Example European Studies Essay

A Case Study of a Narrow Definition of Europe

"Europeis ringed - from Kalingrad in the North, to the Caucasus and Central Asia, tothe Balkans - by an arc of danger and instability." (EU Commissioner forexternal realtions Christopher Patten, July 2001).

Does this mean that at the present time 'Europe' and the European are one and the same thing?

Introduction:

The European or EU citizen is at the present time becomingsynonymous with the definition of the point to where the continent of Europeextends. This seems to be the case with the present reaction to enlargement andthe focus on crime from outside the borders of the EU and the fears of crimefrom the newly integrated countries and from those countries that ring the EU.Enlargement will illustrate the new tiered system in the EU, the newly ascendedcountries from post-Communist countries, which are viewed as not trulyEuropean. Therefore this discussion will illustrate how the definition of whatEurope is in the 21^st Century has been narrowed from the expanse ofthe European continent to the membership of the EU; whereby countries are aimingto join this political unit in order to gain legitimacy within the globalpolitical and economic structure.

Enlargement - A Case Study of a Narrow Definition of Europe:

Enlargement of the EU is a mixed blessing, becauseon one hand it is helping to achieve a status of stability and cohesivenessthroughout the region. On the other hand, there are concerns that in making theUnion larger will in fact de-stabilize the region. This is due to prejudice ofcertain groups which would have free access in the region, one such group arethe Roma Gypsy migrants from Slovakia. In the past few months the newspapershave displayed the concerns of the British public and politicians about thesemigrants when the nation joins the EU. Therefore this introduces the questionwhether the EU really respects the integrity of cultural difference? Otherproblems include the possible de-stabilizing of the economy by incorporatingsmaller, less affluent countries; marginal and war torn countries; andtransitional countries. These countries could also cause the EU problems inregard to its unique approach of ensuring cohesiveness by using the rule of law,because if the EU gets too large it may not be possible any longer to ensureits political and legal stability. Therefore the consistency and coherence thatthe rule of law ensures is no longer apparent due to the sheer size of theUnion. Another problem lies in the fact that smaller nations may not have thelegal, political and economic clout to ensure that their agenda is considered.Although previously it has been mentioned that the EU's rule of law acts as acheck and balance to more powerful nations, in truth the original countries inthe EU were mainly ex-colonial empires. The newer nations that are joining theEU are akin to colonies of a colonial power, therefore there is an inherentimbalance in the Union.

However in response to the negative effects of thepossible de-stabilization of the region, one must consider that in order tojoin the Union each nation must have fulfilled the Copenhagen Criteria. This criterion states that each joining nation mustbe:

Be a stable democracy, respecting human rights, the rule of law,and the protection of minorities; have a functioning market economy; adopt thecommon rules, standards and policies that make up the body of EU law.

The EU paints avery enthusiastic picture of enlargement, where the only outcome of enlargementis beneficial. In truth this is a very lopsided picture because of the publicoutcry against the possible immigration into the original EU states. This canbe seen in the article by Cathy Newman in the Financial Times:

Britain will throw open its doors to workers from the formercommunist countries joining the European Union on May 1, but those that refuseto get a job will be denied benefits and thrown out, the government haspledged

Tony Blair - after months of pressure from the Tories and therightwing press over fears of an influx of immigrants from the former Sovietbloc - vowed: "If they can't support themselves, they will be put out ofthe country."

This articleillustrates the problems that have occurred within one nation over the policyof enlargement. Although the enlargement is supposed to bring together theEuropean region, the public opinion of at least one EU nation is resisting theexpansion, in relation to economic migrants - migrants which the nation hastraditionally refused asylum applications. However these fears may be unfoundedbecause as Kraus & Schwagerargue that increased migration from East to West EU countries would onlyoccur under the fear of rejection to Union membership. In fact they argue thatthe EU's expansion will have a beneficial effect on the economy of thesesmaller nations and this will result in a boost of their economies and jobmarket, hence reducing the amount of migrants from East to West. The conclusionof their article they state that:

Policy makers who are, forwhatever reason, reluctant to accept large numbers of immigrants should notfeel troubled with enlargement. On the contrary, the prospect of joining the EUmay well reduce immigration. The economic and social benefits which probablyaccrue to Eastern Europe from accession should be presented as a means toreducing the incentives to emigrate. Policies which enhance convergence ofincome levels in eastern and western Europe, such as the internal market and,possibly, Structural Funds should be promoted. .. In this process, diverginginterests of major EU members have created substantial uncertainty about thedate and conditions of accession. It is quite plausible that such uncertaintyhas raised the fear among potential migrants that accession may fail or bepostponed for a long time. According to our result, this may have increasedimmediate immigration. Thus, if immigration is not desirable, for future accessionrounds a straightforward and predictable negotiation process is to berecommended.

Hence Kraus& Schwager argue that the fears of the right, which have been fed tothe public through the media, concerning immigration from the East that willde-stabilize the economy, have no place. This is because the possible migrantswould prefer to stay in their homeland with a stronger and growing economyrather than move to another nation. However, although these fears may beunfounded the resistance to these new citizens from the Eastern Europeillustrates the possible de-stabilization of the EU politically. In addition tothis it causes problems legally because the cornerstone and the uniqueness ofthe EU lies within the rule of law and one of the most important laws that isupheld is the Free Movement of EU Citizens, which includes their abilityto trade, reside and work in part of the EU. Yet, the accession of the newEastern European nations has heralded blocks to this ability by many of theoriginal and major EU players. In the UK it has caused a debate because thegovernment was going to allow a free movement of possible immigrants but thishas been resisted by the right, as well as members of the public. This isillustrated by the arguments of Michael Howard, leader of the ConservativeParty:

Mr Howard,seeking to make political capital out of Labour's discomfort on the issue, willaccuse the Government of complacency over the implications of the EU'sexpansion in May. This comes as the Government sought to play down fears thatBritain would be flooded by migrants seeking work in more prosperous parts ofthe EU. During a high-profile visit to Burnley, the scene of race riots in2001, Mr Howard will demand that Britain copy the "transitionalarrangements" adopted by Germany and France to prevent citizens from newEU members from working there. Mr Howard will say: "The Conservative Partyhas always supported the enlargement of the EU to take in the former communistcountries of Eastern Europe. We continue to do so."

But he will continue: "Almostevery other country in the EU has quite rightly taken the precaution of puttingin place transitional arrangements to deal with immigration from the accessioncountries. It is still not too late for the British Government to put in placetransitional arrangements as well. If we were in government, we would do so.The Government has approached this problem in typical fashion. First it failedto address it, then it ignored it, now it is claiming to face up to it."

In short thecohesiveness that the EU has claimed will occur with the enlargement has not happenedin the expected manner. Ever since enlargement there have been a greater amountof problems combating organized crime, because of decreased security,corruption of public officials in favor of organized crime groups in the newlyacceded nations and the breaches of human rights in arrests. Therefore thiscreates problems for combating organized crime with either prisoners being letoff on technicalities, the vastness of places to hide decreasing theeffectiveness of policing or the police not interested in fighting organizedcrime. Kennedy has commented that the EU is committed to justly and fairlyfighting organized crime within the realms of human rights and justice; howeverits weakness is that it relies only on specific domestic member state intelligence:

We are being told that Europol and Eurojust - the new European bodyto strengthen collaboration between justice ministries and prosecution services- will only act on specific intelligence. This is to rely on the integrity ofthe state and its officials [I]t also means relying on the intelligence ofother countries and, as I have said before, we have no idea about how this maybe collected and by what standards. Justice does not permit shortcuts, butgovernments will readily pursue quick and dirty solutions to problems if notkept under scrutiny.

Therefore bypurely relying on only specific intelligence this will reduce the effectivenessof the fight against organized crime, especially when there is the addedproblem of corrupt post-communist regimes that have joined the EU afterenlargement; whereby the true European, i.e. the EU citizen needs to beprotected especially those original member states which define the true Europe.