Advertisement

“Great Europe”: A Pan-European Perspective on the Future of Europe

  • P. Garonna
  • Y. He

The Amato Report (see International Commission on the Balkans 2005) confronts the European Union (EU) with a very difficult dilemma with respect to the Western Balkans: either the EU proceeds with the enlargement and integrates the Balkan countries into the EU, thus ensuring stability, prosperity, and democracy in this troubled area and, consequently, in the whole EU, or the EU will be compelled to increasingly intervene in the Balkans in order to solve instability and underdevelopment crises, maintain peace and humanitarian assistance, fight corruption, criminality, and illegal immigration, while investing substantial financial political and military resources in the process. In other words the EU is facing a crossroads: enlargement or empire (Krastev 2005). The instability at its borders and the stall of the enlargement process is in fact causing an escalation of interventions and risks to create a set of “protectorates” or “supported areas” in the neighbouring countries (consider for instance Kosovo, but also in some respects Montenegro and Bosnia-Herzegovina) always on the edge between stability and instability, development and underdevelopment, democracy and authoritarian involutions. The course of growing humanitarian, security, or assistance interventions of the EU can be considered (in terms of the Amato Report) as some sort of European “neo-imperial” perspective towards neighbouring areas or areas included in its “sphere of influence”. This road is proving very costly and risks being ineffective at mid-term. It contrasts with the outstanding success of the EU enlargement policies, which at a relatively limited cost, have seen candidate countries and new members meet the challenge of the necessary economic and institutional reforms and, through economic integration, take the road to financial reorganization, democratic consolidation, and development. Therefore, in the light of the most recent experience, the enlargement is cost effective for the EU compared with neo-imperial external support and intervention strategies! This is the conclusion of the Amato Report, presenting a plan to have all Balkan countries take the necessary steps to join the EU within approximately 10 years from the date of the report, i.e. around 2015.

Keywords

European Union Member State Foreign Direct Investment Economic Integration Candidate Country 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Abraham F, Konings J (1999) Does the opening of Central and Eastern Europe kill jobs in the West. World Econ 22:585-603CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Angeloni I, Flad M, Mongelli FP (2005) Economic and monetary integration of the new member states: helping to chart the route. ECB occasional paper no. 36Google Scholar
  3. Baldwin R, Windgrèn M (2005) The impact of Turkey’s membership on EU voting. CEPS policy brief no. 62Google Scholar
  4. Barysch K (2006) Enlargement two years on: economic success or political failure? Confedera-tion of Danish Industries, CopenhagenGoogle Scholar
  5. Boeri T, Bruecker H (2001) The impact of Eastern enlargement on employment and labour markets in the EU. Report for the European Commission, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  6. Breuss F (2002) Benefits and dangers of EU enlargement. Empirica 29(3):245-274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Doyle O, Fidmuc J (2004) Who is in favour of enlargement? Determinants of support for EU membership in the candidate countries referenda. CEPR discussion paper no. 4273Google Scholar
  8. Easterly W (2004) Globalization, inequality and development: the big picture. New York University discussion paper no. 2004-E-20Google Scholar
  9. Easterly W (2005) The utopian nightmare. Foreign Policy, September-OctoberGoogle Scholar
  10. Easterly W (2006a) The big push déjà vu: a review of Jeffrey Sachs’s the end of poverty. J Econ Lit 44:118-127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Easterly W (2006b) An identity crisis? Examining IMF financial programming. World Dev 34(6)Google Scholar
  12. EBRD (2005) Transition report. EBRD, London EBRD (2006) Transition report. EBRD, LondonGoogle Scholar
  13. European Commission (2001) The economic impact of enlargement. Enlargement paper no. 4, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  14. European Commission (2002) Getting information on Europe: the enlargement of the EU, support for European integration. Special Eurobarometer no. 166, European Commission, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  15. European Commission (2005a) Integrated guidelines for growth and jobs (2005-2008). The EU Economy 2005 Review, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  16. European Commission (2005b) Rising international economic integration - opportunities and challenges. The EU economy 2005 Review, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  17. European Commission (2006a) Enlargement, two years after: an economic evaluation. Occa-sional paper no. 24, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  18. European Commission (2006b) Enlargement, two years after - an economic success. Communi-cation of the EC to the Council and the European Parliament, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  19. European Commission (2006c) Strengthening the European neighbourhood policy. Communica-tion from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament, Brussels, DecemberGoogle Scholar
  20. Garonna P (2006) Prospects for the Caspian economy: a Pan-European perspective. Paper pre-sented at Bled Strategic Forum, Bled, Slovenia, AugustGoogle Scholar
  21. Garonna P (2007) What is new about new Europe’s view of the future of Europe. In: Gaspar P, Jaksa RA (eds) Knowledge economy, innovation and growth in Europe. e-book, ICEG Euro-pean Center, BudapestGoogle Scholar
  22. Grassini M (2001) Eastern enlargement to the EU: economic costs and benefits for the EU pre-sent member states? The Italian case. European Commission, final report.Google Scholar
  23. Heijdra B, Keuschnigg C, Kohler W (2002) Eastern enlargement of the EU: jobs, investment and welfare in present and member states countries. CESifo working paper no. 718(7)Google Scholar
  24. International Commission on the Balkans (2005) The Balkans in Europe’s future. R. Bosch Stiftung, Stuttgart, GermanyGoogle Scholar
  25. Kohler W (2004) Eastern enlargement of the EU: a comprehensive welfare assessment. J Policy Model 26:865-888CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kopits G, Székely IP (2002) Fiscal policy challenges of EU accession for the Baltics and Central Europe. Conference paper Oesterreichische Nationalbank, Wien, 3-5 NovemberGoogle Scholar
  27. Korhonen I (2003) Some empirical test on the integration of economic activity between the euro area and the accession countries. Econ Transit 4:331-347Google Scholar
  28. Krastev I (2005) The European Union and the Balkans: enlargement or empire? Open Demo-cracy, AprilGoogle Scholar
  29. Lejour AM (2001) EU enlargement: economic implications for countries and industries. CESifo working paper no. 585Google Scholar
  30. Maliszewska M (2003) EU enlargement: benefits of the single market expansion for current and new member states. Centre for Social and Economic Research, PolandGoogle Scholar
  31. Radosevic S, Sachwald F (2005) Does enlargement conceal globalisation? Location issues in Europe, Les notes de l’Ifri no. 58Google Scholar
  32. Read R, Bradley S (2001) The economics of eastern enlargement of the EU. Ind Relat J 32(5):380-400CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Sachs J (2000) Globalization and patterns of economic development. Weltwirtsch Arch 136(4)Google Scholar
  34. Sachs J (2006) The end of poverty: economic possibilities for our time. Penguin, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  35. Stiglitz JE (1998) International development: is it possible? Foreign PolicyGoogle Scholar
  36. Stiglitz JE, Charlton A (2005) Fair trade for all, how trade can promote development. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  37. UNCTAD (2005) World investment report. United Nation Conference on Trade and Develop-ment, GenevaGoogle Scholar
  38. Verhofstadt (2005) Gli Stati Uniti d’Europa, Manifesto per una nuova Europa, Fazi Editore, Roma, Italian translation published in 2006Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Physica-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • P. Garonna
    • 1
  • Y. He
    • 2
  1. 1.Economic Commission for EuropePalais des NationsGeneva 10Switzerland
  2. 2.Capacity Building and Field Operations BranchUN Office of the High Commissioner for Human RightsGenevaSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations