Anastasiya Stolyarova for The New York Times

Eurozone Crisis

By ANASTASIYA STOLYAROVA

The New York Times

The lessening of the value of the Euro has caused an economic crisis within the European Union (EU). Major factors of the Eurozone crisis include: government debt, banking crisis, unemployment, and the subsidizing of countries with weaker economies. The crisis has also introduced contemplation of EU dissolution.

Overall, member states of the EU agree that dissolution would be counterproductive. Isaac Mensah-Yeeoah, delegate of France, gave his position on dissolution: “I think the only way we can solve issues is if all EU countries are actively taking part in finding a solution.”

The EU provides unique trading opportunities for countries involved. Many member states have reinstated that the Eurozone crisis is a small dent in the success of the EU. However, Portugal disagrees. As a country greatly affected by the Eurozone crisis, Portugal sees their 18.5% unemployment rate as more than a small dent, and wishes to dissolve the EU. Delegate Kyle Schaefer of Portugal was asked about the personal bias associated with having a failing economy; “Bias could be a factor, but I believe the EU was just an experiment. It was created 20 years ago and left unchecked for 20 years. The EU did not have the correct knowledge or resources and it ultimately failed.”

Most member states conclude that changes to the Euro would disrupt the economy. Although Great Britain has survived off a different form of currency, it would be impractical for countries to introduce a new domestic currency in a time of economic crisis. Also, member states, such as Norway, strive to strengthen the value of the euro.

Investing in the labor force was an idea shared my many member states. The EU believes that solving the high unemployment rate in struggling countries would create a strong base for economic progress. Members did however discern that unemployment was just one factor of the Eurozone crisis.

Lastly, the prospect of including other nations in EU affairs brought mixed feelings between member states. For example, Italy and Bulgaria argued that the EU’s energy should be focused on internal affairs. While Austria and Finland wanted to introduce new nations, as long as they were economically stable, and brought improved economic conditions.