in countries where they do not usually allow multiple statuses or, even if they do, issue more than one residency card. Of course, other statuses we should be able to hold are not confined to EU long-term residency, they should include the EU Blue Card, dual nationality, family member of an EU citizen…

Personally, I do think people should be up in arms about this. The UK and EU negotiated an agreement which not only removed our freedom of movement as EU citizens, it also failed to automatically give us equal mobility rights to other third country nationals. We are now neither one thing nor the other.

It would seem the only favour the Withdrawal Agreement did us was we didn’t have to go out and come back in again! Brits who follow us, fortunate enough to get a visa, may well pip us at the post being able to apply for EU long-term residency as clearly defined non-EU citizens.

I have been bringing this issue to the attention of the embassy in Rome, FCDO and the European Commission for three years now. I hope we will see some movement soon.

Finally, there should be no dragging of heels assuming we will all take citizenship of our host countries. Actually, we shouldn’t have to, my son was fortunate, even though it took a long time. Others may not meet the requirements or wish to give up their UK citizenship in countries which do not permit dual nationality.  

Bureaucratic challenges may seem almost insurmountable but why not simply allow our Withdrawal Agreement permanent card to double up as the EU long-term residency permit.

Clarissa Killwick,

Since 2016, Clarissa has been a citizens’ rights campaigner and advocate with the pan-European group, Brexpats – Hear Our Voice.
She is co-founder and co-admin of the FB group in Italy, Beyond Brexit – UK citizens in Italy.

SHOW COMMENTS