European Union comes at the limit of its enlargement

Borislav Gradinarov*


The negative outcome of the referendums for European Constitution in France and Netherlands should be perceived as a symptom of the tendencies and dispositions in the EU. It is obvious that the latest enlargement from May, 1st 2004 when 10 states from central and Eastern Europe become members of the EU, changed the balance in direction that is perceived as negative for the national interests of the old member states.
The paradoxical implications of the referendum outcomes are that France and Netherlands obviously see the constitution as irrelevant to their own attitudes and visions of the future, but because of different, even opposite motives. In France the leading motive appears to be the fear of the limitation of the compass of the welfare state, while in Netherlands the leading arguments were related with the persuasion that the new rules would confine the economic liberalism and enhance exceptive social functions. For both of them evident is the fear of immigration from Eastern Europe and the penetration of Islamic fundamentalism.
Maybe strong impact had also the fact that in the constitution the political influence of the old member states or the establishers is smaller in future decision making. It should not be forgotten also that all that was a good chance for the people to show the discontent with their own governments. It is possible to observe the same tendency in Denmark and in other member states.

But there is another important question. It is related with the speed and the mode in which the economic, political and social integration of the member states is achieved. It is obvious that the main political wings, the souvereignists and the federalists, do not see a common ground in the proposed document, which could help to overcome their contradictions. And this has its consequences. One of them is that more time would be necessary for the mutual adaptation of the different political, legal and economic systems, in order that the suspicion and distrust could be overcome. In such a way a question mark is put about the speed of the enlargement. No doubt Europe needs more solid foundation for its integration. But it is suspicious that this could happen without acceptable compromise, which could not easily be achieved at this stage and needs more time.
Another consequence is the possible reconsideration of the way one of the main elements of the European integration – the free movement of goods, services, persons and capitals – should be built up. The fears of invasion of cheep and more unpretentious labour force and of transfer of production power in central and Eastern Europe should not be underestimated. In such a sense it is undisputable that EU needs more integral strategy and clear rules for the relations between the member states. And not only with respect to the political.
The third consequence is that the recent events in France and Netherlands could influence negatively the economic growth and the rate of exchange of the EU currency. And this could only deepen the future problems.
From the point of view of Bulgaria and Romania such a progress is undoubtedly a negative token. The situation is interpreted as a sign that the member states do not want future enlargement with poorer states that have political and legal problems. In the same time the possible delay of the ratification of the signed contracts in April 2005 would have probably a negative impact on the quality of life and the economies of the two states. This would be a bad example for the other states that want to become members of EU.
The most important conclusion is that EU obviously comes at the limit of its enlargement. It needs a sufficient intensive period of acknowledgement and getting accustomed to its own political ‘body’. In order to defend its place in the globalizing world it is necessary to bring it in good social and economical condition. In such a sense the EU integration is no more a mere political but far more encompassing activity. And surely, it is no longer in the hands of the national governments but should involve more actors.

June 2005

* Borislav Gradinarov is Professor at the Institute for Philosophical Research, Bulgarian Academy of Science.


PREVIOUS PAGE

The opinions

Send your opinion

European Union comes at the limit of its enlargement