31
Dr. David Galbreath Lecturer in Politics and International Relations [email protected] Office: F36 Edward Wright Building Hours: Tuesday: 10-12
Dr. David Galbreath
Lecturer in Politics and International Relations
Office: F36 Edward Wright Building
Hours: Tuesday: 10-12
The European Union and Enlargement
PI 2003 International Organisations in Europe –
Week 9
Previous Enlargement• Original members: Belgium, France,
Germany, Italy, Luxembourg and the Netherlands.●1973 Denmark, Ireland and the United
Kingdom ●1981 Greece●1986 Portugal and Spain●1995 Austria, Finland and Sweden●2004 10 new members
EU Enlargement• Political • Economic• Social
EU Enlargement: Questions• Why did the EU expand?• How did the EU expand?• What were the political implications of
expansion?• How did EU change to prepare for 15
new members?• What were the political, economic and
social requirements of new member-states?
• What is the future for EU expansion?
Why did the EU expand?• Changes the internal order of the EU;• Allows for greater divisions in the EU;• Forces painful economic and
institutional adaptations required of the applicant country;
• Encourages anxiety over immigration in the existing member-states.
Why did the EU expand?• Three views:
1. Rationalist approach2. Ethical-political approach3. Moral approach
Why did the EU expand?• Three views and hypotheses:
1. Rationalist approach• The EU would concentrate only on those states
that offered the most gain2. Ethical-political approach
• The EU would concentrate on those states that had an element of kinship
3. Moral approach• The EU would concentrate on democratic states
outside the community
Who supported enlargement?• ‘Drivers’ vs. ‘Brakemen’
●Drivers• those bordering the CEEC’s (except for
Italy and Greece)●Brakemen
• Recent new states (ex. Spain)• All others (except for Britain)
Who supported enlargement?• Drivers: two groups
●Limited round focusing on Central Europe (Hungary, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Poland, Slovenia)
●The ‘big bang’ enlargement
Who supported enlargement?Limited Enlargement
Inclusive Enlargement
Drivers Austria, Finland, Germany
Britain, Denmark, Sweden
BrakemenBelgium, Luxembourg,Netherlands
France, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Portugal, Spain
Who supported enlargement?• Reasons for support
●Geographical proximity• Interdependence• Shared borders• Economic gains
Export Share Output Share Disproportionately high share in exports Germany 41.2% 27.4% Austria 8.8% 2.7% Finland 3.1% 1.5% Roughly proportional share in exports Italy 16.1% 14.1% Netherlands 4.5% 4.6% Belgium/Luxembourg 3.8% 3.3% Sweden 3.1% 2.9% Denmark 2.0% 2.0% Greece 1.4% 1.4% Disproportionately low share in exports France 7.4% 17.8% Britain 5.6% 13.4% Spain 2.0% 6.8% Ireland 0.6% 0.8% Portugal 0.2% 1.3%
Member state shares of EU exports to Central and Eastern European countries and EU economic output
Who supported enlargement?• Reasons for support
●Geographical proximity?●Economic gain?●Influence?
EU Enlargement• Institutional Arrangements
●Copenhagen Criteria●Acquis Communautaire●Madrid European Council●Agenda 2000
EU Enlargement• Copenhagen Criteria
●stability of institutions guaranteeing democracy, the rule of law, human rights and respect for and protection of minorities;
●the existence of a functioning market economy as well as the capacity to cope with competitive pressure and market forces within the Union;
●the ability to take on the obligations of membership including adherence to the aims of political, economic & monetary union.
EU Enlargement• Acquis Communautaire
●Treaty of Amsterdam 1993●The body of EU law that must be
adopted into domestic law●Acquis politigue●Finalité politique
EU Enlargement• Madrid European Council
●Administration●Judicial Structures
EU Enlargement• Agenda 2000
●Amsterdam IGC 1997 and Luxembourg European Council 1998• Development of EU• Challenges of Enlargement
– Accession Process – Regular Reports• Financial framework beyond 2000
EU Enlargement• Agenda 2000 (regular reports)
● 1998-20031. Minorities2. Adoption of Acquis3. No delay for 64. Relied on other institutions and NGO’s
EU Enlargement• The logistics
●Should the Commission be re-weighted?
●Should voting change in the Council?●How will the new states be
represented in Parliament?
Political Conditions• Democracy
●Transition●Consolidation●European Union and Democratisation
Political Conditions• Political Conditionality
●‘This is achieved by specifying conditions or even preconditions for support, involving either promises of material aid or political opportunities.’
●Democratic Conditionality
Political Conditions• Democratic Conditionality (three
stages)1. Pre-negotiations2. Actual negotiations3. Once membership begins
Financial Issues• PHARE
● (Poland and Hungary: Aid for Economic Restructuring)
● Three aims:1. Pre-accession Funds for adoption of the
Acquis2. Structural Funds3. Aimed at Regions and regional
institutions
Financial Issues• PHARE
● Three phases:• Mark I (1989-97)• Mark II (1997-2000)• Mark III (2000-)
Financial Issues• Common Agriculture Policy
●Reforms at the Copenhagen summit in December 2002
●Direct payments phased-in●Lock-in strategy
Financial Issues• The Economic and Monetary Union
●Euro is obligation for new states●Although when and how is up to state●No states ready yet (euobserver.com)●Criteria: exchange rates, price
stability, interest rates, deficits and the status of central banks
What is the future for EU expansion?• Romania and Bulgaria (2007)• Turkey (2010?)• The Balkans (Croatia, Bosnia,
Serbia, Macedonia, Albania)?• Belarus, Ukraine, Georgia?• North Africa?
Conclusion• Why did the EU expand?• How did the EU expand?• What were the political implications of
expansion?• How did EU change to prepare for 15
new members?• What were the political, economic and
social requirements of new member-states?
• What is the future for EU expansion?
