The Guardian, terming the Greek crisis “a continuous cliffhanger”, wrote in its editorial: “The only real certainty was that the crisis would not go away. What was decided would alter the form the crisis took but would not resolve it. So Tsipras’s gamble [of resigning] may or may not pay off. But even if it is successful, whoever holds office in Greece in the future will be compromised by the fact that it will not bring power in the old sense, because so much power will have passed to European Union officials.”
The New York Times editorial views reflect a similar thought process. “If Greece’s European creditors think the resignation of Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras will improve their leverage over Athens, they best think again,” it said. “First, there is no telling what the new wave of political tumult in the struggling nation will bring and it is entirely possible that Tsipras will return as prime minister of a stronger coalition. Given that his scant seven months in office were one continuing crisis, it is hard to judge how good a prime minister Tsipras was or could have been.
For all his failings and failures, Tsipras remains the most popular political figure in Greece, because a large part of the population accepts that he did his best to improve Greece’s lot. How that plays out in elections is to be seen.”
The other burning issue of Europe, the migrant crisis that also seems to be like a continuous cliffhanger, to borrow The Guardian’s phrase. The big debate in this crisis is the owning up of responsibility for homing the migrants by European Union’s member states.
The Irish Times, for example, refers to the United Kingdom’s reluctance to take in migrants in light of countries like Germany and Sweden bearing the brunt of the migrant rush. Its editorial says: “The country that has been caricatured during the Greek crisis as most unwilling to share collective EU burdens is expecting to receive some 800,000 asylum applications this year, four times the numbers last year, and in excess of a third of all likely EU migrants. With Sweden, it has put fellow member states to shame in terms of accommodating refugees, a fact most Germans view as a matter of pride.”
The editorial concludes by saying: “We are still only scratching the surface. Other member states will have to dig much deeper.”
The Guardian, critical of Cameron’s ineffectual stance on UK’s role in the crisis, writes: “By adopting a more enlightened, responsible and less self-interested approach to migration, and by insisting other British political parties endorse it, Cameron has a chance to redeem himself on the international stage and show that 21st-century Britain, for all its weaknesses and blindspots, still has the power and vision to rise above petty nationalistic concerns and prejudice.”
Europe’s mishandling of the migrant crisis prompts the Chicago Tribune to say: “... European management of this humanitarian catastrophe is a disaster itself.” The migrant crisis, the paper says, “could end up a bigger test of Europe’s shared identity than Greece’s financial implosion. Many of Europe’s countries seem willing to let Germany handle most of the burden of this humanitarian crisis. That’s wrong.”
_resources1_16a31069e4e_small.jpg)
