Greece debt crisis: Milton Friedman's 1997 prediction of the eurozone disaster

Greece debt crisis: Milton Friedman's 1997 prediction of the eurozone disaster | afr.com
Penned in 1997, the late professor Milton Friedman, argued the drive for the Euro was motivated by politics not economics, aiming to make a future European war impossible. 
He said that adoption of the Euro would have the opposite effect.
Here's what he wrote:

by Milton Friedman
A common currency is an excellent monetary arrangement under some circumstances, a poor monetary arrangement under others.
Whether it is good or bad depends primarily on the adjustment mechanisms that are available to absorb the economic shocks and dislocations that impinge on the various entities that are considering a common currency.
Flexible exchange rates are a powerful adjustment mechanism for shocks that affect the entities differently.
It is worth dispensing with this mechanism to gain the advantage of lower transaction costs and external discipline only if there are adequate alternative adjustment mechanisms.
The United States is an example of a situation that is favorable to a common currency. 
Though composed of fifty states, its residents overwhelmingly speak the same language,
listen to the same television programs,
see the same movies,
can and do move freely from one part of the country to another;
goods and capital move freely from state to state;
wages and prices are moderately flexible;
and the national government raises in taxes and spends roughly twice as much as state and local governments.
Fiscal policies differ from state to state, but the differences are minor compared to the common national policy.
...By contrast, Europe's common market exemplifies a situation that is unfavourable to a common currency.
It is composed of separate nations, whose residents speak different languages, have different customs, and have far greater loyalty and attachment to their own country than to the common market or to the idea of "Europe".
Despite being a free trade area, goods move less freely than in the United States, and so does capital.
...The drive for the Euro has been motivated by politics not economics.
The aim has been to link Germany and France so closely as to make a future European war impossible, and to set the stage for a federal United States of Europe.
I believe that adoption of the Euro would have the opposite effect. 
It would exacerbate political tensions by converting divergent shocks that could have been readily accommodated by exchange rate changes into divisive political issues.
Political unity can pave the way for monetary unity.
Monetary unity imposed under unfavorable conditions will prove a barrier to the achievement of political unity.