By Nikos Konstandaras

The Italian elections confirmed several predictions as no one party in Italy is able to form a government, the economic reform program has been rejected and, regardless, the European Union’s leading powers insist that it will have to be adhered to. What was not confirmed was the fear of Italy’s immediate collapse, followed by the eurozone. This is because Italy is big enough to withstand any pressure and, unlike Greece, will impose its own schedule on developments – and this will be decisive.

Much has been said about the broadening rift between Europe’s north and south, with the citizens of northern countries being presented as more thrifty, more conscientious and, of course, richer – the ones who, in other words, will pay the southerners’ debts. The rift widens not so much because it exists as for the fact that it is believed to exist. The truth is that Spain had a lower debt-to-GDP ratio than some northern countries, other nations work longer hours than the Germans, and even wounded Greece has been paying its debt to its EU partners’ taxpayers.

The main difference between north and south, though, is something far more intangible – it is people’s relationship with time. According to studies and cross-cultural consultants, countries like Germany and the United States are monochronic. There, people believe that they must set specific targets, they must stick to timetables and not be swayed from their final goal. Elsewhere, as in Greece and Italy, attitudes are polychronic – people deal with various tasks at the same time, they see time as flexible and human relations are more important than achieving targets.

However much globalization has improved cross-cultural contacts, this difference still exists in general terms.

Greece had the misfortune to be the first to fall into the debt trap. Pressed by the lack of funds, it had to wear the tight suit of austerity tailored by the troika and follow a strict timetable of reforms. When it became clear that austerity was undermining the reform effort and leading to political instability, our “northern” creditors refused to make significant changes to the formula or the timetable. The euro remained in jeopardy.

Only when ECB President Mario Draghi declared that the bank would “do whatever it takes” to save the common currency did the eurozone breathe easier. The wise flexibility, the fudged decisiveness were pure Italian invention – and precisely what was needed. Now we will see how Draghi’s mismatched compatriot politicians will use time to affect Europe’s course.