Numerous Europeans view Europe as a 
one-way street: they appreciate its advantages but are little inclined 
to accept common rules. An increasing number throughout the Union are 
handing their vote to populist parties – Front National, Syriza, Podemos
 – that surf on this Eurosceptic wave and rise up against “foreign”- 
imported constraints.
Embroiled with the Greek crisis, 
European policymakers will soon have to step back and reflect on the 
broader issue of the Eurozone’s future. Before envisaging an exit or, on
 the contrary, more sustained integration, it’s right to reflect upon 
the consequences of each option.
Oversimplifying, there are three 
strategies for the Eurozone: a minimalist approach that would see a 
return to national currencies, while keeping Europe perhaps as a free 
trade area and retaining a few institutions that have made a real 
difference such as common competition laws; the current approach based 
on the Maastricht Treaty of 1992 and its fiscal compact update in 2012; 
and, finally, the more ambitious version of federalism. My own clear 
preference is for the federalist version but I’m not at all convinced 
that Europeans are ready to make it work successfully.
Note EU-Digest: 
 Federalism is probably the only way to go if Europe does not want to 
become subservient to the presently ruling superpowers, China, the US, 
and even Russia. Populism and nationalism is not the way to go, as it 
has always turned sour in Europe's history. True federalism would 
certainly require finding another historic shining political star like Mustafa 
Kemal Ataturk, who has the ability to get the EU reorganized, and all 
the EU member states moving in the same direction. Let's hope we get 
blessed soon in finding that "needle in the political haystack" to 
rescue the EU out of the iron grip of the Wall Steet dominated financial
 community. 
Read more: Europe's Future Is Federal » Social Europe
 

