On Syria

That Obama has overtaken Bush II is a  fact that comes to show who's not in charge at the White House. So, as if doubling up in Afghanistan were not enough of a Bushism, and Obama wanted his own mark on the Axis of Evil, the talk now is about Syria.

In a way, Syria is a proxy for Iran, but not without its own risk: Russia. The discussion here goes beyond the traditional relation between the two countries and reaches, for example, strategic levels. In short, it's about GAS.

Background Facts:
1) Russia's prominence in the world follows the prices of natural resources, especially energy;
2) UPI reports that

The U.S. Geological Survey reported in 2010 the Levant Basin, covering all these territories, contains at least 122 tcf of gas and 1.7 billion barrels of oil.

See the image below for a map of the area:

So, what's the big deal? I will not go into the details of how the US is yet again invoking reasons that fail to win support for an intervention even at home, that is, an enterprise whose risk-reward profile/opportunity cost keeps even the British away. The big deal here is in calculating the reaction of a revanchist Russia, which may well feel like interwar Germany.

As a side show, the reaction of the Syrian elites surrounding Assad will be interesting. I think, after the lessons in Iraq, Libya, Egypt..., local elites would think twice before turning against their strong man, lest they are left to their own devices to earn a living under market conditions.

So, strategically, the US would probably welcome another failed state.  Tactically, the whole question is how remotely from the reactive Syrian capabilities can the US strike?  Distance being inversely proportional to effectiveness and efficiency.  One can only hope that the Syrian communication capabilities have been deciphered for good and their control  capabilities will be scrambled.  Shortly, we'll get to infer the Russian state of the art. 

The Money Postulate

In capitalism, money that is left to its own devices deluges towards the biggest market.

All else follows.

Then, the larger question for all of us becomes: To what end?

A little less than 3 years ago, I commented about the unfolding episode of WikLeaks.

[...] a smart young man, driven by patriotism, enlists with the Army, yet his self-control breaks when he gets deployed and sees our relations with the world out there being so different from what we espouse at home?

Now, Edward Snowden, another young American man driven by patriotism, has done it again.  To outsiders, this may be another symptom of the two-dimensional American hero that overfills American cultural productions: self-appointed at defending some Constitutional article or even the planet from the dark force.  On second analysis, Snowden is no dummy.  Just consider the choice of Hong Kong, a place outside western reach where China rules, even more so than N. Korea.  Also the timing of his coming out is interesting as the US and PRC presidents are meeting in California to build rapport and tackle the cyber-security threats, among other topics.  If he's got as much data in his hands as he alludes to in the following interview, the US will have to cut a deal, or else this guy will go to the highest bidder.

As Americans, young and old, progressive and libertarian, have been disappointed by Obama, the changer in chief, one should expect that this episode is only another data-point in a tug of war pitting a government clueless at the challenges it faces and people who take each and every constitutional article seriously.

From the interview with Snowden, included below, we get once again the idea that the US Government records everything, which has most probably become current procedure in every country with the means at its disposal.  Then, the larger question for all of us becomes:  To what end?  Is it only because they can, or because a watched people tends to remain quiet for longer?    

NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden: 'I don't want to live in a society that does these sort of things'

The source behind the Guardian's NSA files talks to Glenn Greenwald about his motives for the biggest intelligence leak in a generation

Edward Snowden was interviewed over several days in Hong Kong by Glenn Greenwald and Ewen MacAskill.

Q: Why did you decide to become a whistleblower?

A: "The NSA has built an infrastructure that allows it to intercept almost everything. With this capability, the vast majority of human communications are automatically ingested without targeting. If I wanted to see your emails or your wife's phone, all I have to do is use intercepts. I can get your emails, passwords, phone records, credit cards.

"I don't want to live in a society that does these sort of things … I do not want to live in a world where everything I do and say is recorded. That is not something I am willing to support or live under."

Q: But isn't there a need for surveillance to try to reduce the chances of terrorist attacks such as Boston?

A: "We have to decide why terrorism is a new threat. There has always been terrorism. Boston was a criminal act. It was not about surveillance but good, old-fashioned police work. The police are very good at what they do."

Q: Do you see yourself as another Bradley Manning?

A: "Manning was a classic whistleblower. He was inspired by the public good."

Q: Do you think what you have done is a crime?

A: "We have seen enough criminality on the part of government. It is hypocritical to make this allegation against me. They have narrowed the public sphere of influence."

Q: What do you think is going to happen to you?

A: "Nothing good."

Q: Why Hong Kong?

A: "I think it is really tragic that an American has to move to a place that has a reputation for less freedom. Still, Hong Kong has a reputation for freedom in spite of the People's Republic of China. It has a strong tradition of free speech."

Q: What do the leaked documents reveal?

A: "That the NSA routinely lies in response to congressional inquiries about the scope of surveillance in America. I believe that when [senator Ron] Wyden and [senator Mark] Udall asked about the scale of this, they [the NSA] said it did not have the tools to provide an answer. We do have the tools and I have maps showing where people have been scrutinised most. We collect more digital communications from America than we do from the Russians."

Snowden is a 29-year-old former technical assistant for the CIA

Q: What about the Obama administration's protests about hacking by China?

A: "We hack everyone everywhere. We like to make a distinction between us and the others. But we are in almost every country in the world. We are not at war with these countries."

Q: Is it possible to put security in place to protect against state surveillance?

A: "You are not even aware of what is possible. The extent of their capabilities is horrifying. We can plant bugs in machines. Once you go on the network, I can identify your machine. You will never be safe whatever protections you put in place."

Q: Does your family know you are planning this?

A: "No. My family does not know what is happening … My primary fear is that they will come after my family, my friends, my partner. Anyone I have a relationship with …

I will have to live with that for the rest of my life. I am not going to be able to communicate with them. They [the authorities] will act aggressively against anyone who has known me. That keeps me up at night."

Q: When did you decide to leak the documents?

A: "You see things that may be disturbing. When you see everything you realise that some of these things are abusive. The awareness of wrong-doing builds up. There was not one morning when I woke up [and decided this is it]. It was a natural process.

"A lot of people in 2008 voted for Obama. I did not vote for him. I voted for a third party. But I believed in Obama's promises. I was going to disclose it [but waited because of his election]. He continued with the policies of his predecessor."

Q: What is your reaction to Obama denouncing the leaks on Friday while welcoming a debate on the balance between security and openness?

A: "My immediate reaction was he was having difficulty in defending it himself. He was trying to defend the unjustifiable and he knew it."

Q: What about the response in general to the disclosures?

A: "I have been surprised and pleased to see the public has reacted so strongly in defence of these rights that are being suppressed in the name of security. It is not like Occupy Wall Street but there is a grassroots movement to take to the streets on July 4 in defence of the Fourth Amendment called Restore The Fourth Amendment and it grew out of Reddit. The response over the internet has been huge and supportive."

Q: Washington-based foreign affairs analyst Steve Clemons said he overheard at the capital's Dulles airport four men discussing an intelligence conference they had just attended. Speaking about the leaks, one of them said, according to Clemons, that both the reporter and leaker should be "disappeared". How do you feel about that?

A: "Someone responding to the story said 'real spies do not speak like that'. Well, I am a spy and that is how they talk. Whenever we had a debate in the office on how to handle crimes, they do not defend due process – they defend decisive action. They say it is better to kick someone out of a plane than let these people have a day in court. It is an authoritarian mindset in general."

Q: Do you have a plan in place?

A: "The only thing I can do is sit here and hope the Hong Kong government does not deport me … My predisposition is to seek asylum in a country with shared values. The nation that most encompasses this is Iceland. They stood up for people over internet freedom. I have no idea what my future is going to be.

"They could put out an Interpol note. But I don't think I have committed a crime outside the domain of the US. I think it will be clearly shown to be political in nature."

Q: Do you think you are probably going to end up in prison?

A: "I could not do this without accepting the risk of prison. You can't come up against the world's most powerful intelligence agencies and not accept the risk. If they want to get you, over time they will."

Q: How to you feel now, almost a week after the first leak?

A: "I think the sense of outrage that has been expressed is justified. It has given me hope that, no matter what happens to me, the outcome will be positive for America. I do not expect to see home again, though that is what I want."




______________________________________



RLS, VirginiaWhile the President said he welcomes having a debate on the surveillance program, he really doesn’t. In 2008, candidate Obama said he would “strengthen whistleblower laws to protect federal workers who expose waste, fraud and abuse.” Instead, he has prosecuted more whistleblowers under the Espionage Act than previous presidents combined, including NSA whistleblower Thomas Drake. He was prosecuted for exposing the ineffective Trailblazer program that was chosen over another program which had “built-in privacy protections” and cost a fraction of what was spent on Trailblazer.

Drake received the Ridenhour Prize for Truth-Telling in 2011. From his acceptance speech:

“Truth tellers, such as myself, are those who are simply doing their jobs and honoring their oaths to serve their nation under the law of the land. We are dedicated to the proposition that government service is of, for, by the people. We emphatically do not serve in order to manipulate on behalf of the powerful, nor to conceal unlawful, illegal or embarrassing secrets from the public, because truth does matter. Truth may be inconvenient. It may cause embarrassment. It may threaten the powers that be and their unlawful activities, but it is still the truth.”RECOMMENDED99

Howie Lisnoff, Massachusetts
Edward Snowden, the Founders would have liked you! Snowden is an American hero: all power to the free flow of information and no power for sweeping government surveillance!
RECOMMENDED89



robert bloom, berkeley caThank you, Mr. Snowden, for your wisdom, your principles, and your courage.
Thank you, Guardian, for telling us the truth.
And thank you, George Orwell, for warning us what was coming. Too bad we didn't pay attention.
RECOMMENDED78



Brett Wharton, Boise, IDI believe Mr. Snowden is a national hero and our Founders would have supported his actions. Whether or not you agree that the government should be collecting our data, I believe we had a right to know, and engage in a debate. I personally support the surveillance, since it is averting deadly terrorist attacks, but I am disgusted our government unnecessarily tried to conceal it from us, given it's controversial infringement on our 4th Amendment rights.

I hope Mr. Snowden is pardoned. Mr. Obama should thank him for providing the transparency he himself promised but failed to give us, and that we our entitled to as a country that supports its citizens' freedom and privacy.RECOMMENDED64
DonD, Wake Forest NC
Let's see. This guy joins the Army, then is upset that the Army teaches one to kill, rather than perform humanitarian acts.

He joins the CIA, and gets upset again, this time because the CIA may want him to collect intelligence information. He later discloses his version of what the CIA expected of him which, if true, is a violation of a non-disclosure agreement he would have had to sign.

Next, he works for NSA as a contractor, where he must sign a non-disclosure agreement, but again gets upset, this time with an intelligence organization that collects communications information.

He says he has heroes, Daniel Ellsberg and PFC Bradley Manning, both of whom gained notoriety by disclosing classified information. For the latter, that series of disclosures has put several individual lives at peril. I'm surprised he didn't claim Jonathan Pollard as a hero as well.

For those who think this is heroic behavior, this individual was custom made to be recruited by a foreign intelligence service, and the old KGB would have had him working for them in a heartbeat. The hook, in Snowden's case would have been a psychological weakness for personal recognition, while assuring him that his actions in no way would be damaging to the US.

I do agree with those who want a more fulsome public dialogue as to the limits of NSA's work, but having gotten there with public disclosure of sensitive methods of collection to a foreign entity cannot be supported.
RECOMMENDED32

_______________


It's obvious, as the Crisis goes on, the US is approaching the condition of old countries, where complexity has long been accepted and managed, not just legislated away as in the land of once-free. As the late Michel Crozier put it, 

America is beginning to experience what some recent historians of the Middle Ages, Pierre Chaunu in particular, have called the "time of saturation" (temps du monde plein).  

If you don't understand the French, it means you have not gotten there

rational time, another instance of failed social construction?

We rarely get convinced by the force of the argument, for that you need shared experience matched by language.  It's usually the case that we are convinced either by ideologies or ideologues.

So much for our epoch's claim to rationality, whose lack thereof, by the way, generates many a headache, amplified as it is by the formal exclusion of the irrational.

in capitalism, civilization is just one crisis away from its inception

Untitled, originally uploaded by LJ..

The author of the photo, Lee Jeffries, has been documenting The Crisis as reflected on the faces of British folk.

http://leejeffries.500px.com/

China by Jean-Julien Pous

China is still often misunderstood and frightening to most Westerners. Despite the violence of its development and the cultural divide that separates us, their universal concerns bring them closer to us. As a portrait of modern China through the eyes of people met in the streets, Beijing Strangers let us dive into the lives of different generations and social backgrounds. They share their dreams, fears and beliefs towards themselves and their country.

Beijing Ordinary people - trailer from Jean-Julien on Vimeo.

As the Franco-German marriage goes so will EUROpe

The Franco-German engine of EUROpe is being tested by the replacement of Nicolas Sarkozy with François Hollande. Whereas the former had been quite accommodating of the German economic and financial logic, the latter tries to play a different hand. We should be clear about the German logic, it's not necessarily any more consistent than its French counterpart, at least not outside the German world. However in-consistent outside the German borders, the Germans are working hard at imposing their logic at EUROpean level either in the name of a more sound EUROpean edifice, or simply in exchange for paper bailouts. The basic idea is that the Germans want to convert their relative economic advantage into a long term advantage, institutionalized both at EU and national parliaments levels.

I think big Eurpean countries like France, Italy and even Spain can simply call the bluff of their financial tormentors, for default at such levels will take down the whole world system. Except that EUROpe is held hostage; this is to say that unless there is political will for a EUROpe that's not necessarily speaking German, the default of any one of the above mentioned trigger the fall of the EURO and everything else. No consolation in anticipating that anyone's moves will be stated as pro-EUROpean, contrasting the other(s)...

All in all, I guess, the eternal problem of Europe is the lack of a natural hegemon. As you notice, I chose to not even mention the UK, which still has to figure out a role for herself after making American folk pop-ular.

To get an idea of the intellectual flavors spicing up the Continental soup, I'm including here an exchange between the French and German intellectuals, as wit were imagined by Romain Leick for Der Spiegel. The Europeans still take their intellectuals seriously, so much so that one may take the following as a discussion in our own Foreign Affairs.

Author Max Gallo, 80, a member of the Académie française, the intellectual high court of the nation, views himself as a "republican patriot." He has spent four decades of his life searching for France's historical identity.

The list of his popular books comprises more than 100 titles. He churns out best-sellers about the French Revolution, Napoleon, Victor Hugo, Charles de Gaulle and World War II. Who could lay claim to knowing the soul of the French people, in all of its nostalgic ramifications, better than this keeper of the seal of a long-faded political sense of mission?

Europe seems to have established a special culture in celebrating round anniversaries of important historical events. With yet another approaching, Gallo is currently working on a book about the months leading up to the outbreak of World War I, the seminal catastrophe of the 21st century, in August 1914. During his work, he noticed an intriguing and unsettling parallel to the current crisis in Europe. Just as in 1914, says Gallo, current events could also trigger a chain reaction, driven by nervousness, panic, conflicts of interest, alliance obligations and practical constraints, which could ultimately defy control by politics and diplomacy.

A hundred years ago, says Gallo, it was the mobilization plans of military leaders, worked out down to the last detail, including train departure times, while today it is the anonymous market powers, banks and market traders, with their computerized commands, that have plunged all key players into "prognostic impotence" and a "chaos of improvised decisions."

Doubts in German-French Relationship

Does the historian and author truly believe that the lights could go out again throughout Europe, this time in a fratricidal war over financial and economic policy? In response to Gallo's appealing and yet seemingly absurd comparison, one could point out, as German philosopher Peter Sloterdijk has done in his remarks on German-French relations since 1945, that Europeans are no longer making war preparations, but instead are solely focused on concerns about the economy. "They have forsworn the military gods and completed a conversion from heroism to consumerism," says Sloterdijk.

Is this sufficient reassurance? Judging by what committed French intellectuals are saying this summer about their perceptions of the crisis and the distribution of roles between Paris and Berlin, it is clear that they are not willing to simply release the two countries, once enemies and now partners (at least according to official parlance), from their passions and the shackles of history.

Each of the two leading powers, Germany and France, possesses a key, and the keys can only be used together to liberate Europe from its tower of debt and the fetters of the financial markets. If Berlin is willing to cooperate, that is. But the German government's intentions are mysterious. There is an unspoken suspicion that German Chancellor Angela Merkel, that unemotional heir to former Chancellor Helmut Kohl, a sentimental advocate of France, could be pursuing a hidden agenda, and that her secret goal is to prepare Germany, the world's third-largest exporter, for the fight for survival in the age of globalization.

Doubt has suddenly crept into the German-French relationship, as with an old married couple that has lived together for too long, in benevolent, ritualized indifference, and is suddenly consumed by suspicions. Ironically, this is happening almost exactly 50 years after the two countries' great postwar statesmen, former French President Charles de Gaulle and former German Chancellor Konrad Adenauer, attended a "mass of reconciliation" in the magnificent Reims Cathedral on July 8, 1962 and, six months later, in January 1963, signed the Treaty of Friendship between the two countries.

During the horrifically banal remembrance of the solemn Te Deum at Reims by De Gaulle's and Adenauer epigones François Hollande and Angela Merkel a month ago, there was no mistaking the lack of originality of the two protagonists.

Where there should be eternal solidarity, trouble is brewing in the friendship. "It's a disturbance of the osmosis, a growing ignorance of the other partners," says Gallo, whose son, also an historian, has just completed a study visit to Berlin. During his first trip to Germany after the war, Gallo says he had "goose bumps" when he saw uniformed officials at the border. "It was still like stepping into another world."

A 'Lack of Empathy'

Business professor and author Jacques Attali, 68, a longstanding advisor to former President François Mitterrand, who brought the young Hollande into the Elysée Palace as a special advisor, also bemoans the "lack of empathy" that he says prevails today between the neighboring nations, as well as the inability of either side to put itself in the shoes of the other. In psychopathology, this lack of empathy as seen is a precondition for the commitment of atrocities and violence.

Attali cannot understand, for example, why the Germans are developing such an "obsessive fear of inflation" in the discussion over European Central Bank (ECB) bailout programs for debtor countries. The national bankruptcy of the German Reich in the wake of hyperinflation in 1922 and 1923 was a consequence of Germany having lost the war, says Attali. He believes that if there is a parallel to the current situation, it ought to be former Chancellor Heinrich Brüning's grim austerity policy during the post-1929 global economic crisis, which led to depression, mass unemployment, impoverishment and, politically, to the rise of the Nazis. Why, he asks, don't the Germans see the writing on the wall, and why do they use the "fictitious threat" of inflation and an imaginary wealth destruction machine as an argument?

Historian and demographer Emmanuel Todd, one of the harshest critics of Germany's economic ordoliberalism, even sees Merkel's "austerity mandate" and her "pact for eternal austerity" in the European Union as a form of "fiscal fascism." Todd believes that two opposing cultures are colliding in the euro zone: the German culture of free competition and the French culture of fraternal equality. Rivalry produces winners and losers, as well as jealousy, resentment and the willingness to engage in conflict. But a monetary union, says Todd, can only exist in the long term if it gives priority to the principle of equality, just as Germany, with its principle of inter-state fiscal equalization, irons out differences in the standard of living.

Has Geopolitics Returned to Europe?

France has also had its skeptics of the monetary union, who don't see the introduction of the euro as the accomplishment of a great European vision but as a ticking time bomb instead. Gallo, whose wife is a member of the European Parliament, voted no in the French referendums on the Maastricht Treaty and the treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe, because he predicted a renaissance of nationalism after the fall of the Berlin Wall. "Geopolitics has returned to Europe," he says.

In the 2002 presidential election, Gallo supported the left-wing nationalist Jean-Pierre Chevènement, a fierce opponent of the euro who saw the common currency as the beginning of a German instrument of domination or, in a sense, the Trojan horse of an age-old German hegemonic claim that has existed since Napoleon broke apart the Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation.

In his recent book "La France est-elle finie?" (Is France Finished?), Chevènement describes a "Germanocentric" Europe in which "France can make suggestions, but Germany gives the orders." Polls in both countries seem to confirm a renationalization of thought. According to the French Institute of Public Opinion (Ifop), only 31 percent of the French see Germany and 18 percent of Germans see France as their country's "preferred partner." These figures have been declining since 2003.

Rivalry or Complementarity?

They reveal the fragility of a relationship that is increasingly based more on calculus and less on affection. The two neighbors' view of each other is also a mirror in which each of the partners sees itself. For some time now two discourses, says German studies Jacques-Pierre Gougeon have shaped the image each of the two countries has of itself and the other: the rhetoric of decline and the rhetoric of ascension. Germany has become the absolute reference for France, says Gougeon, while the relationship between the two partners is a mimetic reflection of rivalry, imitation and projection. The French fear of being left behind, both economically and politically, reinforces the German position that it must assume the function of the exemplary role model in Europe. In the end, says Gougeon, this raises a key question: "Rivalry or Complementarity?

The future of Europe depends in large part on the answer to this question, says Gougeon. French Prime Minister Jean-Marc Ayrault, a former German teacher, has brought in his fellow academic Gougeon, professor at the University of Franche-Comté in the eastern city of Besançon and research director at the Institute for International and Strategic Relations (IRIS) in Paris, as an advisor. The appointment gives the title of Gougeon's latest book "France/Germany: A Threatened Union?" more than rhetorical significance.

Nevertheless, such different intellectuals as Gallo and philosopher Pascal Bruckner feel that Gougeon's question is the wrong one to ask. The problem, they believe, consists in the fact that the two countries are so closely intertwined -- through geography, history, the economy and politics -- that they cannot become disengaged. "It's like an old couple, who both love and hate each other," says Bruckner. "They can't stand to be apart or together, and divorce isn't an option."

Gallo likes to reconstruct the thousand-year German-French rivalry in various forms. The relationship, he says, has always been characterized by familial closeness and jealous distance, an ambivalence that sometimes produces creative and sometimes conflict-laden, permanent tension. When he saw and heard Merkel butchering the obligatory French words "Vive l'amitié franco-allemande" at the chilly commemorative meeting in Reims, he remembered, with irony, the Oaths of Strasbourg in 842. Half-brothers Charles the Bald and Louis the German pledged loyalty and support to each other. So that their followers would understand them, each man proclaimed his oath in the language of the other side. But by forming the alliance, they also sealed the division and breakup of the empire founded by their grandfather Charlemagne.

The mirror-image relationship, in which the Germans and the French have tied themselves to each other, both culturally and politically, could be described as a relationship between foreign relatives. It is characterized by a mutual fascination, what Bruckner calls "a sort of magnetism," which can be both attractive and repulsive, and has ended in violence again and again, in the Franco-Prussian War of 1870, World War I and World War II.

'Twilight Approaching over Europe'
Today France is in the process of losing yet another war, but this time it's an economic war, says cultural pessimist Bruckner, who sees a "twilight approaching over Europe."

Economist Henri Sterdyniak can translate the language of victory and defeat into numbers. According to his calculations, France has lost about 10 percentage points of its competiveness against Germany since the turn of the millennium, or roughly since the introduction of the euro. As a result, what was once a relatively even balance of trade is now a gaping deficit of more than €70 billion ($86 billion), while industrial production is declining and the government debt is on the rise, says Sterdyniak.

Sterdyniak is part of a group of economic experts critical of globalization who call themselves "économistes atterrés," or crushed or appalled economists, and are anticipating a possible crash landing of the euro. According to Sterdyniak, the monetary union was an "inane idea" from the very beginning, because it tied together what didn't belong together. He sees three possible scenarios for the future: implosion, decomposition or an emergency exit.

This sounds so menacing that Sterdyniak occasionally interrupts the explanation of his terrible visions with an ironic chuckle. He explains that the Germans would have to choose the emergency exit. In other words, they would have to deliberately compromise their competitiveness, essentially placing lead in their running shoes, that is, by significantly increasing wages and accepting inflation as a consequence.

Of course, government debt would also have to be guaranteed in the euro zone, through the European Central Bank and through joint liability in a fiscal union. This would be done in return for a promise by countries with deficits to consolidate their budgets. But there is an important caveat, says Sterdyniak, namely that the mechanical rules, which he feels are too rigid, of the fiscal pact Germany is imposing on all others are completely unsuitable." Sterdyniak calls the fiscal pact an alleged debt relief machine that leads only more deeply into debt." Does he believe that Merkel will play along? It would be like demanding that the Germans stop being German, says Sterdyniak. Like in the fable of "The Ant and the Grasshopper," the ant remains implacable toward the grasshopper. For this reason, says Sterdyniak, the most likely scenario is that Europe will continue along the path that Merkel has already proposed, that of slow decomposition, the rotting of the euro zone.

'The Tone Is Getting Sharper'

In the midst of such discussions, it seems that the preparations for the search for a scapegoat are already underway. The instrument of torture that can be shown to the Germans ought to be familiar from history: isolation, encirclement and pillory.

Anti-German resentments have not become virulent in France yet, and yet they are simmering just a few centimeters below the surface. "We are not in an open marital dispute, but the tone is getting sharper," says philosopher Bruckner, describing the psycho-political constitution of the troubled couple.

German intellectuals take a more relaxed view. In his essay Theory of the Post-War Periods, Sloterdijk -- who, next to Jürgen Habermas, is one of the few contemporary German thinkers respected in France -- argues that the pragmatic way leads to a "benevolent and nonviolent coexistence by means of mutual disinterest and defascination." "Don't be too interested in each other!" he counseled the archenemies and friends of convenience.

That was at the end of 2007, shortly after the financial crisis had begun its disastrous course. But the old demons are still lurking. What if Gallo were right with his hair-raising feeling that Europe, through its financial policies, could be drifting toward an August crisis like the one in 1914, with Greece assuming the role of Serbia, which Germany's conservative Christian Social Union (CSU) wants to make an example of?

Political veteran Attali, who was there in 1984 when Mitterand and Kohl shook hands across the trenches of Verdun, believes that it is politically dangerous and even foolish to declare a war between France and Germany to be inconceivable for all time. According to Attali, there are only two opposing strategies to overcome the crisis: Either Europe's core countries, led by France and Germany, pull themselves together and form a true federation, or there will no longer be a euro in a few years.

And if the latter happens, he says, there are numerous possibilities, ranging from a decline into geopolitical insignificance, to more or less outmoded regionalism and a return to drama in European reality.

Translated from the German by Christopher Sultan

URL: http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/french-intellectuals-put-the-franco-german-axis-on-the-couch-a-850197.html