##ic tension. - 12 - at any rate, it will probably not suffice to set aside the topic of convergence by using the learned argument that a country which is in competition and does not have access to central bank money and credit has no choice but to maintain its competitiveness and keep its public finances in shape. it is basically correct that a country ’ s policy makers can also rise to the occasion, as it were, along with the challenges of competition. but of course, a country - - just like an enterprise - - can also founder as a result of failing to meet those challenges, if its starting position is too unfavourable. the difference is that an enterprise then just disappears from the market, whereas a country naturally continues to exist. if a country were to encounter difficulties with the conditions of monetary union, then an economic problem would arise. and - - let us not deceive ourselves - - that would soon create a political problem. europe must avoid that problem as far as possible. therefore, monetary union requires a minimum level of convergence on the part of all its participants, both before accession and, of course, most certainly thereafter. vii the euro will have to be a denationalised currency ; there cannot and must not be any doubt about that. it will thus be in keeping with an increasingly borderless economy. and therein lie the key economic arguments in favour of the euro. the path to monetary union offers europe major new opportunities. in a europe which is heading towards a single market, and in a world which is converging in economic terms, a large single monetary area offers major advantages - - always provided the euro remains enduringly stable. monetary union and the single currency, the euro, will not just mean the elimination of many risks and costs. if it becomes and remains sufficiently stable, the euro also has great prospects of building on the d - mark ’ s position as a world currency. and, it can improve the efficiency of the european single market and, moreover, give further impetus to political integration. those great opportunities and advantages of that historic step into monetary union are not qualified by pointing to the reality of today ’ s situation in europe and the resulting challenges. as a denationalised currency, the euro will be embedded in a political europe which is still largely characterised by national structures. as a borderless currency, the euro will encounter bordered national economic, social and tax policies still searching for answers to the borderless economy. -

escape hatch - - no matter what economic or political developments a given country may undergo. that is what makes it different from an exchange rate system or unilateral exchange rate pegging. this monetary finality, if you will, means putting a crucial political and economic framework in place for future generations, too. maastricht enshrines the concept of a depoliticised currency, and hence stable money, as the primary objective for the central bank, for all time. under the terms of the treaty, once a country has entered into monetary union, it no longer has the option of trying a different path. and each of the participating countries is in intra - european competition for ever without being able to adjust its exchange rate or to adapt central bank rates to its own economic situation. of course, these monetary restrictions - - technically speaking - - already result from a tight exchange rate pegging. only, with a fixed exchange rate corridor, a country still has it in its power to decide on those self - commitments - - but that will no longer be so once monetary union commences. under the conditions of the 21st century, it will certainly not get any easier to maintain economic convergence and to safeguard a country ’ s own competitiveness. • one reason is that competition will continue to increase, in europe and most certainly all over the world. the technological driving forces of globalisation will continue to exert an effect. • the other reason is that just about all the european countries - - more or less - - are still facing great structural challenges which are still a long way from being overcome, such as persistent unemployment. the countries have to work hard to find solutions. the national governments and parliaments should not forget the words of your fellow austrian, karl - heinrich waggerl : “ ask for god ’ s blessing for your work - - but do not ask him to do the work himself as well. ” the subject of convergence in monetary union therefore does not just present itself - - as economic textbooks call it - - in external shocks which affect individual countries to varying degrees. the key issue here is for countries to tackle the structural challenges they are facing, which are identifiable now, in a similar manner and at a similar pace. otherwise, “ internal shocks ” would ensue. the individual economies would grow apart. but not due to an external event hitting a given region like a comet. rather, because monetary union would smoulder inside, giving rise to tecton