How Far East?
In my last post, the acceptance of Turkey and it’s historical predecessor the Ottoman Empire by the major European powers was discussed. After examining the rocky relationship between the European continent and Asia Minor, the new Eastern Question was posed: How far east?
Before that question can be discussed, it must first be noted that today’s Eastern Question is a much greater in scope than the original being rather based on the disintegration of the Soviet Union and less so on the Ottoman Empire.
To begin, it would be helpful to consider the unofficial border between the West and the East. The modern border between Croatia and Bosnia was long the frontier of Europe, separating Austria-Hungary from the Ottomans and also Christianity from Islam. Later after World War II, the line was pushed back to West Germany, Austria and Italy separating not culture and religion, but two ideologies. Today, in 2005, the border extends from Estonia almost directly south past Poland, Slovakia, Hungary and Slovenia, a significant shift. And while overlapping EU members with NATO members creates the de facto border, it is a very porous one these days in terms of cultural and economic influence.
How far so far?
Before future eastward expansion is discussed, let us first examine expansion since the end of World War II. Once the second world war was resolved and the world essentially divided between the United States and Soviet Union, the US and Europe still continued to press eastwards. In 1945, NATO had 12 members, all of Western Europe plus the US and Canada. Over the next decade, it continued to expand with Greece and Turkey joining in 1952, West Germany in 1955 and finally Spain in 1982.
After the USSR broke down, a flurry of former communist states joined: Czech Republic (1999), Poland (1999), Hungary (1999), Bulgaria (2004), Estonia (2004), Latvia (2004), Lithuania (2004), Romania (2004), Slovakia (2004), Slovenia (2004). The Ukraine has just recently begun talks with NATO regarding their membership and it is estimated they should join within the next four years.

On top of NATO, eastern European states also quickly joined the European Union: Cyprus, Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Slovakia and Slovenia all in 2004. Current EU membership is up to 25 with Romania, Bulgaria and possibly Croatia set to join in 2007. Turkey has also begun accession talks and will join sometime around 2015. Post-revolution Ukraine has also recently taken its place in line and Serbia has recently received positive news in the same regard.

The original Eastern Question dealt with the demise of the Ottoman empire, but more so with how to maintain the balance of power in Europe in the wake of its decay. Our new question differs with the original in this respect. During the long period of Ottoman decay, there were a number of European powers competing with each other overseas in the colonial race and at home on the European continent itself. Therefore, when we look at today’s question of how far east, we have to ask whether such competition exists, to which the answer would be no. Today’s eastward expansion, marked by the end of the Soviet Union, is rather a realignment than vultures circling a carcass. As Russia steadily breaks down, most all of its former republics and satellites are joining the more successful west and quickly reaping the benefits thereof.
We have seen that the current expansion eastwards of the West, through institutions such as the EU and NATO is the beginning of a major geopolitical realignment. Additionally, a second series of revolutions is occurring in the east, toppling Soviet remnants and adding the few remaining ex-Soviet dictators to the endangered species list. Unlike the demise of the Ottomans, the aftermath of the disintegration of the USSR has left no peer competitor thereby speeding up the integration of Europe and keeping Russia constantly off balance and unable to find its geopolitical footing. What does this mean for the west? What forces will keep us marching eastwards? And where will it end?
Stayed tuned for Part III which will offer answers to the aforementioned questions and offer predictions of how far is feasible and how globalization is affecting this process.

Comments to this entry
Curzon
April 23, 2005
10:19 pm
Dr. Alfred Russel Wallace
April 23, 2005
10:22 pm
Chirol
April 24, 2005
10:43 am
When Iceland became a founding member of NATO in 1949, it did so on the explicit understanding that Iceland, which has never had a military, would not be expected to establish an indigenous force. Iceland's main contribution to the common defense effort has been the rent-free provision of the "agreed areas"--sites for military facilities. By far the largest and most important of these is the NATO Naval Air Station at KeflavÃÂk.
and
In addition to providing the "agreed areas," the Government of Iceland contributes financially to NATO's international overhead costs and recently has taken a more active role in NATO deliberations and planning.
...
Iceland has provided support to peacekeeping missions in Kosovo and Afghanistan running the airports in both territories respective capitals.
But you are correct. Iceland's military spending is $0. They have no standing army. Their contribution seems to be their geographical position, money and logistics.
ComingAnarchy.com » Blog Archive » The Eastern Question: Part III
May 3, 2005
11:36 pm