The new year marked an expansion of the EU on two fronts: Slovenia became the first Eastern European 
member to take the Euro currency, and Bulgaria and Romania became EU member states. The eight ex-communist states that joined in 2004—Poland, Hungary, Slovakia, etc—have done well, and that success was crucial for Bulgaria and Romania’s membership. But the problems with the addition of these two new members are multifold, and the challenges ahead are tougher than anything the EU has faced before. (Graphic from CBC.)
1. Economics. Bulgaria’s GDP per capita in 2005 was $3,480, and Romania’s $4,490. The average for the eight 2004 entrants was $9,240, and the EU-wide average is $29,330. These two 2007 members are poorer and weaker than then 2004 members, so the issues are not the same.
2. Politics. Both countries are backward in their politics and infrastructure. Corruption is entrenched in many levels of government administration. Bulgaria faces the ipso facto rule of organized crime in many areas of the country. In Romania, the least-trusted public institution in is the courts.
3. Culture. Romania is in some ways a Latin outpost in a Slavic land, with a poor opinion of Russia. Bulgaria’s language is as close to Russian as Spanish is to Italian, cultural ties with Russia are strong, and many Bulgarians today believe communist rule modernized the country. This brings us to…
4. National Security. Both these countries will alter how Europe deals with the world. As noted above, Bulgaria is close to Russia, but Romania is distancing itself from its eastern neighbor and is strengthening ties with the US. Both countries also bring perils to the EU, as they have leaky borders and poorly regulated immigration.
What does this mean for the EU’s future? The challenges are clear, the opportunities—a larger labor supply and more long-term growth potential—less apparent and immediately beneficial. Both countries now face intense pressure to meet Brussels standards. Criticism and sanctions are probably the rule for the future than congratulations and rewards. How the EU copes with these newest members will shape how candidates Croatia, Turkey, and others could enter the EU, and how the member states will respond.
- BROWSE / IN TIMELINE
- « The nuclear terrorism question
- » Mountains, Mist and Mongoose
COMMENTS / 11 COMMENTS
ComingAnarchy.com » Blog Archive » Where is Europe? added these pithy words on Jan 07 07 at 4:42 pm[...] The comments are well worth reading, and thought-provoking. As Bulgaria and Romania joined the EU this month, we must wonder how far the EU can expand. Morocco applied to join the European Community in 1987 but was rejected on the grounds that it was not in Europe. Ukraine, Georgia, Moldova, Armenia, Azerbaijan, and even Kazakhstan have expressed varying levels of interest in membership, although none have submitted formal applications and none are expected to in the near future. What say you? [...]
Rommel added these pithy words on 05 Jan 07 at 8:01 amMy understanding of EU accession politics is limited but frankly I am suprised to see Bulgaria and Romania get in before Croatia. I expect Croatia would integrate into the Union almost as well as Slovenia. Also, it will likely be the last nation to join for some time if not forever.
Turkey may as well forget about it and move on.
IJ added these pithy words on 05 Jan 07 at 11:00 amWhat does constant enlargement mean for the EU’s future?
It slows the effects of economic globalisation. And the current trend is towards protectionism. A big political grouping like the EU is more able to impose restrictions on the movement of capital, goods and labour. Moreover the bigger the grouping, the better.
Protectionism is the theme of an article today by the director of international economics at the US Council on Foreign Relations. He also doubts whether floating exchange rates, ‘protectionism’ introduced in the 1970’s, helps the global economy.
Dan tdaxp added these pithy words on 06 Jan 07 at 3:15 pmThis is very good news., speeding the effects of globalization just as the EU’s earlier enlargement (and NAFTA’s rise) did as well. It continues to put Eastern-Europe’s low labor costs with Western-Europe’s low capital costs. It also demonstrates how Europe can import labor without the cultural or political problems associated with large-scale Muslim immigration.
IJ added these pithy words on 07 Jan 07 at 10:09 amSigns that the West wants more protectionism in the global economy, per an interview with the FT. Germany will be very influential in 2007 in chairing the G8 and the EU.
What exactly will Germany propose? The G8 has no permanent executive. However Toronto University have researched and set out Germany’s tentative agenda here Concern for the social dimensions of globalisation is a new theme.
Dan tdaxp added these pithy words on 07 Jan 07 at 2:30 pmIJ What are you talking about ? The link implies the opposite of what you argue. (This is an honest question.)
IJ added these pithy words on 07 Jan 07 at 5:02 pmMrs Merkel told the FT that her ambition was to create a single transatlantic market for investors. Such a market would have common rules and standards in a number of areas, including intellectual property and financial regulation.
Economic protectionism is on the increase in many ways, Dan. And by popular demand – such is democracy. There are numerous examples, including the destruction of monetary discipline in the world (Bretton Woods) by introducing floating exchange rates over 30 years ago.
Dan tdaxp added these pithy words on 07 Jan 07 at 5:04 pmIJ,
I hope you are not trolling, but I have to ask again: What are you talking about? You have cited two examples of economic integration and claimed they are examples of economic protectionism. How so?
IJ added these pithy words on 07 Jan 07 at 5:14 pmYou suggest that the destruction of the world’s monetary discipline (Bretton Woods) was not a protectionist measure. You also suggest that an EU/US economic zone will not be protectionist. Therefore we disagree.
The stalled WTO talks at Doha are yet another example, Dan.
Dan tdaxp added these pithy words on 07 Jan 07 at 6:30 pmYou suggest that the destruction of the world’s monetary discipline (Bretton Woods) was not a protectionist measure. Y
Really? Where? You’re jumping to conclusions.
You also suggest that an EU/US economic zone will not be protectionist.
You jump in your rhetoric. Before, you said “Economic protectionism is on the increase” and “the West wants more protectionism.” I’m not sure how lower tarrifs between the US and the EU amounts to more protectionism. You seem concern that because any trade barriers exist against any state, this is protectionism… more protectionism.
I take it when taxes are cut, you complain about “more taxes,” and when prices are cut, you complain about “more prices,” because some still exist.
IJ added these pithy words on 07 Jan 07 at 6:54 pmI looked up “Internet trolling”. Wikipedia explains”: “Internet trolling involves a user making comments intended to provoke an angry response.”
The essence of your indignant comments seems to be the assertion that protectionism by some is rife, is long-standing, and is growing.
