The European Union's enlargement
process is the one where the Union accepts a new country as a member.
In this procedure the Union extends its institutions, legal frame,
policies, rules, economic legislation, and even the currency; towards
the country.
This process is a complex one, as it
represents the a reduction of the national sovereignty in areas, in
favour of the European Union. And also it means a change for
national, economic, defense and foreign policy. As the country
belongs to an International Organization, or more appropriately, to a
supranational organization, with its owns policies for these areas.
This enlargement process is not
immediate. The five enlargement waves carried by the European Union
have taken different number of years depending, mainly, on the
advanced stage of the legislation implementation, and harmonization,
and the process of reducing the level of economic differences of the
applicants and member states. In some cases, like Finland, it took 2
years and 9 months (because this country had previously implemented
the European Union directives regarding trading in order to be able
to have an intense economic relation with the EU members). But in
other cases like Portugal, it took 8 years and 9 months. (Miles,
1995:25)
The enlargement process has
demonstrated to be a really effective instrument in foreign policy.
The reasons of this effectiveness can be find in the fact that the EU
is the most powerful economic block in the World, and gaining access
to this singles market, with no trading barriers, is always
profitable. Also, the EU membership represents a strong boost to the
economy and social improvements, and a strengthened negotiations
capacities for the member in the international arena. It is true the
fact that, this accession to a single market, without barriers can
damage the competitiveness of the national industry, if the applicant
country is less developed in economic terms than the EU members, but
the EU has tools to like the cohesion funds policy that tries to help
the SMEs (Small and Medium Enterprises) to develop. This policy
cohesion is oriented to the economy but also to the social field. The
aim of the policy cohesion is to put a the EU's average all the
regions and countries of the Union.
The EU has used this previously
mentioned advantages to performance a normative power. This means
allowing countries to gain access to the EU's membership as long as
they implement the necessary legal reforms to be a democratic
country, improver economic aspects, reform the economy to gain
competitiveness, liberalize the economy (reducing the public
enterprises), liberalizing public services (like the energy) if they
are under government's control. In few words, the EU, using the tool
of the enlargement, is spreading to its neighborhood the
liberal-democratic model of governance, and the applicant's
memberships is conditioned to their success in the application of all
these changes. But, there are also political interests that makes
each enlargement process different:
The first enlargement occurred with
the membership of United Kingdom, Denmark and Ireland the first of
January 1973. The United Kingdom saw the EEC (European Economic
Community) as an important market for the British exports, and also a
way to keep its influence in the European affairs. Denmark and
Ireland joined to the community because of their intense economic
links with the United Kingdom. For the EEC this first accession
helped to revitalize the alliance due to the integration of a big
economy and influential partner. This first expansion did not
suppose a big challenge as the incoming countries were mainly at the
same economic level as the members, and their political systems were
also liberal-democracies.
The
80s expansion were a big challenge as it saw Greece, Spain and
Portugal gain their EU membership. These countries were at a
disadvantage in terms of economy (poor industrial competitiveness,
lower Gross Domestic Product, higher inflation, etc.) and in social
development. Together the previously mentioned problems, these
countries were facing politic transitions from authoritarian regimes
to liberal-democratic systems. The reasons why this enlargement was
done can be found in a brilliant way in the next quotation of Lee
Miles in the book Enlargement
of the European Union ‘the
EU Commission in its January 1976 Opinion actually advised against
accession of Greece on economic grounds, but was overruled by the EU
Council. Their accessions [of Greece, Spain and Portugal] were
accepted for political reasons and in spite of economic reservations.
The Union viewed the support of their fledgling democracies through
EU membership as more important.’
With this, the EU was using the enlargement as a foreign policy tool
to support and boost countries in transition by letting them accede
to the Union in exchange of multiple programs to reform almost all
the policies of the country. Greece (first of January 1981) and Spain
and Portugal (first of January 1986). (Kaiser et al., 2004)
This accession meant the big start of
the social policies, as the three countries increased the social
disparities inside the European Union. The social policies were
materialized with the Economic and Social Cohesion and Structural
Funds, all included inside the Treaty of the European Union. (Miles,
1995: 10) This enlargement process set the bases for future processes
where the incoming states were at a lower economic and social level.
The third enlargement was a
consequence of the end of the Cold War. Without this conflict Sweden,
Finland and Austria did not have to remain neutral towards the
conflict that involved the two superpowers. Therefore they saw an
opportunity to join to the Single European Market, after harmonizing
the European directives and adapting the industrial sector, for
example reducing and adapting the size of the Swedish defence
industry, to the EU's requirements. This enlargement was not a big
problem for the EU as it saw the accession of countries with living
standards equal or higher to the EU's average but small in population
terms. Sweden, Finland and Austria gained their EU membership the
first of January of 1995.
We cannot avoid to mention the
reunification of Germany in 1990 that is related to this period, and
supposed the accession to the EU for another “new state”.
The
fourth enlargement wave was the most important as in one year the
population of the EU grew by 29%, the area by 34% and the Gross
Domestic Product by 9% (Schimmelfennig, 2003: 56). This enlargement
was also politically significant because it saw the accession of
Eastern countries that, more less 15 years ago belonged to the Warsaw
Pact and were governed under a communist regime. The countries
acceded in this wave were: Malta, Cyprus, Slovenia, Slovakia, Czech
Republic, Hungary, Poland, Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia. All the
first of January 2004. Not all the member states were interested in
the same way to allow this enlargement. On one side the United
Kingdom was more interested supporting the Turkish membership. Also
the UK is more interested in the enlargement rather than in the
integration (in other words, expanding the single market rather than
giving more parcels of sovereignty to Brussels). But on the other
side Germany was keen to accept the entrance of Central Europe into
the European Union. In fact Germany enjoyed 25% of the benefits the
new comers created, on the contrary Italy, Portugal, Spain and Greece
were the most affected as their factories had to compete with cheaper
labour
force. (Schimmelfennig, 2003: 57) (Hughes et al., 2001:19). But
Germany is more keen to accept the enlargement of the EU only if this
represents a further integration process. This is because the
enlargement process always has an impact inside Germany because of
the freedom of goods and persons of the EU. (Hughes et al., 2001: 14)
The fifth enlargement wave occurred in
the first of January 2007 with Romania and Bulgaria, expanding the
borders of the European Union to the Black Sea. This expansion is
similar to the previous one as it represents the union of two members
in a situation of lower GDP and social level than the EU's average,
and also a necessity to reform the state, as it comes from an
authoritarian past.
As we can see, the enlargement
represents an important tool to make foreign policy. In addition to
the waves of enlargement seen before (that represents the culmination
of this foreign policy) there are other actions related to this
instrument that we are going to see some lines ahead, and that have
had a great impact provoking changes in third countries. The
effectiveness of this is related to the fact that is performed with
one voice (this is, the European Union bodies interacting with the
candidate country). One region targeted by the European Union as a
key part of its policies is the region of the Balkans, which were a
source of problems and instability inside the European continent.
Even with a war with criminals against the Human Rights. And, after
the European Union mediation and its setting of conditions (political
reforms, respect of the minorities and equal rights, arrest of war
criminals, economic reforms, etc.), the region reached a sustainable
level of economic growth and social improvements that made possible
an adhesion to the EU in foreseeable future. All these preconditions
were set by the European Union as a previous phase to the accession
to the Union and the single market. Some countries have introduced
all the necessary reforms and have achieved all the objectives set by
the EU, like Croatia, which solved all the territorial disputes with
its neighbours (one of them Slovenia, country which could have vetoed
its membership); it has also reached economic and institutional
stability, adopted the European directives and harmonization of the
law, and one of the most important things in this region, it has
turned all the war criminals to the International Court of The Hague.
(Traynor, 2011)
With the enlargement process it is
also interesting how the countries upload their own political
interest to be performed by the EU. Like the United Kingdom with
Turkey. At this moment, the UK is one of the main supporters for the
adhesion of this country (Hughes et al. 2001:12). The reasons are
mainly because the UK is more interested, as mentioned before, in the
extension of the EU and its Single European Market, and Turkey
represents a dynamic market with a numerous population. But it is
also because Turkey and the UK share the same points of view in many
foreign affairs like the conflicts in the Middle East. The same
happens with Sweden, more interested spreading the European Union
influence in the Baltic region, this country was one of the major
defenders on the enlargement of this territories, because of cultural
and economic tights.
Related
to the enlargement there is another foreign policy tool of the
European Union. This is call the normative power. One of the “goods”
the EU exports are norms, primarily to its neighbours. The EU does
this mainly by trade treaties or with humanitarian aid. The European
Union has different treaties with its neighbours, some are about
trade, and depending on the country the EU will ask, in exchange of
allowing the entrance of some type of products to the single market,
the implementation of a reform. The same modus
operandi with
the humanitarian aid. The EU usually does this actions in the
Mediterranean Basin (Elgström et al. 2006: 136) and the East of
Europe. The reason why the EU does this is because it feels that, as
it is in a position of power to impose its views, it has the moral
obligation to help the citizens of other countries to bring them the
benefits of living in a democratic and liberal state. So, it can be
said that the EU is “exporting” the democratic and liberal order
to other countries. This action is called the “soft power”,
instead of the “hard-power” of the US. (Schimmelfenning 2003:
Chapter 4)
Another foreign policy instrument at
European Union's disposal is the trade. As mentioned at the beginning
of this essay, the European Union is the biggest trade block in the
world. And it is represented, and this is an exception for the Union,
with one voice in the World Trade Organization in Geneva (Elgström
et al., 2006:189). The EU holds the seat in the organization
representing all the member states position with a common one.
Through the trade the EU also performs its foreign policy, blocking
it with some countries because a decision of the EU presidents (like
with Iran and Syrian in recent times). Also using the trade as a
consequence of interior policies, like the Common Agricultural Policy
and the unequal treaties with the Third World, where the European
Union sign with Third World countries trade agreements of free trade
for European goods, but, the main products of these countries
(agricultural ones) are locked in the EU's market because of the CAP
policies to protect the primary sector in Europe. The only goods
allowed are the ones that cannot be produced in Europe because of the
weather. This protectionist attitudes at the same time as it is
trying to open free trade zones with third countries are seen as
neocolonialist and have received many critics inside and outside the
European Union borders.
The European Union has different ways
of negotiation of trade treaties. Its primary objective is to
negotiate trading treaties with the regional economic organizations
like ASEAN or Mercosur and trying to get free trading zones.(Gualdoni
et al. 2010) With this bodies the agreements are usually even, but
with single countries the European Union usually uses its economic
power to impose its conditions, this is why sometimes it is
criticized .
But
this is not the only European Union's foreign policy instrument. The
EU, since the Lisbon Treaty was accepted enjoys a proto-diplomacy
service called the European External Action Service, created under
the umbrella of the High Representative, with embassies spread all
around the world (as it uses the national embassies of the EU member
states, although in some countries, usually regional key countries,
it has its own embassy). But there are some problems with this
External Action Service. Firstly it has budget problems, as it does
not have an entry, so it has to be financed by the Commission. Also
its size is too small to fulfill all the objectives (a diplomatic
service as big as the Netherlands' one). Among the operative problems
as it does not have a clear duty to do because there is not a clear
foreign policy position among the member states, so the EU is unable
to speak with one voice. This is because the member states does not
want to give up with the foreign policy and because the member states
have different interest because of their History. Some were imperial
powers like Spain, Portugal, France and United Kingdom; others
belonged to the Warsaw Pact like Romania and Hungary; others were
neutrals like Sweden, Finland and Austria; and others are micro
states like Malta. One consequence of this is that these countries
are more focus in one region of the globe than the others, for
example Spain is more interested in the Hispanic America affairs
rather than in the Oceania affairs. These makes so difficult to merge
the common foreign policy in one single opinion to be defended in the
international organizations. But, it is hoped that, with the further
merge of these countries in economic terms and a bigger budget to be
able to give a faster answer, finally the European Union will be able
to merge all the opinions into a single one.
To
continue with the foreign policy and the idea of the single voice.
Nowadays the European Union is represented, through its member states
in the main international organizations, and, in some, the European
Union is also presented as an observer. In the Security Council the
European Union is represented by France and Great Britain, and
sometimes by the non-permanent members. In the United Nations General
Assembly the European Union is represented by its
27 members and also by a European Union observer with the right to
speak and submit amendments. It is also a member of the FAO (Food and
Agriculture Organization) and also represented by the member states.
And, to mention another relevant organization, in the WHO (World
Health Organization) the European Union participates as an observer.
But, as said before, because of the absence of one voice (nowadays
there is the High Representative, the President of the European
Council, the President of the European Commission and the national
Governments) and the weakness of the materials given to the External
Action Service, the European diplomacy currently cannot be performed
in a proper way.
To summarize all the ideas mentioned
below, we can affirm that the most effective foreign policy of the
European Union is the enlargement tool. Although the foreign policy
throughout the trade it is also effective but it is seen as a
neocolonialist attitude and have received many critics. Also the
European External Action Service might work in the future with
further funding and a clearer role. Another problem for this Service
is that the member countries are not committed with the idea of
giving up with the foreign policy sovereignty because they are afraid
that their country interests are going to be underrepresented. Due to
the operative difficulties, unclear role and absence of one voice the
European diplomacy is problematic to be done by this body. Therefore,
the only way the European Union has succeed performing foreign policy
and where more milestones have been achieved is by using the
enlargement of the Single European Market and the of the European
Union. The exit can be seen in a continent that have enjoyed a large
quantity of years of peace, economic dynamism, social progress,
political stability and free movement of persons and goods. (Jeffery,
2002) And each decade going further from the core of the founder
countries.
Biography:
1-
Traynor, Ian; 2011, Goran
Hadzic capture a milestone for Yugoslav war crimes tribunal,
The
Guardian, 20th
of July. Available
at:
2-
Hughes. Lippert and Grabbe and Becker, British
and German interests in EU Enlargement, 2001.
3-
Schimmelfennig, Frank, The
EU, NATO and the Integration of Europe, 2003.
4-
Tonra, Ben and Christiansen, Thomas, Rethinking
European Union foreign policy, 2004.
5-
Elgström, Ole and Smith, Michael, The
European Union's Roles in International Politics, 2006.
6-
Kaiser, Wolfram and Elvert, Jürgen, European
Union Enlargement, a comparative history, 2005.
Chapters 4, 5 and 6)
7-
Gualdoni, F. González, M. and Calderón, V., 2010, La UE y Mercosur
se apresuran para cerrar un pacto de libre comercio este año. El
País, 17th
of May. Available at:
8-
Miles, Lee, Enlargement
of the European Union, 1995
9-
Jeffery, Simon, 2002, EU Enlargement,. The
Guardian, 12th
of December. Available at:
10-
Tatham, Allan F., Enlargement
of the European Union, 2009.
Chapters 2, 3, 5.
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario