The European Tribune is a forum for thoughtful dialogue of European and international issues. You are invited to post comments and your own articles.
Please REGISTER to post.
Still, I think that in many respects, all of "new Europe" taken together is less influential than the UK by itself. On the other hand, each of them gets a vote. So I don't know. We are talking about gradual historical development here. The breakup of the UK would be a watershed, I think. A bomb, H bomb, Minuteman / The names get more attractive / The decisions are made by NATO / The press call it British opinion -- The Three Johns
But there is more behind the espansion to the East than just US inducement. There was a very real fear that, if the new democracies in Central and Eastern Europe were not "validated" by achieving EU and NATO membership (and, here, Atlanticists were successful in making people believe the couldn't have one without the other), involution and a rise of authoritarian and populist politics would result. Whether or not that's true, it's the way it was perceived across Europe, both East and West.
IMHO only Slovenia and the Czech Republic were ready for accession in 2004, politically and economically. But you couldn't have CZ without Slovakia, Poland and Hungary. The Baltic states were probably ok economically but there are serious unsolved human rghts issues surrounding their large Russian populations, and now the EU "owns" the problem. They and Cyprus show that the idea that the EU could more effectively deal with problems in member states than in candidate states is a delusion. And the same delusion has been applied to Romania and Bulgaria with their "conditional" accession this year (supposedly they could be suspended after 1 year, but that's exceedingly unlikely). Finally, Malta is a microstate island nation, more catholic (read: socially backwards) even than Spain, Italy, Ireland or Poland, and smaller than Luxembourg, and I question the wisdom of effectively giving them veto power over key EU developments.
The last 15 years of EU leadership have given us the "growth" of the EU and the constitution fiasco. Not much to be happy about. "It's the statue, man, The Statue."
Make that Slovenia only. The situation of the Czech Roma is not dissimilar to the problem with thew Baltic states. Then again, in the EU-15, there was Greece, and in terms of malfunctioning political system, Italy. *Lunatic*, n. One whose delusions are out of fashion.
They and Cyprus show that the idea that the EU could more effectively deal with problems in member states than in candidate states is a delusion.
It's not delusion: it works. These problems are headaches, sometimes long and painful ones, but they do not turn into international crisis, hot or cold wars. just that is worth it, even if it's never counted as an achievement.
Just like Italy having the same interest rates as Germany: sure their debt and economy is a problem, but it's not a crisis that destabilises several countries.
How quickly we forget what the alternative looked like. In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes
by Frank Schnittger - Oct 2 4 comments
by gmoke - Sep 27
by Frank Schnittger - Sep 17
by Oui - Oct 7
by Oui - Oct 66 comments
by Oui - Oct 54 comments
by Oui - Oct 4
by Oui - Oct 41 comment
by Oui - Oct 31 comment
by Oui - Oct 24 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Oct 24 comments
by Oui - Oct 214 comments
by Oui - Oct 120 comments
by Oui - Oct 124 comments
by Oui - Sep 30
by Oui - Sep 303 comments
by Oui - Sep 2819 comments
by Oui - Sep 28
by Oui - Sep 276 comments
by Oui - Sep 271 comment
by Oui - Sep 263 comments
by Oui - Sep 266 comments