Now, however, I find myself in the middle of it all. The EU has been mentioned in every single one of my classes, even if it does not seem relevant to the subject material. Consequently, I cannot stop myself from trying to pinpoint exactly when it started to go wrong and what current events mean for its shaky and uncertain future.
One of my classes in Lyon has talked extensively about the various expansions of the EU, particularly the large 2004 absorption of many former Communist countries following the collapse of the Soviet Union. While this expansion is rightly heralded as a victory for democracy, I cannot help but think that this might have been a bad strategic move for the EU. It dramatically increased the number of votes needed to get things accomplished and pushed the center of the EU eastward, further from the former core situated between France and Germany. These newly absorbed countries also took funds away from already struggling economies such as Italy and Spain, and Germany was forced to become the primary monetary support for nearly an entire continent.
Craig Parsons discussed the issue of enlargement in “A Brief History of the EU,” questioning the possible acceptance of Turkey. I am inclined to agree with those that believe Turkish accession would be the “end of Europe,” primarily for the following reasons: (1) If accepted, Turkey’s rapidly growing population could make it the largest EU member, giving it an incredible amount of power and (2) Turkey’s geographic location is quite a bit removed from the center of the EU, meaning that its accession could trigger the end of a purely “European” union. As Parsons poses, would that make Morocco next?
No comments:
Post a Comment