Only a few years ago, many renowned analysts and pundits were ready to bet money on the collapse of the Economic and Monetary Union (EMU). Today, after years of significant reforms at both the EU and national levels, far fewer would consider doing so. At the EU level, we now have a much more active monetary policy, a single banking supervision and resolution system, and a European Stability Mechanism to support countries in distress. At the national level, we have adopted stricter budgetary rules, and we have taken important steps in the direction of more modern and competitive economies.

After these early initiatives, however, progress on securing the future of the EMU seems to have stalled due to diverging views and interests among the main member states. This issue of European View took shape in the difficult political context of the immediate past and present, which has seen growing disaffection with the euro and often the open contestation of the currency by powerful political forces.

True, the election of Emmanuel Macron to the French presidency has recently rekindled hopes that big steps forward towards a ‘genuine EMU’ may be taken after the German parliamentary elections later this year. However, responsible political forces must always ‘hope for the best and prepare for the worst’. They cannot ignore the significant technical and political problems that stand in the way of further economic integration.

Accordingly, the central question connecting the different contributions to this issue is the following: under what conditions can the eurozone survive and thrive as a monetary union with decentralised economic decision-making and limited fiscal integration? Contributions delving into the need for and the feasibility of a fiscal union in the EU must be read in this light. It is our conviction that future initiatives in the eurozone should not follow the goal of further centralisation but only pursue the stabilisation of the euro. They should be limited to what is strictly indispensable to achieve this paramount goal, in adherence with the principle of subsidiarity.

As can be expected of the economic analysis carried out by a political foundation, some contributions go beyond the technicalities and attach special importance to the politics of EMU reform, as well as to the legitimacy challenges posed by the most ambitious reform plans. We have tried to take a sober and realistic view of the future of the EMU and to frankly admit that difficulties exist when we see them. Europe’s monetary union is an amazing achievement, and securing its future will require both intellectual honesty and political realism.

Finally, we have not forgotten that Europe’s future does not only depend on the success of the EMU. This is why this issue contains contributions on a variety of other topics, including the Libyan conflict, migration and transatlantic relations, as well as an article calling for a reinvention of Europeanism.