The European Union s Final Frontiers How far can

The European Union’s Final Frontiers How far can it expand ? Graham Avery EU Study Weeks, St. Petersburg 22 October 2011

Themes • • • Why has the EU expanded? Who can join it? What are the limits of Europe? What prospects for future enlargement? Where will the EU’s final frontiers lie? Can they be decided in advance?

From EC-6 to EU-27 • European political & economic integration – 1950 Schuman Declaration of 9 th May – 1952 European Coal & Steel Community – 1957 European Economic Community – 1993 European Union • For most of its existence, countries have been knocking on the door. . .

1952

1973

1981

1986

1990

1995

2004

2007

2011

Enlargement : why ? • Magnetism of EU’s method of integration • Enlargement policy is – reactive, not proactive • Expansion is driven by – pressure from applicants – not imperial ambition

Enlargement : who ? Treaty on European Union (as amended by Lisbon Treaty) • Article 49: ‘Any European state which respects the values referred to in Article 2 and is committed to promoting them may apply to become a member of the Union’

• Article 2: ‘The Union is founded on the values of respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities. These values are common to the Member States in a society in which pluralism, non-discrimination, tolerance, justice, solidarity and equality between women and men prevail’

Copenhagen criteria 1993 • Membership requires: – stability of institutions guaranteeing democracy, rule of law, human rights and respect for and protection of minorities – existence of functioning market economy and capacity to cope with competitive pressure and market forces within the Union – ability to take on obligations of membership

Membership is based on values • But EU not designed for world government • Logically, expansion must stop somewhere • Membership is also based on geography – requires contiguity or proximity • So what are the limits of Europe? – geographical – historical – cultural

Europe - geography

Geographical limits of Europe • In North, West & South the European continent is well defined by seas • borderline cases: Cyprus, Iceland • But in East the limits are unclear • River Tanais? (Greeks, Romans) • Ural mountains? (Strahlenberg, Tatishchev) • Some geographers say Europe is not a continent • Western peninsula of continent of Eurasia

Europe – when?

Historical & cultural limits • • • Roman empire Charlemagne Renaissance Enlightenment Christianity • Western church • Eastern church

European Commission 1992 The term ‘European’ has not been officially defined. It combines geographical, historical and cultural elements which all contribute to European identity. The shared experience of proximity, ideas, values, and historical interaction cannot be condensed into a simple formula, and is subject to review by each succeeding generation. It is neither possible nor opportune to establish now the frontiers of the European Union, whose contours will be shaped over many years to come

But is it really impossible ? • What states are accepted as ‘European’ by international treaties today? • Consider the Council of Europe – founded in 1949 (before EU) • Aims & tasks are different. . . • . . . but all EU members are signatories

Council of Europe

Council of Europe: 47 members • European Union (27 states) plus: • Albania, Bosnia & Herzegovina, Croatia, Macedonia (FYROM), Montenegro, Serbia • Turkey • Iceland, Norway, Switzerland • Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Moldova, Russian Federation, Ukraine • Andorra, Liechtenstein, Monaco, San Marino

• Add 2 states not yet in Council of Europe – Kosovo: will be accepted when recognised – Belarus: would be accepted if democratic • Subtract 4 micro-states (less than 100, 000) – Andorra, Liechtenstein, Monaco, San Marino – too small to operate in EU • That leaves 45 recognised as ‘European’ – of which 27 EU members – 18 not yet EU members

EU-45 ? • So we have 18 states which – if they decide to apply for EU membership – could not be refused as ‘non-European’ • But EU-27 will not necessarily expand to 45 – No state is obliged to apply – EU is not obliged to accept an applicant – New states may be created – States may leave EU

Deepening vs. Widening • A question accompanying each expansion • Has more led to less? • Results of enlargement from 15 to 27 – No paralysis of decision-making – EU works as well / as badly as before • With increased size EU has developed more substantial polices (internally & externally) than it could with smaller group

Absorption capacity European Council, Copenhagen 1993 • ‘The Union’s capacity to absorb new members, while maintaining the momentum of European integration, is an important consideration in the general interest of both the Union and the candidate countries’ • Demystification by Commission in 2006 • But ‘pace of enlargement must take absorption capacity into account’ (European Council)

Dominic Lieven The Russian Empire and its Rivals • The problem is to reconcile our tradition of national sovereignty and democratic selfgovernment with our attempt to create a system of continental scale, so as to achieve goals which go beyond the power of the nation state • The basic dilemma for the EU is to reconcile the expansion required for its economic efficiency, its security, and its external power with a sense of solidarity and legitimacy among its multinational citizens

2011

Situation today • Applicants for EU membership: • • • Turkey (1987) Croatia (2003) Macedonia (2004) Montenegro (2008) Albania, Iceland, Serbia (2009) • ‘Candidates’ & ‘potential candidates’ • Other countries aspiring to EU membership (Ukraine etc. )

The EU’s next frontiers • In short & medium term EU will limit its expansion to: – countries of Western Balkans: membership promised by EU at Thessaloniki in 2003 – Turkey: accession uncertain, and in any case will take a long time – EFTA countries: Iceland (plus Norway & Switzerland if they apply for membership)

European Free Trade Agreement (EFTA) • European Economic Area (EEA) – EU-27 & Norway, Iceland, Liechtenstein – EU’s closest relationship with neighbours • Iceland: EU application 2009 – result of financial crisis • Norway: EU accession treaties 1972, 1994 – but ‘no’ in referendums • Switzerland: EU application 1992 – but withdrawn after referendum on EEA

Iceland • Smallest state ever to apply (320, 000) • Well qualified under EU’s criteria – Democracy – Europe’s oldest assembly – Economy – recovered since crash in 2009 – In EEA – applies many EU rules already – In Schengen zone - free movement of persons • Potential problems – Fisheries, agriculture, whaling – Public opinion in Iceland

Turkey • Longest wait: candidate since 1987 • Biggest candidate: 78 m now, 90 m in future • Arguments in favour of membership – Economic: rapid growth, labour force – Political: geostrategic position - yes, but. . . • Problems – Copenhagen criteria: minorities, civil/military relations, freedom of expression – Cyprus

• Accession negotiations began 2004 – slow progress, chapters blocked by FR, CY – negotiations now practically stopped • Negotiations opened on false premise: – no unanimity on EU side to conclude them • Public opinion in EU – Turkey not perceived as European • ‘too Muslim, too poor, too big’ – France committed to referendum • What alternative options for Turkey?

Western Balkans

Western Balkans

Western Balkans • Total population 25 million, of which: – Croatia (4. 5 m) – Bosnia-Herzegovina (4. 5 m) – Serbia (7. 3 m) applied 2009 – Kosovo (1. 8 m) – Montenegro (0. 7 m) – Macedonia/FYROM (2. 1 m) – Albania (3. 6 m)

Western Balkans • Slow progress to EU membership – Heritage of conflict – Uncertain frontiers – External dependence – ‘protectorates’ • Problems of governance – improve administration, strengthen judiciary, combat organised crime, corruption, etc. • No realistic alternative to EU membership • Major test of EU’s ‘soft power’

Croatia • Applied for EU membership 2003 • Opened accession negotiations in 2004 • Concluded negotiations in June 2011 – Treaty to be signed in December 2011 • Croatia due to join EU in July 2013 – if Treaty ratified by all countries

Serbia • Biggest state in region • Secession of Kosovo – Conflict between Serbia’s European & national priorities – Bilateral talks with Kosovo begun in 2011 • Progress – Applied for EU membership 2009 – Commission has proposed ‘candidate status’ • EU was created on basis of reconciliation – Vergangenheitsbewältigung – coming to terms with the past

Bosnia-Herzegovina • • Slowest progress of region Legacy of post-Jugoslavia conflict Not yet autonomous: UN ‘protectorate’ Unresolved intra-community conflicts – Bosniaks, Serbs, Croats • Status of Republika Srpska – ‘state within a state’

Kosovo • Declaration of independence 2008 • Not fully recognised as state – not by EU members ES, SK, RO, GR, CY • Need for – better governance & rule of law – further economic reforms – improved inter-community relations – reconciliation with Serbia

Montenegro • • Independence from Serbia 2006 Applied for EU membership 2009 Obtained ‘candidate status’ 2010 Commission has proposed opening of accession negotiations

Macedonia/FYROM • Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia • Applied for EU membership 2004 • Obtained ‘candidate status’ 2005 • But name dispute with Greece blocks – opening of EU accession negotiations – membership of NATO

Albania • • Applied for EU membership 2009 Was poorest country of Europe Now making progress Prospects – Many reforms of governance needed • But political impasse since 2009 elections – Parliament not functioning

EU’s Eastern Partnership

The EU’s final frontiers • In longer term EU may consider other East European countries as potential members: – Ukraine 47 m, Belarus 10 m, Moldova 3. 6 m – Azerbaijan 9 m, Georgia 4. 4 m, Armenia 3. 2 m • Presently in EU’s Neighbourhood Policy – an ‘accession-neutral’ relationship – enhanced by Eastern Partnership 2009 – leading to Association Agreements • Role of Russia in European neighbourhood

Russia in EU? • Idea of EU membership mentioned by leaders on both sides (Yeltsin, Berlusconi) • But is it feasible for Russia with – self-image as a ‘great power’ – population of 140 million – different interpretation of democracy • Maybe one day. . . ? – Russia’s declining population – relations with China

Decide EU’s final frontiers now ? • Not desirable: definition of limits would – discourage states excluded – diminish leverage for states included • Not possible: enlargement needs unanimity – EU members have widely differing views

Conclusion • Final limits of EU will result – not from strategic choice made in advance – but from successive political decisions & events • EU’s policy of ‘constructive ambiguity’ – neither ‘yes’ nor ‘no’ to future enlargement • Not close door to other Europeans – allow all Europeans to take part in the construction of our common house

The European Union’s Final Frontiers How far can it expand ? Graham Avery EU Study Weeks, St. Petersburg 22 October 2011