the expansion of the European union after 1991

  1. The further enlargment of the EU
  2. political and economical integration and its impact on international relations
HideShow resource information
  • Created by: Tom
  • Created on: 21-04-14 21:03

the further enlargement of the EU

  • May 2004 - 25 member states
  • Western Europeans suggested once Comm. had withered, the formed Comm. states would be welcomed into EU and NATO
  • pre-access strategy established - technical + financial aid for form comm. states
  • 1992 - European agreements - enlarging EU by admitting former eastern bloc states - created free trade on industrial goods - excluded agricultural goods
  • 1993 - Copenhagen Summit - ratified European Agreements - first step toward full membership of EU. Defined criteria for entry:
    • creation of democratic institutions
    • commitment to protect human rights
    • market economy
    • recognition of minorities + their protection
    • adopt economic and monetary union
  • 1993 - Bulgaria, Czech republic, Hungary, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, guaranteed membership of E.U - Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Slovenia, eventually recieved membership
  • membership of EU easiestw ay to transition dictators/state-controlled economies to democracy/free market
  • membership of EU would remove possibility of instability across Europe
1 of 16

the further enlargement of the EU

  • gains for enlargment for member states were:
    • Eu market would enlarge and consist of over 100 million more consumers
    • Economic growth stimulated through EU
    • eastern European states would become integrated into West politics and economic systems - strengthen security and stability
    • improve environmental standards in east Europe - new members had to conform to EU standards
  • addition of members increased market competition
  • richer members faced with higher financial contributions to EU budget
  • growing fear that EU would become victim of East-West divide
  • clear issue of European identity - vast ethnic mix. heterogerous states
  • Agenda 2000 attempted to tackle this issue - defined immediately after Treaty of Amsterdam, 1997.
2 of 16

Agenda 2000

  • focused on budgets, policies and enlargments
  • recognised huge agricultural gaps between current EU members and new applicants. Restructure + modernisation necessary for entry
  • transition period planned to lessen shock of price changes for applicant states
  • Agenda 2000 made sure all applicants were ready for entry and ready to conform to EU standards - prevent divisions within EU
  • environmental issues in many applicant states - first step to address water pollution and air pollution
  • Transport also issue - all applicants had to conform to existing EU transport policy
  • made all applicants bring nuclear safety to international standards
  • modernisation programs would be implemented over 7-10 years
  • Agenda 2000 = preparing applicant for membership and making sure existing members not disadvantaged - making EU stronger - not undermining it by making ti larger but decreasing unity.
3 of 16

Agenda 2000 reactions

  • open negotiations immediately with 5 countries of central/eastern Europe
  • 5 would then be considered after
  • created a heirarchy - dissastisfaction within countries not in first 5
  • 'succesful 5' = Poland, Hungary, Estonia, Slovenia
  • delayed = Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Bulgaria, Slovakia
4 of 16

Agenda 2000 - the applicant states

  • Latvia + Lithuania felt Estonia had been assessed favourably. Latvian PM, Krasts, warned of Baltic divisions unless all Baltic states treated equally
  • Romania argued that putting the states in to two groups was divisive and counter productive. First wave countries would recieve greater foreign investment
  • Bulgaria accepted decision but was not happy with it
  • Slovakia accepted some limitations but argued it was not different from other states
  • response of those in group 1 were, of course, positive
  • September 1997 - EU commission argues there should be a common start for all 10 states
  • Hans Van de broek - "The idea that the EU is drawing new dividing lines across Europe is a red herring."(Financial Times, 1997)
  • Commisson said there was little convincing evidence that the procedure acted in a decisive way. Concern for EU rather than applicants.
5 of 16

Agenda 2000 - EU members

  • existing members saw expansion as positive
  • many applicant states were neighbours of existing states
    • Austria -> Slovenia, Hungary, Slovakia, Czech Republic
    • Germany -> Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary
  • these states were in eastern frontiers and acted as buffer zone for former S.U
  • October 1997 - Hans Vanden Broek - "one firm conclusion has been reached, namely that where differentiation is applied, it should never mean discrimate"
  • reccomendation of Commission accepted by EC - December 1997
  • comprehensive package of aid and support for applicant states was agreed by the council and EC President, Jean-Claud Jucker, considered outcomes to 'monumental'
  • commission president Santer - EC support had "opened the path to the peaceful unification of our continent"
6 of 16

title too long for this bad website...

Political and economic integration and its impact on international relations

  • can an organisation with so many members function collectively and maintain consensus of policy?
  • attempts to make a common policy date back to 1970's. Policy known as European Political Cooperation(EPC) - range very limited - clear it was not working by 1990
  • no common approach to 1991 Gulf War or collapse of Yugoslavia
  • 1991 - turning point - Maastricht Treaty + creation of common foreign and security policy(CFSP)
7 of 16

development of common foreign and security policy

  • Maastricht treaty - basic provisions for foreign and security policy:
    • a common foreign and security policy. Agreed foreign policy rather thn attempts to coordinate individual national ploicies as has been case up to 1992
    • defence as well as security would be role of CFSP
  • 1997 - Amsterdam Treaty moved EU closer to definite policy formulation structure when it referred to 'the progressive framing of a common defense policy'
  • despite desire to establish common foreign policy on foreign relations and security the EU remains at mercy of member states being unwilling to relinquish their national control of these policy areas
8 of 16

EU relations with superpowers - Russia

  • many newer members of EU = previous members of S.U
  • for EU, stable Russia is an advantage
  • 1994 - EU signed Partnership and Cooperation Agreement(PAC) with Russia - focus on providing a framework for cooperation in areas such as forieng and security policy, transport, energy policy, financial aid and technical aid issues.
  • PAC not implemented until end of 1997 because of Russian military action in Chechnya
  • 1999 - efforts made to strengthen relations in terms of foreign and security issues - Russia's aggression in Chechnya hampered these moves
  • terrorism in USA, 2001, neutralise Russian aggression in Chechnya, as they could be presented as part of war on terrorism
  • relationship with Russia lies in extent that EU develops defence capability
  • development of stronger defence could alarm Russia and raise fear about its own security
9 of 16

EU relations with United States

  • enlarged EU keen to maintain relationship with US for security
  • US strong supporter of EU expansion
  • central+eastern states who asked for membership saw best guarantee of security from US, not EU
  • if east became fragile, US would offer ebst military rpotection
  • some EU states not enthusiastic about US influence
  • France, Germany, Belgium critical of US decision to embark on Iraq War, 2003
  • new central+eastern states were pro-US  - expanded Atlatnic arm of E.U
  • danger it would drice a wedge between EU members - EU could not afford to develop a security policy which excluded the US
  • key to preserving link with US was NATO
  • end of cold war brought a re-evaluation of NATO's role. May 1990 - NATO announced Warsaw Pact no longer a threat - July 1990 moves toward establishing military cooperation between the two.
  • 1991 - Maastricht - EU set out plans to create common foreign/security policy(CFSP)
  • clear divisions grew between British and French. Britain saw NATO as base for EU security. France was backing seperate defence committe not back by US
  • clear by 1990 that structured EU defence would not develop
  • US clear leader of NATO, but no united EU defence force
10 of 16

EU relations with United States

  • NATO enlargment faster than EU enlargement. European states accept NATO enlargement has provided greater security
  • Poland, Czech Republic and Hungary all accept benefit of NATO security
  • NATO represented way of resolving disputes before they degenerate i.e Bosnia
  • linkage with US gives NATO global status and resources beyond anything any other EU state could aspire to
  • close relationship between EU and US continued since NATO formation in 1949
  • European security remains firmly attached to NATO and US leading role within it
11 of 16

contemporary debate on NATO enlargment

  • there were some significant objections to NATo enlargment:
    • enlargment would have reduced security of Europe. It would strengthen nationalism within Russia and therefore make it less likely that Russia would cooperate with Europe over arms reduction strategy
    • Russia would move toward closer ties with China in order to offset growing US-EU relations. Any expansion of NATO would be seen as expansion of US power and influence over Europe. Would have to be counter balanced by stronger ties with China
    • Enlarged NATO wouldn't be able to function coherently. Growth in membership = larger area to defend. Also bring more national interests which would lead to conflict of interests. Enlargment seen as distraction from more important need to expand EU succesfully
  • objections have no real substance. No evidence to show development of Russian policy affected by NATO enlargment since July 1997
  • NATO is purely a European defence organisation
  • fulfilled role of deterrence and increased European security
  • No evidence to suggest expansion undermined effectiveness
  • expansion was a positive step rather than negative
  • Historians argued membership of NATO was necessary factor in preparing states as members of EU
12 of 16

enlargement & post-cold war challenges

  • concerns any expansion of NATO would deter U.S from commitment to Europe
  • others feared NATO would become tool to manage US interests
  • U.S criticised unwarranted Russian involvement in NATO
  • Russia given right to consult in NATO council
  • NATO's initial post cold-war expansion underlined transformation from a system of collective defence to a political system providing collective security for expanding Europe
  • NATO's expansion took place when there was no immediate threat to Europe
  • reinforced view its purpose was aimed at collective security rather than resistance to an external threat.
  • Russia granted role in NATO shows it had become focused on collective security
  • Gale Mattox, Daniel Whiteneck - "A collective defence alliance seemed to have little purpose in a Europe where the democratic west faced no real foe"
13 of 16

economic impact of enlargement

  • new member states accepted in 2004 had 1/3-2/3 income levels of EU average
  • issue was how to ensure newer weaker members developed in order to achieve equal economic status
  • new members already had trading partners - raised issue of integrating them in to EU trade policy
  • Hungary especially keen to retain ties with former trading partners
  • Slovenia had free trade agreement with Croatia + Macedonia. Not accepted under Slovenia EU entry agreement
  • EU eventually signed trade relations with 'new nighbours'
  • economies of new members would have been destroyed if they were forced to cut old trade ties
  • redirection of trade seen as vital part of enlargment in order to prevent EU becoming protectionist and damaging economies of non-eu countries
  • In time the new members shifted away from traditional trading partners
  • 70% of trade of 2004 group of members already with EU states
  • membership of EU led to reduction in tariffs used by new members. EU tariffs lower than those in place in new member states
  • membership of EU meant trade policies of prospective members had to be in line with EU trade policy. not always easy to enforce
  • EU attempts to carry through this requirement had impact on world trade
14 of 16

economic impact of enlargement

  • 2001 - Poland set up trade agreements with US without consulting EU
  • economic impact of enlargement of EU focused on transition from socialism to capitalism. necessitated economic transformation
  • post-1991 enlargements have shown no idication that this non-protectionist outcome has changed
  • economic impact on international relations were minimal
15 of 16

outcome of enlargement

  • enlarged EU crated greater unity and stability despite the potential problems it inevitably generated
  • eastward movement of NATO raised implications about relationship NATO and Europe have with the non-EU states and Russia
16 of 16


No comments have yet been made

Similar History resources:

See all History resources »See all Cold War resources »