Is Bigger Better? Discussing the espansion of the EU
...hey can lend a hand to Middle East negotiations, and their own economy will be helped. They have also demonstrated a strong desire to be part of the EU in (via the advances made with regards to human rights), which can not be similarly said for other countries. The fact that Russia has such an enormous population means that it would be extremely difficult to absorb. (Economist, 2001). The EU has already overexerted itself in the integration of the Eastern-Europe countries this past May. (Pushkov, 2004). Many people argue that the integration of Turkey into the EU would be a mistake because of its size. So then what of Russia? With a population of 144 million (CIA world factbook) those who are concerned with size would obviously not be in favor of an integration with Russia. Also, many of the Baltic states who joined the EU did so to distance themselves from Russia (Economist, 2003). If Russia were to be allowed in, this would negate the purpose of the Baltics joining the EU. Another very large factor in the Russian integration question is simply that the EU does not want Russia (Pushkov, 2004). The EU does not want to strain relations with the U.S., and neither the U.S. nor the EU wants to see Russia as a part of their military or political organizations (Pushkov, 2004). It should be noted that Russia can be a partner of the U.S. or the EU without being member to them, and still be independent and self-sufficient (Pushkov, 2004). In a large way, they have already achieved this, as Russia currently is a major energy supplier for most EU economies (Champion, 2004). If Russia were to join the EU, it might be beneficial for them as well as the rest of the world, but it is likely that the integration of Russia would lead to instability of the EU (Mandelbaum, 2004) The original European Coal and Steel Community consisted of only six members, and it was very easy for them to cooperate with one another, but as we have seen, as the EU has grown problems have risen between countries that disagree with EU policy. Thus, it can be said that as the EU expands, it gradually becomes more unstable (Mandelbaum, 2004). Russia would severely destabilize the EU as well. It differs economically and culturally from western Europe as well as politically (i.e. Putin’s version of democracy) (Economist, 2004). Turkey also differs in that respect, but if Turkey joined the EU it could help stabilize the Middle East, and stabilize relations between Muslim and the rest of the world (Economist 2004). Russia’s current President, Vladimir Putin, has also done many things recently to deter anyone from agreeing that Russia should be part of the EU. Russia’s strong governments, as well as Putin’s take on human rights, xenophobia and his nostalgia for the former Soviet Union (Economist 2004). But why would Russia even want to be a part of the EU? Many argue that integration with a poorer country has helped that country become successful. Such is the case with Ireland or Spain. Recently, however, Russia has been improving their economy on their own. Industrial production in Russia has risen to 9.2% in June from 5.5% in May, and thanks to oil prices, Russia will grow by 7% in 2004, and is predicted to grow by 5.8% in 2005 (Economist, 2004). In response to this many would say that the Russian economy may be doomed due not only to the aging population in Russia, but also to the disappearing population (Economist, 2004). If Russia’s aging population is the issue, then exactly what would the EU gain by Russian integration that the EU does not already have from Russia? Certainly one can argue the same for Turkey, but as we have seen, Turkey has a very large young population who are ready to become part of the work force, and in a decade or two the youth of their nation will be even larger (Pope & Friedmann, 2004). The combined GDP of the ten countries admitted this year accounts for less than five percent of the European GDP (Wells, 2004). Inviting a huge behemoth of a country, like Russia, with a GDP per capita of only $8,900 (CIA world factbook) would be extremely detrimental to the EU, especially since they already make a habit of taking money from more prosperous nations and giving it to the less prosperous ones. Russia’s huge population would make it futile to redistribute any sort of wealth because it would need to be spread paper-thin (Champion, 2004) The EU obviously does not need Russia as the integration of such a large country both with regards to population and landmass could lead to instability. Russia has no need to be part of the EU, just as no other country besides Turkey does. Proponents of Turkish membership claim that the acceptance of Turkey into the EU is crucial to avoid a “Clash of Civilizations” between Islam and the West (Economist, 2004). Allowance of other countries such as Ukraine, or other southwest countries, or even Israel would do nothing to aid this; it would simply widen the gap between the West and Islam, or even lead to hostility. Take Israel for example. In a survey conducted by the European Commission and the Gallup organization, the general consensus between EU member-states was that Israel was the biggest threat to world peace. 59% of respondents agreed to this (National Observer, 2003). As we have seen with the U.S. model, taking either side in such a volatile situation can be extremely dangerous. Also, as we have seen, the liberal EU has idealism in mind. As for Israel, however, “Israel’s political and military leadership is still driven by greed for land, water, resources and power” (Natl. Observer, 2003). By this we see that the ideals and values of Israel differ from those of the EU. The same can be said somewhat of the Ukraine. “[Ukraine’s] judicial system and the transparency of its major companies compare unfavorably even with Russia’s, while democratic institutions are still weak (Champion, 2004).” The countries which were recently admitted to the EU want Ukraine in also in order to ensure a more stable neighborhood for themselves. There are issues with Ukrainians, as well as other border states, with immigration and travel between EU and non-EU countries. But if the EU were to move that far east, it would burden the current EU members financially and push the EU into a poorer and even less stable region (Champion 2004). The same can be said for other border states such as Romania, Bulgaria, and Croatia. The integration of these countries, as well as this year’s ten new countries, will cost billions of dollars in subsidies for many years (Champion, 2004). Integration of Ukraine would also cause the EU’s relationship with Russia to change. Ukraine recently entered into a loose economic union with Russia, Belarus, and Kazakhstan (Champion, 2004). So allowing Ukraine in would cause pressure for Russia, and as we have seen, Russia would be bad for the EU. As for the Balkans, they all want in. But if we add Turkey and the Balkans then what about the other states which have showed interest in becoming ‘part of Europe.’ Moldova, Belarus, or Georgia, Russia and Israel or even Morocco all have people suggesting that one day they might bid for membership; then we have an EU of about 40 (Economist, 2004). A union of this size would be hard to navigate. “The larger the group, the fewer decisions it can make” argues Frits Bolkstein, the Dutch European Commissioner; in order to reach any decisions in an EU with 40, remaining rights to national vetoes would surely have to go (Economist, 2004). So with that, efficiency goes too. It now becomes a question of widening vs. deepening. Rousseau, proph...