Ok, I must admit – I was worrying about this just a little. Franco-German pacts on economic governances within the Eurozone aren’t just unpopular with those who want to join that monetary zone, but also those that do not want to be excluded in an ongoing integration process.  The sound of silence coming from the U.K. only made things worse – Tories appear to be rather fond of this continent’s struggles.

And what could do more damage in a political union than more dividing lines? I wouldn’t know the answer at this point, but, as I argued before, sound economic policy for a currency shared by seventeen countries is going to become reality only when cooperation thrives; which it doesn’t, or at least not yet.

But economics and politics are an intertwined couple, it is nearly impossible to discuss economics without rolling into the issues of banker bonuses, taxes, subsidies – or to summarize – big government, and likewise it has become difficult, all the more after the downswing, the come up with grand ideas without viable economical math. Was it altogether that surprising that Germany and France want to change direction to ensure not only their currency’s survival, but also its future stability?

I don’t think it surprises anyone. This principle can already be seen by the rather unproblematic gathering of the Eurozone’s finance ministers, a meeting which generally precedes the meetings of the Council. It’s just the realization that more might have to be done in order to maintain the Euro’s successes of the past decade.

You can’t argue that ‘they should have seen this coming’. They have – sort of. In the 2003-2004 and Lisbon intergovernmental conferences an emphasis was put on economic governance within the European Union, but this emphasis was put mainly on those countries having the Euro as their currency. The eventual Lisbon Treaty kept this emphasis, as stressed in Article 3 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union that states ‘the Union shall have exclusive competence in the following areas: … (c) Monetary policy for the Member States whose currency is the Euro.’

The problem is neither the current situation, nor the definition found in any of the EU’s treaties. The problem is that the crisis has taught us a couple of lessons, and Merkel and Sarkozy are walking a path of trial and error.

I stick to my point. No one needs a union within a union, but no one will be better off if there is not enough unity. Meetings of heads of state by Eurozone countries are probably going to become a new inevitability for the time being, but I can see no reason why they should not be open to all, both to (1) give those who might want to join the Euro a voice (even though they might not have a vote in some issues yet) and (2) to keep an open mind to those that have chosen to keep their own currency, but who are nevertheless part of Europe’s internal market, which should allow them to voice their opinions.

And while someone has to do the drafting, politics is about more than just deliberative processes and results. Of all the people, Merkel and Sarko ought to have learned the symbolic values of political acts. Please do keep in touch with the other member states.