The Greek bailout saga reminds me of a story from antiquity about discussions (or, euphemistically, negotiations) between representatives of a powerful state, aiming to secure its empire and deter subjugated member-states from future rebellion, and a pesky weaker state, which is offered the choice between total destruction and the acceptance of the stronger state’s demands, viz payment of tribute and loss of sovereignty. The weaker state’s representatives invoke quaint notions such as justice and freedom in their arguments against personal and financial enslavement, but this is met with a lecture on the harsh truths of realpolitik (as we might call it): that questions of justice are only relevant “between those with an equal power to enforce it”, and that the sole question of relevance is “one of self-preservation – that is, not resisting those who are far stronger than you”. In the hope that they might somehow preserve their independence, the weaker state declines the offer then on the table, that of enslavement, only to be faced with no choice at all: their adult males are killed, their women and children enslaved, and their land and property expropriated.Such was the story told by Thucydides of the treatment of Melos by the imperial state of Athens in 416-15BC. While any parallels with current events must be drawn with caution (who could imagine that a modern European nation would impose collective punishment on its weaker brethren?), it is perhaps worth mentioning as a footnote that the Athenian empire was only to survive its destruction of Melos for little over a decade.Dr Terry PeachUniversity of ManchesterThe latest hardball by Germany suggests a Europe lacking both empathy and understanding of cultural differences Continue reading...
 |
| READ THE ORIGINAL POST AT www.theguardian.com |