KONA, Gamze Güngörmüş and Zeynep Özonur (2006). “EU Borders and the Problem of Enlargement”. The paper presented at the International Symposium on the Changes and Transformations In The Socio-economic and Political Structure of Turkey Within the EU Negotiations, organized by Stiftung Zentrum Für Türkeisstudien – Universitat Essen Duisburg and Dumlupınar University, March 16-18, 2006, Kutahya.
EU Borders and the Problem of Enlargement
Abstract
This essay concentrates on the examination of reasons of expansion’s being a problem for EU, to investigate what it has won and lost financially, socially, politically and militarily while it reaches its borders limits; focusing on the origins of European identity to debate the unity of EU and its impacts on the expansion; to investigate whether globalization is instictive to EU and to determine its borders keeping its cultural fibre in consideration. This essay analyzes the classical expansion methods and their principles for each expansion vawe seperately and aims to answer the question of eastward orientation and the reasons for the policy change. In conclusion, through a character analysis of Europe and taking its contradictions found out scrutinizing the teraties since European Coal and Steel Community after the WWII, real goal of EU and its sincerety is to be determined.
Introduction
It has been observed that beginning at the end of WWII European integration has reached from common market to single market, from the stage of monetary union to the stage of politcal union. On the way to this political integration the most important debates were concentrated on the enlargement and the structure of EU which would take shape afterwards, and the latest enlargement vawes have been the cause of a new debate : deepening along with enlargement.
Problems that arose on the way from European Common Market to European Union necessiated the economic integration to be completed with political integration and as the natural outcome, this nessicity has been the main cause for deepening followed each and every expansion.
Since neo-functionalism describes international relations as being comprising and cooperative rather than controdictory, neo-functional perspective was brought afore among the international relations theories as the descriptive theory for the integration process. As regards to the EU in particular it was debated that integration process started in the economic field was due to spill over to other fields as the common economic policies were applied. Deepening on the peace created by the commercial relations among the states, it was the goal to establish a political power within a federal structure resting on national interests and established by sovereign states.[1]
As the conclusion, although the EU has reached its targets set as economic integration, it is still debated whether it is capable of transfering its above mentioned success to political and social dinensions. Eventhough it can be taken for granted that some problems have been resolved by European Constitution signed in 2004, the existence of European identity sociologically; whether it is possible to mention about a state which would hold the Eoropeans together taking European identity as the base; whether European identity will serve as a base for that state and whether the consciousness of unity will be able to eradicate the national identity in minds are the questions not answered as yet.
This essay deals with this identity perspective of integration whose main trends for exenlargement is economic. The answers for the contradictions within are to be found in the above questions. An an assertive structure such as unity is to be based upon a common sense, a common culture and a common identity whose creation is probable. A Union created by the Europeans who do not feel themselves as European is sure not to be able to take any further step than being an economic cooperation and is doomed to share the destiny of empires that bore the claim of unity once upon a time.
European Union and Its Formation Process
After the World War II Europe as the border between U.S.A. and U.S.S.R. was exposed to regional presures and found the solution in returning socially and regionally to itself. A state of welfare was created and regional compromise was reached in europeanization economically.[2] As the outcome, Treaty of Rome conceptualized a Europe of free curculations of capital, goods, servisces and people. With this aim European Economic Community ( European Common Market ) and European Atomic Energy Community were established by Germany, Italy, France, Benelux.
As the European Economic Union had aims such as economic development, harmony, bettering off the welfare and intense relations among the conutries, it put forward some conditions such as abolishing the custom duties among the countries and common custom duty policy against the third world, free circulation of capital and workforce or common policies of agriculture and transportation.[3] Explanations given hitherto as examples clearly display that the purpose is to sustain stability and welfare by creating a Union. The European Atomic Energy Community established by the same treaty set them as its goals to forward peaceful atomic energy; to establish a nuclear energy industry not in national scale but in European scale; to fulfill security and health regulations; and to create a common market for nuclear meterials and equipment.[4]
As hitherto seen, these organizations aiming to establish the common peace through the practice of common policies emphasize economic framework. However, main purpose of European Coal and Steel Community established by the Treaty of Paris in 1951 was to prevent an German-French contradiction especially on Saarland and Alsace Loraine regions[5] and while setting the economic framework with the aim of integrating steel and coal industries gained a political framework through the idea of “ United States of Europe “[6] which idea it set as the ultimate goal for itself.
These organizations being the economic and political pillars of the integration were described as “ pragmatic “. As Germany, France, Italy, Belgium, Holland and Luxemburg being members of the three organizations had some gains seperately. While France widened her market for agricultural products through industrialization and gained political initiative in this way, Germany regained her credebility devastated by the W.W. II and increased industrial goods export.[7] In addition, Holland gained some advantages from the increasing trade due her development in fright transportation; Italy and Belgium received support to speed up their industrialization.[8]
These organizations for the common goal of economic and commercial development bearing the aim of creating free trade, free circulation and common customs united and this union was named as European Community on July 1st., 1967. Since after this point staying outside the European Community created a feeling of loneliness for the countries the integration process gained speed.
Classical Method of Expansion and Its Principles
E.U. ( E.E.C. till before 1992 when it became E.U. by the Treaty of Maastricht ) was developed on two main axis of logic : expansion and deepening. Expansion progressed alongwith economic development as the prior is related to the latter. In order to preserve their resources and fortify freedom and peace, Treaty of Rome invited European countries tos hare values to join the Union.[9]
Consequently, classical method is the method of uniting. This method depends on cooperation, integrates policies practiced sectorally and aims for moving from national level to supranational level depending on the pirniciple of credibility as the base.
As for the principles, the applicant country is to accept the Acquis ( free circulaition and commonly practiced policies ). As the problenms increase with each expansion, E.U. is in need of new instruments rather than structural reforms anda this necessitiate deepening alongwith.
Harmony is one of the most important principles in the Union. Keeping expending is for the interests of E.U. and solving the problems within the Union.[10]
It would be easier to grasp the analysis of eşpansion vawes within this perspective.
The First Enlargement Vawe
Common market was the main cause of many crisis and made it impossible that member states cooperate and compromise as the deepening stopped. Especially, due to the must of making amendments in laws for harmonization in order to reach the goals set by the establishment agreements caused the crisis. At this point deepening stopped, expansion started and countries with different levels of devlopment and sociocultural aspects integrated.
As the first attempt U.K. which was supporting the Union declared her candidacy for the Union in 1962 but could not joined it due to the veto of France by De Gaulle. U.K. was rejested with a veto of the same kind for the second time on May 10th, 1967. It was asserted that the main logic of those vetos “is that U.K. be the trojan horse of U.S.A. and if joined, her main pupose be to limit the European integration only within a framework of a regional commerce”.[11]
In spite of the French vetoes, U.K. was supported by Belgium, Holland, Italy and Luxemburg in order to balance a German-French hegemony and by Germany in order to increase her export to U.K. through the Common Market.
Denmark and Ireland took place in the first vawe of expansion. Both of the countries made their applications on May 11th., 1967. European Community membership served for the two country as a leverage lessening their dependance on U.K. and as a cahance for retail trade with the member countries.[12] U.K., Denmark and Irland became members of Euorpenan Community on January 1st., 1967. Norwegians rejected their country’s membership for which the application was made on July 21st., 1967.
Southern Enlargement
Greece, Portugal and Spain became members of The European Community in two seperate expansion vawes as a chain of three rings. These new members were accepted as they belong to European culture and history and it is necessary countries new to democracy be sopported eventhough it was evident that the existing unemployment, regional inequalities and migration as their natural outcome are to be worsened by their enterance into The European Community.[13] The political and economical expectations of these three countries were the development of their democracies and economy respectively.
The Second Enlargement Vawe
Greece signed the Union Agreement in order to develop free trade. She was to remove tariffs and quotas and put eliminate her products in twelve and twentytwo years’ time respectively. European Community suspended the agreement due to military coup in Greece. She was recommended a pre-entrance time in order to get ready for Acquis but this recommendation was put aside due to her lobbying activities. This situation created by Greece was interpreted as “non-observerance af Acquais”[14] Deep seperation of ideas occured and her candidacy was rejected as the democracy might be jeopardized and she was persuaded into waiting for Spain and Portugal in order to create a chain of three rings - Integrated Mediterranean Program -
In 1975 after the democracy was re-established in the country, Greece remade a membership application for the second time and was asked to wait till 1981 due to some political rather than economic reasons and was accepted later that year.
The Third Enlargement Vawe
Spain and Portugal displayed many inconsistencies in many aspects such as their economic conditions, development levels and trade deficits. Especially Spain became the most poblematic country in respect of regional inequalities, fishery, agricalture and industry. As to Portugal, due to her non-volumous economy and inequalities between her and the Community she bore hesitation that she would be incapable of fulfilling the requirments of the integration process.[15]
Against all the negative aspects Spain’s and Portugal’s applications made in 1977 were accepted on January 1st., 1986.
Treaty of Maastricht (1992) and Its Consequences
Founding agreements were revised by the Treaty of Maastiricht. European Community was transformed to European Union; issues such as common market and free circulation were realized. While geographical expansion was fixed by the borders of Europe in order to eliminate the east-west seperation within Europe, political and social issues were contained by the agreements of the Union. With respect to economical issues the process for economic and monetary integration started upon the Single European Act was signed. It was decided common monetary policy be set up by the Treaty of Maastricht. This agreement eliminated the bi-polarity within the European Union and keping the insufficiensies of foreign policy of E.U. in consideration, Common Foreign and Security Policy was founded as one of the main pillars[16] of the Union.
The agreement which described the Union as a forever and compulsory supranational law order dealt with the identity transition problem as a matter of law. Political integration could not be completed due to limits set by the cold war, but Treaty of Maastricht was seen as a great chance due to the fear that soul of the Union and Union consciencousness would dissappear.[17] In this way the concept of “ European citizenship “ came into being.
Copenhagen Criteria (1993)
Copenhagen Ciriteria were created to harmonize relation established with Central and East Euporean Balkan Counteries after the callapse of U.S.S.R. Countries that would be recent memebers should meet sone political, economic criteria outside and along with Acquis Commutaries[18]. These criteria are as follows :
Political criteria : Democracy, state of law, human rights, respect to minorities and guaranteed protection for them.
Economic criteria : Existence of operative market economy, competition pithin the Union and capability of competition with market powers.[19]
The Fourth Enlargement Vawe
E.U. having had dynamism set as the goal decided to increase its affecteiveness as an international role player by increasing its population and surface area. With respect to that purpose, the Union, as the first attempt, offered candidacy right to the countries that due to their economic levels could easily meet the Union’s criteria and enhance the Union with their high standards and force southern countries (Greece, Spain and Portugal) into meeting the criteria and the requiered economic level that they could not meet.[20] These countries were Austria, Finland and Sweden.
Recently mentioned countries preponderant as throughout the cold war they were forced into having a policy as much economic as strategicly of non-alignment bore importance for E.U. in order that it became an affective role player in the changing international system. They set examples for the countries to increase welfare and confidence. Since they entered the Union as a group of counteries rich, traditional and democratic, they were very succesful in creating hormonization with the Union.
Austria, Sweden and Finland that made their applications on seperate dates became menbers on January 1st., 1995 following referenda with positive result.[21] Norway re-made her application for the same vewe of expansion for the scond time but could not become o meber of the Union due to the second time refrendum with a negative result.
Eastward Enlargement
Treaty of Amsterdam in 1999 and Nice in 2000 bore some new concepts such as democratization, transparency, approaching to people and citizens, determining self-identity, political investigation and investigation of social integration.[22] Cerating the identity of being a Eoropean by describing that identity as a concept and injecting under this identity the conscienciousness of being a European to every European is an important yoint for E.U. not only to cerate transparency but to remove the illegitimacy of the democratization process.
Laaken Summit in 2001 is very important as it was decided for the foundation of European Convention, which prepared the draft of European Constitution that constituted a legal identity for the Union and provided it with constitutional status and with power of representation against the outside world.
These summits and agreements were very important milestones on the way on which the E.U. was moving towards its goal of being transformed into a federal structure to which sovereign states hand over their authorities .
The Fifth Enlargement Vawe
Democracy became sounder following the central and east European countries broke their relaitons with the Iron Curtain after the end of the cold war and established a free market . Relations, shaped by the Partnership Agreement and thought be subject to guidance by them, bettered off so much as to reach the level of realization of these countries’ memberships in Luxemburg Summit in 1997.[23] However, the great number of the applicant states forced the Union to fix the number of the member states, its borders, its political structure and its political goals as an international role player; in other words the Union was forced into deepening.[24] Some changes in the institutional and administrative structures of the Union were brought about.
It may be well asserted that the expansion vawe in 2004 be the first one of the fifth expansion vawe : Poland, Hungary, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Slovenia, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Malta, Cyprus. The second vawe is to take place in 2007 and candidate counteries are Bulgaria and Romania. These countries’ additional values to the Union are questionable when a win-and-loss balance sheet is produced. High level of unemploment, decrease in social relations, inreasing crime ratio are higher in the region than the forcasts of the Union.
It is for sure that unemployment is the cause for the problem of migration; in addition, as twelve counteries enter the Union, hundred-and-fifteen million increase in the population of the Union will have the income per capita fall below the average in Europe and due to that inequalities among regions will increase.[25] Furthermore, the problems that plolitical and economic elit are to come into being in the same course of time following the transition to free market; democratization and the negative perssure created by social strata that bear so much nostalgia as to create a problematic situation. In spite of all these negativies, health expenditures, level of education and organizational trends of these countries display similarities with those of the European Countries.
Alongwith all these negative aspects the new comers display many cultural dissimilarities against the member countries. Depending on this point it is well asserted that the increasing heterogeneousity within the Union is to make the harmonization of the counteries more difficult . Much more than this, this problem is capable of being an important issue of continuity for the Union whose indentity has not sahaped as yet and which aims to have a federal structure in order to be a global power (United States of Europe).[26]
It is quiet right to raise the question why E.U. preferred the epansion covering that region hosting aproblemetic region such as Balkansı if above mentioned assertion is true ? The answer is : to control Balkans (power vacuum area after the collapse of U.S.S.R.) in the course of international division[27]; to display that it strengthens the legitimacy of the European Constitution with democracy creating the harmonization of dissmilarities. But it should be always kept in mind that the talk is of a region of countries that are not ready to finish off with national consciousness; that do not analyze globally and have religions motives.
General Assesment
E.U. always kept cooperation and compromise in the fore ground since it used to be the European Economic Community. Crisis within the Union lessened the dynamism; expansion was the the answer to that problem; expanded when integration stopped. Expansion and especially the expansion of 2004 brought deepening alongwith. The goal : to be the unique power to control Europe. But more menbers than the capacity of digestion causes decrease in the speed of integration and the loss of the Union’s soul. “Differentiated Integration”[28] is defined as the answer to this poblem. The Union’s soul could be kept alive but the gap among the states could not be filled due to great differences of the same kind.
At this point it is right to raise the question : How pil it be possible to create a pill for living together and a common identity consciousness if there are counteries described as dissimilar within the Union? To answer this question social foundations of the Union, that had itself accepted as an economic union, plays the key role. With respect to globalization dimension of expansion the social and political handicaps are investigated in the following sections.
Globalization and the European Identity
As globalization is described as a new way of international economy in which increasing trade flow and reelizations of capital invesments take place, it is quiet clear that globalization is not a new concept. Local globalizations occured throughhout the history. Concepts such as multinational companies, international media and internet in our age are the proofs that globilazation has already crossed baroders. Consequently, economic globalization is for the countries’ benefit as it decreases the cost of common liabilities.
With respect to national state, globalization is a porcess that erodes state borders, lessens the its capability of homogeneousation.[29] Sharing power is not acaceptible by state when forced into doing that. As a new type of international organization E.U. has formed a specific structure that exceeds but does not outshadow national state, increases its national benefits and interdependencies.[30]
Globalization is in contradiction with social model based on a liberal and social synthesis of Europe. Political and social structure receeds as they remain at the national level, while economy gains a higher status as it operates on the international level. Thus globalization operates as an negative effect on E.U. Rules change as the balance between market and welfare state model change.[31]
Jacobi asserts that global market colonizes the whole social model system socially, politically and economically.[32] Inequalities and social injustice among regions and countries increase; since concordence with global market and competition are must, social policies that must be applied are held back.
The Logic of International Community
International community as desrription is formed as a community of states awere of common values and depend upon sharing due to the stimulus of inter-dependency.[33] With respect to E.U. it is possible that international community come into being throufg the unity of states sharing common goals, organizational structure and administative standards alongwith common borders. Thus it is accepted that the aim of E.U. is to start an age of international community depending upon sovereign states.
Historically ancient Greece happened to be the first explicit example of international community. Ancient Greeks defined themselves as people sharing definitive cultural aspects such as common race, language, religion, way of life and separating the people who did not resemble them and whom they called “barbarians”.[34] They established political relations with barbarians but they had no cultural relation and did not interact with them.
Another example is Roman Empire. It was one of the empires that were very close to being a global empire. It established imperial relations with other people. Dialogue and compromise among sovereign states disappeared; obedience and revolts took their place.[35] As it was divided into two by barbarians and Christianity as the cultural aspect holding the people together was divided into two under the Greek and Latin identities. Thus Europe created an “other” within itself.
Middle Age is full of breaking points for Europe. Latin Christianity tried to hold the people together through the fanatization of the religion in order not to loose what it was left behind but started being resolved due to the effects of Protestant Reforms. Following this age Renaisance occured depending upon the thought of a secular Europe and it became the hope of Christian identity hurt by the reforms. Religous institutions and values were replaced with common values such as science and national states of rationality alongwith secularity, rights and freedons, industrial revolution.[36] The Venecia Republic formed by the unity of Venice, Florance, Milan and Papacy is the first international community rested on these normes. Since these Italian states were so small, so weak and so divided that they could not live on.
Westphalia and Utrecht Treaties in 1648 and 1713 respectively are to be interpreted as a new beginning in Europe. All the European states that came into being were secular. Religion was interpreted as a cultural dimension. As the Thirty Years’ War prooved it became common sense that contridiction among the European states was political rather than religious and that a Europe was to be formed anew through the seperation of politics from religion.
As these examples clearly identify all the unions that came into being in Europe were formed against a common enemy. That following the vawe of nationalism brought about by the French Revolution Napoleon was percieved as the threat and the European thought was based upon this perception. prooves the correctness of this assertion.[37] This entity was created through rules of neibourship in order to protect the international community.[38]
As the 20th. Centry dawned, being the outcomes of the European thought described by racism and imperialism wars in the 19th. Century were replaced by nationalism and universal values were degenerated. Facism based on originality and aryan race and consecrated as well devastated Europe and declared itself as the defender of the European ideals.[39] This elite and externalizing structure created its own “other” as its predecessors did.
Problem of Belonging in the 20th Century : National State of International Community ?
E.U. is in need of a political identity in order to integrate itself politically and gain power at the international level. This need paves the way for the attempts of political and social interpretation of the European identity. In other words it requires that the peoples of the E.U. member states feel themselves beyond their national identity as European. A supranational identity which would make it possible for them to feel themselves belong to the common community around a common Europeanship and relate themselves obediently to the community through a whole-heartedly acception; but some obstacles exist.
National identity is still the dominant feeling of belonging in member states of the European Union. Resistent elements such as common reiligion, common language, common geography and common race are the ones that hold them together and make it possible for them to live together.[40] In addition level of Trust to E.U., though differentiates from country to country, is not high.
With respect to cfeeling one’s self “ European “ Europe is divided into two while the southern coutries (Spain, Portugal and Greece) emphasize strongly historical and cultural relations that bind Europe together. They have a stronger feeling of being European than that of the northern countires. Northern countries (U.K., Denmark, Holland, Sweden) neither feel themselves European nor wish to have common vaues with the southern countries.[41] As seen once again, though being the members of the same Union one externalize the other and did not make any attempt to cerate a common cultural zone.
There is no way of democracy without the existence of society. There is neither a homogeneous society nor a unity among the people. “European democracy” faces the problem of legitimacy at this point. Power in a society without democracy falls in the monopoly of the administrators. Being incapable of integrating itself politically an showing no interest in political participation the Europeans bring about “unsufficient democracy” and consequently the “problem of legitimacy”.[42] Clearly put, citizenship, feeling of belonging and resposibility can not be created without a common European identity.
Two different views on the formation of the European identity exist on the fore gorund. While the first view asserts that the conditions helping the formation of national identity should be protected, the sencond one takes as base that feeling of seperate belongings can exist in harmony (plurality of identity).[43] The aim of the latter view is to combine the national identity to the European identity which has emotional roots and rational respectively; to make the national identity flexible and universal; to form a new official identity by taking this new identity as the base; and to create a new culture resting on common values.
As to globalization, it plays an important role putting pressure on the national identity.
The Future of European Identity with Respect to Orientalism
The most poblematic contadiction of Europe was that she did not accept the cultures which she externalized and made “other” when the Union started debating identity within itself. Although the concept of barbarian formed by Europe thraughout its history was referred to various cultures and civilizations it is still alive in minds. The reaction corresponding to this description in EUrope and displaying the Europe’s intolerance to veriety is named “islamophobia”, “fear of Islam” in other words, which it displays itself as “anti-Islamism” in reality. The reasons for that are ignorance and a conception of western origin : Orientalism. Throughout the age of colonization western countries used orientalism to discover the weak points of a culture;to reform Islam in a way that Moslems be driven into hesitation and westeners be depicted as saviours in their eyes.[44] As the result a by westeners defined and still alive religion full of by orientalism distorted concepts such as jihad, ummet, tevhid, fundamentalism appeared. Edwad Said deccribes orientalism as “to learn a world of different function; to keep it under control in some cases and to resolve it.”[45] and emphasized that imperials conquests were legitimized through religion.
Nowadays Europe is afraid of that religion made up in the 19th. century, forget that itself is the maker of it and is trying to suppres Moslem refugees, migrants through the policies of externalization and Violence.[46] Being made “the other” of Moslems in Europe that is proud of its principles of tolerance and multiculturalism is related to an ever-going-on misperception and prejudice that Islam be a powerful enemy, a deviated and egxotic structure, have introspective people as believers, a civilization that was incapable of reforming itself and a reaction against the modern age.[47]
Europe is trying to create an unity and identity within itsself depending upon the comon enemy, “the other” which it defines and alieates as different form itself. Europe externalizes the dissimilar cultures and develops an aggressive attitude and asserts being culturally superior to them. Europe puts universal values under the monopoly of some cultures defined and chosen by itself asserting that Islam not be in harmony with the universal values.[48] This clutural reductionism is in contradiction with democracy and supported by a European centric perspective.
As formation which asserts to be global Europe slould not reject cultural interactiveness, display its sincerety openly to dissimilarities through sharing. Inter-religious dialogue and the reference to universal values instead of Chirsitianity is a good start for this purpose. However, European identity is to be colmplete its formation process upon it accepts “the one” which is not different from it and those dissimilarities find their places in the political culture without being assimilated.
Conclusion
E.U. is as much a political itegration asseting to be a global power as an regional economic integration within its borders limits. Its cultural heritage from its past became its carrier upto today. This heritage has been enhanced not only with a rich historical past but also with characteristics which have set the color Europe has today. Europe, at this point where it is today, has already made its choice to return to its esence for peace and satability furthermore developing more careful and self-possesing attitude than the past ones. E.U. formed for the economic purposes has become one of the three largest blocs of the world today. However, being able to be a union rests upon social and political policies rather than economic ones and this points at the porblem of acception in formation process of the European identity in the member states of the Union. Thus it is concluded that Europe has not yet been able to form a unity depending on European identity consciousness and a common culture which can move masses. Culture is the most important elememt of identity formation. People become more loyal to their state as fairlier they share. Thus resistant elements such as religion, language, race, increase the loyalty to identity. Since people are related and loyal to these values a Europe contending more flexible or universal values remains unattractive; those who believe in the attractiveness of Europe has an attitude of thankfullness.
To close the doors to the world outside, to reject every possible interaction with its own culture, not to accept the dissimilar one is in contradiction with the democracy and human rights perspectives of Europe. Founding a welfare satate but to externalize those that are dissimilar and to monopolize its own culture by hindering inter-cultural interction has the meaning of destroying its own legitimacy with its own hands. Europe is to find its own real identity the day it is able to live alongwith “the other” and even to learn something from him without fear.
Bibliography
1. BAYLIS John-SMITH Steve, The Globalization of World Politics, Oxford University Press.
2. ERDENİR Burak, Avrupa Kimliği (European Identity), Ümit Press, Ankara 2005.
3.GÖKÇEN Salim, “Balkanlarda Bölgesel Yaklaşım:Avrupa Birliği’nin Balkanlar Politikası”(“Regional Perspectives in Balkans : Balkan Policies of the Eupean Union”), 2023 Journal, November 2004.
4. HEYWOOD Andrew, Politics, Macmillan Press, 1997.
5. HÜSEYİN Asaf-OLSON Robert-KUREŞİ Cemil, Oryantalistler ve İslamiyatçılar (Orientalists and İslamicists), İnsan Press, İstanbul 1989.
6. IM HOF Ulrich, Avrupa’da Aydınlanma (The Enlightenment in Europe), AFA Press, İstanbul 1995.
7. JUDT Tony, “Europe: The Grand Illusion”, The New York Review of Books, July 11, 1996.
8. KOÇAK Mustafa, Devlet ve Egemenlik (State and Sovereignty), Seçkin Press, Ankara 2006.
9. KORAY Meryem, Avrupa Toplum Modeli (European Social Model), İmge Press, İstanbul 2005.
10. SAID Edward, Şarkiyatçılık (Orientalism), Metis Press, İstanbul 2004.
11. ÜLGER İrfan, Avrupa Birliği Ansiklopedisi (European Union Encyclopedia), TÜRKAB, İstanbul 2003.
12. www.europarl.ep.ec/enlargemet_new/positionep/resolutions_en.html
13. www.tihv.org.tr/belgeler/kopenhag.html
14. Gonzalo ESCRİBANO, “AB’nin Genişlemesi:Önceki Deneyimler” (“Enlargement of the European Union : Past Experiences”), www.bizimeczane.com.tr/detay.php?id:21956
15. SAVAŞ Menent, “Avrupa Birliği:Derinleşme-Genişleme Sorunları” (“European Union : Problem of Deepenin and Enlargement”), www.stradigma.com, May 2003, vol. 4
[1] SAVAŞ Menent, “Avrupa Birliği:Derinleşme-Genişleme Sorunları” [“European Union : Problem of Deepening and Expansion”], www.stradigma.com/mayıs2003,sayı4
[2] KORAY Meryem, Avrupa Toplum Modeli [European Social Model ], İmge Kitabevi, İstanbul 2005, p. 239
[3] ÜLGER İrfan, Avrupa Birliği Ansiklopedisi [European Union Encyclopedia], TÜRKAB, İstanbul 2003, pp. 36-39
[4] Ülger, op. cit., pp. 32-33
[5] Ülger, op. cit., p. 42
[6] The thought of “United States of Europe” resting on the Germany-France cooperation was formed by Churchill in 1940s. U.K. remained in a supportive position. For details see KORAY, op. cit., p. 240
[7] JUDT Tony, “Europe: The Grand Illusion”, The New York Review of Books, July 11, 1996, pp. 6-8
[8] Koray, op. cit., p. 243
[9] Gonzalo ESCRIBANO, “AB’nin Genişlemesi:Önceki Deneyimler” [“Expansion of the European Union : Past Experiences”], www.bizimeczane.com.tr/detay.php?id:21956
[10] Escribano, ibid.
[11] Savaş, op. cit.
[12] Escribano, op. cit.
[13] Koray, op. cit., pp. 245-246
[14] Escribano, op. cit.
[15] Savaş, op. cit.
[16] E.U. consists of three pillars : European Commision, (E.C.), Common Foreign and Security Policy, (C.F.S.P.), Law and Interior Affairs.
[17] Savaş, op. cit.
[18] Accepting primary and secondary law sources, founding agreements recently signed, reviosion agreements, directives, regulations. In other words candidacy obligations.
[19] www.tihv.org.tr/belgeler/kopenhag.html
[20] Savaş, op. cit.
[21] Application dates and referenda results as percentages of yes votes with an exception of Norway with no votes : Austaria : July 17th, 1989 / 66,6, Sweden : July 1st., 1991 / 52,2, Finland : March 18th., 1992 / 56,9, Norway : November 25th., 1992 / 52,3 ( no votes )
[22] Koray, op. cit., p. 252
[23] Koray, ibid., p. 322
[24] www.europarl.ep.ec/enlargemet_new/positionep/resolutions_en.html
[25] GÖKÇEN Salim, “Balkanlarda Bölgesel Yaklaşım:Avrupa Birliği’nin Balkanlar Politikası” [Regional Perspectives in Balkans : Balkan Policies of the Eupean Union], 2023 Journal, November 2004, p. 74.
[26] HEYWOOD Andrew, Politics, Macmillan Press 1997, p. 156
[27] Gökçen, op. cit., p. 73
[28] Savaş, op. cit.
[29] KOÇAK Mustafa, Devlet ve Egemenlik [State and Sovereignty ], Seçkin Press, Ankara 2006, p. 280
[30] Koçak, ibid., p. 280
[31] Koray, op. cit., s. 345
[32] Koray, ibid., p. 343
[33] Robert H. JACSON, “Evolution of International Society”, The Globalization of World Politics, John BAYLIS-Steve SMITH (eds.), Oxford University Press, p.35
[34] Burak ERDENİR, Avrupa Kimliği [European Identity], Ümit Press, Ankara 2005, pp. 29, 70
[35] Jacson, op. cit., p. 38
[36] Erdenir, op. cit., p. 61
[37] Erdenir, ibid., p. 71
[38] Jackson, op. cit., p. 42
[39] Erdenir, op. cit., p. 73
[40] IM HOF Ulrich, Avrupa’da Aydınlanma [The Enlightenment in Europe], AFA Press, İstanbul 1995, p. 261.
[41] Judt, op. cit., p. 7
[42] Erdenir, op. cit., p. 17
[43] Erdenir, ibid., p. 22
[44] Asaf HÜSEYİN, “Oryantalizmin İdeolojisi” [“Ideology of Orientalism”], Oryantalistler ve İslamiyatçılar [Orientalists and İslamicists], Asaf HÜSEYİN - Robert OLSON - Cemil KUREŞİ (eds.), İnsan Press, İstanbul 1989, pp. 15-19
[45] Edward SAID, Şarkiyatçılık [Orientalism ], Metis Press, İstanbul 2004, p. 131
[46] Erdenir, op. cit., p. 197
[47] Gordon E. PRAETT, “İslâm ve Oryantalizm” [“Islam and Orientalism”],Oryantalistler ve İslamiyatçılar [Orientalists and İslamicists], Asaf HÜSEYİN - Robert OLSON - Cemil KUREŞİ (eds.), İnsan Press, İstanbul 1989, p. 161
[48] Hüseyin, op. cit., p. 28
EU Borders and the Problem of Enlargement
Abstract
This essay concentrates on the examination of reasons of expansion’s being a problem for EU, to investigate what it has won and lost financially, socially, politically and militarily while it reaches its borders limits; focusing on the origins of European identity to debate the unity of EU and its impacts on the expansion; to investigate whether globalization is instictive to EU and to determine its borders keeping its cultural fibre in consideration. This essay analyzes the classical expansion methods and their principles for each expansion vawe seperately and aims to answer the question of eastward orientation and the reasons for the policy change. In conclusion, through a character analysis of Europe and taking its contradictions found out scrutinizing the teraties since European Coal and Steel Community after the WWII, real goal of EU and its sincerety is to be determined.
Introduction
It has been observed that beginning at the end of WWII European integration has reached from common market to single market, from the stage of monetary union to the stage of politcal union. On the way to this political integration the most important debates were concentrated on the enlargement and the structure of EU which would take shape afterwards, and the latest enlargement vawes have been the cause of a new debate : deepening along with enlargement.
Problems that arose on the way from European Common Market to European Union necessiated the economic integration to be completed with political integration and as the natural outcome, this nessicity has been the main cause for deepening followed each and every expansion.
Since neo-functionalism describes international relations as being comprising and cooperative rather than controdictory, neo-functional perspective was brought afore among the international relations theories as the descriptive theory for the integration process. As regards to the EU in particular it was debated that integration process started in the economic field was due to spill over to other fields as the common economic policies were applied. Deepening on the peace created by the commercial relations among the states, it was the goal to establish a political power within a federal structure resting on national interests and established by sovereign states.[1]
As the conclusion, although the EU has reached its targets set as economic integration, it is still debated whether it is capable of transfering its above mentioned success to political and social dinensions. Eventhough it can be taken for granted that some problems have been resolved by European Constitution signed in 2004, the existence of European identity sociologically; whether it is possible to mention about a state which would hold the Eoropeans together taking European identity as the base; whether European identity will serve as a base for that state and whether the consciousness of unity will be able to eradicate the national identity in minds are the questions not answered as yet.
This essay deals with this identity perspective of integration whose main trends for exenlargement is economic. The answers for the contradictions within are to be found in the above questions. An an assertive structure such as unity is to be based upon a common sense, a common culture and a common identity whose creation is probable. A Union created by the Europeans who do not feel themselves as European is sure not to be able to take any further step than being an economic cooperation and is doomed to share the destiny of empires that bore the claim of unity once upon a time.
European Union and Its Formation Process
After the World War II Europe as the border between U.S.A. and U.S.S.R. was exposed to regional presures and found the solution in returning socially and regionally to itself. A state of welfare was created and regional compromise was reached in europeanization economically.[2] As the outcome, Treaty of Rome conceptualized a Europe of free curculations of capital, goods, servisces and people. With this aim European Economic Community ( European Common Market ) and European Atomic Energy Community were established by Germany, Italy, France, Benelux.
As the European Economic Union had aims such as economic development, harmony, bettering off the welfare and intense relations among the conutries, it put forward some conditions such as abolishing the custom duties among the countries and common custom duty policy against the third world, free circulation of capital and workforce or common policies of agriculture and transportation.[3] Explanations given hitherto as examples clearly display that the purpose is to sustain stability and welfare by creating a Union. The European Atomic Energy Community established by the same treaty set them as its goals to forward peaceful atomic energy; to establish a nuclear energy industry not in national scale but in European scale; to fulfill security and health regulations; and to create a common market for nuclear meterials and equipment.[4]
As hitherto seen, these organizations aiming to establish the common peace through the practice of common policies emphasize economic framework. However, main purpose of European Coal and Steel Community established by the Treaty of Paris in 1951 was to prevent an German-French contradiction especially on Saarland and Alsace Loraine regions[5] and while setting the economic framework with the aim of integrating steel and coal industries gained a political framework through the idea of “ United States of Europe “[6] which idea it set as the ultimate goal for itself.
These organizations being the economic and political pillars of the integration were described as “ pragmatic “. As Germany, France, Italy, Belgium, Holland and Luxemburg being members of the three organizations had some gains seperately. While France widened her market for agricultural products through industrialization and gained political initiative in this way, Germany regained her credebility devastated by the W.W. II and increased industrial goods export.[7] In addition, Holland gained some advantages from the increasing trade due her development in fright transportation; Italy and Belgium received support to speed up their industrialization.[8]
These organizations for the common goal of economic and commercial development bearing the aim of creating free trade, free circulation and common customs united and this union was named as European Community on July 1st., 1967. Since after this point staying outside the European Community created a feeling of loneliness for the countries the integration process gained speed.
Classical Method of Expansion and Its Principles
E.U. ( E.E.C. till before 1992 when it became E.U. by the Treaty of Maastricht ) was developed on two main axis of logic : expansion and deepening. Expansion progressed alongwith economic development as the prior is related to the latter. In order to preserve their resources and fortify freedom and peace, Treaty of Rome invited European countries tos hare values to join the Union.[9]
Consequently, classical method is the method of uniting. This method depends on cooperation, integrates policies practiced sectorally and aims for moving from national level to supranational level depending on the pirniciple of credibility as the base.
As for the principles, the applicant country is to accept the Acquis ( free circulaition and commonly practiced policies ). As the problenms increase with each expansion, E.U. is in need of new instruments rather than structural reforms anda this necessitiate deepening alongwith.
Harmony is one of the most important principles in the Union. Keeping expending is for the interests of E.U. and solving the problems within the Union.[10]
It would be easier to grasp the analysis of eşpansion vawes within this perspective.
The First Enlargement Vawe
Common market was the main cause of many crisis and made it impossible that member states cooperate and compromise as the deepening stopped. Especially, due to the must of making amendments in laws for harmonization in order to reach the goals set by the establishment agreements caused the crisis. At this point deepening stopped, expansion started and countries with different levels of devlopment and sociocultural aspects integrated.
As the first attempt U.K. which was supporting the Union declared her candidacy for the Union in 1962 but could not joined it due to the veto of France by De Gaulle. U.K. was rejested with a veto of the same kind for the second time on May 10th, 1967. It was asserted that the main logic of those vetos “is that U.K. be the trojan horse of U.S.A. and if joined, her main pupose be to limit the European integration only within a framework of a regional commerce”.[11]
In spite of the French vetoes, U.K. was supported by Belgium, Holland, Italy and Luxemburg in order to balance a German-French hegemony and by Germany in order to increase her export to U.K. through the Common Market.
Denmark and Ireland took place in the first vawe of expansion. Both of the countries made their applications on May 11th., 1967. European Community membership served for the two country as a leverage lessening their dependance on U.K. and as a cahance for retail trade with the member countries.[12] U.K., Denmark and Irland became members of Euorpenan Community on January 1st., 1967. Norwegians rejected their country’s membership for which the application was made on July 21st., 1967.
Southern Enlargement
Greece, Portugal and Spain became members of The European Community in two seperate expansion vawes as a chain of three rings. These new members were accepted as they belong to European culture and history and it is necessary countries new to democracy be sopported eventhough it was evident that the existing unemployment, regional inequalities and migration as their natural outcome are to be worsened by their enterance into The European Community.[13] The political and economical expectations of these three countries were the development of their democracies and economy respectively.
The Second Enlargement Vawe
Greece signed the Union Agreement in order to develop free trade. She was to remove tariffs and quotas and put eliminate her products in twelve and twentytwo years’ time respectively. European Community suspended the agreement due to military coup in Greece. She was recommended a pre-entrance time in order to get ready for Acquis but this recommendation was put aside due to her lobbying activities. This situation created by Greece was interpreted as “non-observerance af Acquais”[14] Deep seperation of ideas occured and her candidacy was rejected as the democracy might be jeopardized and she was persuaded into waiting for Spain and Portugal in order to create a chain of three rings - Integrated Mediterranean Program -
In 1975 after the democracy was re-established in the country, Greece remade a membership application for the second time and was asked to wait till 1981 due to some political rather than economic reasons and was accepted later that year.
The Third Enlargement Vawe
Spain and Portugal displayed many inconsistencies in many aspects such as their economic conditions, development levels and trade deficits. Especially Spain became the most poblematic country in respect of regional inequalities, fishery, agricalture and industry. As to Portugal, due to her non-volumous economy and inequalities between her and the Community she bore hesitation that she would be incapable of fulfilling the requirments of the integration process.[15]
Against all the negative aspects Spain’s and Portugal’s applications made in 1977 were accepted on January 1st., 1986.
Treaty of Maastricht (1992) and Its Consequences
Founding agreements were revised by the Treaty of Maastiricht. European Community was transformed to European Union; issues such as common market and free circulation were realized. While geographical expansion was fixed by the borders of Europe in order to eliminate the east-west seperation within Europe, political and social issues were contained by the agreements of the Union. With respect to economical issues the process for economic and monetary integration started upon the Single European Act was signed. It was decided common monetary policy be set up by the Treaty of Maastricht. This agreement eliminated the bi-polarity within the European Union and keping the insufficiensies of foreign policy of E.U. in consideration, Common Foreign and Security Policy was founded as one of the main pillars[16] of the Union.
The agreement which described the Union as a forever and compulsory supranational law order dealt with the identity transition problem as a matter of law. Political integration could not be completed due to limits set by the cold war, but Treaty of Maastricht was seen as a great chance due to the fear that soul of the Union and Union consciencousness would dissappear.[17] In this way the concept of “ European citizenship “ came into being.
Copenhagen Criteria (1993)
Copenhagen Ciriteria were created to harmonize relation established with Central and East Euporean Balkan Counteries after the callapse of U.S.S.R. Countries that would be recent memebers should meet sone political, economic criteria outside and along with Acquis Commutaries[18]. These criteria are as follows :
Political criteria : Democracy, state of law, human rights, respect to minorities and guaranteed protection for them.
Economic criteria : Existence of operative market economy, competition pithin the Union and capability of competition with market powers.[19]
The Fourth Enlargement Vawe
E.U. having had dynamism set as the goal decided to increase its affecteiveness as an international role player by increasing its population and surface area. With respect to that purpose, the Union, as the first attempt, offered candidacy right to the countries that due to their economic levels could easily meet the Union’s criteria and enhance the Union with their high standards and force southern countries (Greece, Spain and Portugal) into meeting the criteria and the requiered economic level that they could not meet.[20] These countries were Austria, Finland and Sweden.
Recently mentioned countries preponderant as throughout the cold war they were forced into having a policy as much economic as strategicly of non-alignment bore importance for E.U. in order that it became an affective role player in the changing international system. They set examples for the countries to increase welfare and confidence. Since they entered the Union as a group of counteries rich, traditional and democratic, they were very succesful in creating hormonization with the Union.
Austria, Sweden and Finland that made their applications on seperate dates became menbers on January 1st., 1995 following referenda with positive result.[21] Norway re-made her application for the same vewe of expansion for the scond time but could not become o meber of the Union due to the second time refrendum with a negative result.
Eastward Enlargement
Treaty of Amsterdam in 1999 and Nice in 2000 bore some new concepts such as democratization, transparency, approaching to people and citizens, determining self-identity, political investigation and investigation of social integration.[22] Cerating the identity of being a Eoropean by describing that identity as a concept and injecting under this identity the conscienciousness of being a European to every European is an important yoint for E.U. not only to cerate transparency but to remove the illegitimacy of the democratization process.
Laaken Summit in 2001 is very important as it was decided for the foundation of European Convention, which prepared the draft of European Constitution that constituted a legal identity for the Union and provided it with constitutional status and with power of representation against the outside world.
These summits and agreements were very important milestones on the way on which the E.U. was moving towards its goal of being transformed into a federal structure to which sovereign states hand over their authorities .
The Fifth Enlargement Vawe
Democracy became sounder following the central and east European countries broke their relaitons with the Iron Curtain after the end of the cold war and established a free market . Relations, shaped by the Partnership Agreement and thought be subject to guidance by them, bettered off so much as to reach the level of realization of these countries’ memberships in Luxemburg Summit in 1997.[23] However, the great number of the applicant states forced the Union to fix the number of the member states, its borders, its political structure and its political goals as an international role player; in other words the Union was forced into deepening.[24] Some changes in the institutional and administrative structures of the Union were brought about.
It may be well asserted that the expansion vawe in 2004 be the first one of the fifth expansion vawe : Poland, Hungary, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Slovenia, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Malta, Cyprus. The second vawe is to take place in 2007 and candidate counteries are Bulgaria and Romania. These countries’ additional values to the Union are questionable when a win-and-loss balance sheet is produced. High level of unemploment, decrease in social relations, inreasing crime ratio are higher in the region than the forcasts of the Union.
It is for sure that unemployment is the cause for the problem of migration; in addition, as twelve counteries enter the Union, hundred-and-fifteen million increase in the population of the Union will have the income per capita fall below the average in Europe and due to that inequalities among regions will increase.[25] Furthermore, the problems that plolitical and economic elit are to come into being in the same course of time following the transition to free market; democratization and the negative perssure created by social strata that bear so much nostalgia as to create a problematic situation. In spite of all these negativies, health expenditures, level of education and organizational trends of these countries display similarities with those of the European Countries.
Alongwith all these negative aspects the new comers display many cultural dissimilarities against the member countries. Depending on this point it is well asserted that the increasing heterogeneousity within the Union is to make the harmonization of the counteries more difficult . Much more than this, this problem is capable of being an important issue of continuity for the Union whose indentity has not sahaped as yet and which aims to have a federal structure in order to be a global power (United States of Europe).[26]
It is quiet right to raise the question why E.U. preferred the epansion covering that region hosting aproblemetic region such as Balkansı if above mentioned assertion is true ? The answer is : to control Balkans (power vacuum area after the collapse of U.S.S.R.) in the course of international division[27]; to display that it strengthens the legitimacy of the European Constitution with democracy creating the harmonization of dissmilarities. But it should be always kept in mind that the talk is of a region of countries that are not ready to finish off with national consciousness; that do not analyze globally and have religions motives.
General Assesment
E.U. always kept cooperation and compromise in the fore ground since it used to be the European Economic Community. Crisis within the Union lessened the dynamism; expansion was the the answer to that problem; expanded when integration stopped. Expansion and especially the expansion of 2004 brought deepening alongwith. The goal : to be the unique power to control Europe. But more menbers than the capacity of digestion causes decrease in the speed of integration and the loss of the Union’s soul. “Differentiated Integration”[28] is defined as the answer to this poblem. The Union’s soul could be kept alive but the gap among the states could not be filled due to great differences of the same kind.
At this point it is right to raise the question : How pil it be possible to create a pill for living together and a common identity consciousness if there are counteries described as dissimilar within the Union? To answer this question social foundations of the Union, that had itself accepted as an economic union, plays the key role. With respect to globalization dimension of expansion the social and political handicaps are investigated in the following sections.
Globalization and the European Identity
As globalization is described as a new way of international economy in which increasing trade flow and reelizations of capital invesments take place, it is quiet clear that globalization is not a new concept. Local globalizations occured throughhout the history. Concepts such as multinational companies, international media and internet in our age are the proofs that globilazation has already crossed baroders. Consequently, economic globalization is for the countries’ benefit as it decreases the cost of common liabilities.
With respect to national state, globalization is a porcess that erodes state borders, lessens the its capability of homogeneousation.[29] Sharing power is not acaceptible by state when forced into doing that. As a new type of international organization E.U. has formed a specific structure that exceeds but does not outshadow national state, increases its national benefits and interdependencies.[30]
Globalization is in contradiction with social model based on a liberal and social synthesis of Europe. Political and social structure receeds as they remain at the national level, while economy gains a higher status as it operates on the international level. Thus globalization operates as an negative effect on E.U. Rules change as the balance between market and welfare state model change.[31]
Jacobi asserts that global market colonizes the whole social model system socially, politically and economically.[32] Inequalities and social injustice among regions and countries increase; since concordence with global market and competition are must, social policies that must be applied are held back.
The Logic of International Community
International community as desrription is formed as a community of states awere of common values and depend upon sharing due to the stimulus of inter-dependency.[33] With respect to E.U. it is possible that international community come into being throufg the unity of states sharing common goals, organizational structure and administative standards alongwith common borders. Thus it is accepted that the aim of E.U. is to start an age of international community depending upon sovereign states.
Historically ancient Greece happened to be the first explicit example of international community. Ancient Greeks defined themselves as people sharing definitive cultural aspects such as common race, language, religion, way of life and separating the people who did not resemble them and whom they called “barbarians”.[34] They established political relations with barbarians but they had no cultural relation and did not interact with them.
Another example is Roman Empire. It was one of the empires that were very close to being a global empire. It established imperial relations with other people. Dialogue and compromise among sovereign states disappeared; obedience and revolts took their place.[35] As it was divided into two by barbarians and Christianity as the cultural aspect holding the people together was divided into two under the Greek and Latin identities. Thus Europe created an “other” within itself.
Middle Age is full of breaking points for Europe. Latin Christianity tried to hold the people together through the fanatization of the religion in order not to loose what it was left behind but started being resolved due to the effects of Protestant Reforms. Following this age Renaisance occured depending upon the thought of a secular Europe and it became the hope of Christian identity hurt by the reforms. Religous institutions and values were replaced with common values such as science and national states of rationality alongwith secularity, rights and freedons, industrial revolution.[36] The Venecia Republic formed by the unity of Venice, Florance, Milan and Papacy is the first international community rested on these normes. Since these Italian states were so small, so weak and so divided that they could not live on.
Westphalia and Utrecht Treaties in 1648 and 1713 respectively are to be interpreted as a new beginning in Europe. All the European states that came into being were secular. Religion was interpreted as a cultural dimension. As the Thirty Years’ War prooved it became common sense that contridiction among the European states was political rather than religious and that a Europe was to be formed anew through the seperation of politics from religion.
As these examples clearly identify all the unions that came into being in Europe were formed against a common enemy. That following the vawe of nationalism brought about by the French Revolution Napoleon was percieved as the threat and the European thought was based upon this perception. prooves the correctness of this assertion.[37] This entity was created through rules of neibourship in order to protect the international community.[38]
As the 20th. Centry dawned, being the outcomes of the European thought described by racism and imperialism wars in the 19th. Century were replaced by nationalism and universal values were degenerated. Facism based on originality and aryan race and consecrated as well devastated Europe and declared itself as the defender of the European ideals.[39] This elite and externalizing structure created its own “other” as its predecessors did.
Problem of Belonging in the 20th Century : National State of International Community ?
E.U. is in need of a political identity in order to integrate itself politically and gain power at the international level. This need paves the way for the attempts of political and social interpretation of the European identity. In other words it requires that the peoples of the E.U. member states feel themselves beyond their national identity as European. A supranational identity which would make it possible for them to feel themselves belong to the common community around a common Europeanship and relate themselves obediently to the community through a whole-heartedly acception; but some obstacles exist.
National identity is still the dominant feeling of belonging in member states of the European Union. Resistent elements such as common reiligion, common language, common geography and common race are the ones that hold them together and make it possible for them to live together.[40] In addition level of Trust to E.U., though differentiates from country to country, is not high.
With respect to cfeeling one’s self “ European “ Europe is divided into two while the southern coutries (Spain, Portugal and Greece) emphasize strongly historical and cultural relations that bind Europe together. They have a stronger feeling of being European than that of the northern countires. Northern countries (U.K., Denmark, Holland, Sweden) neither feel themselves European nor wish to have common vaues with the southern countries.[41] As seen once again, though being the members of the same Union one externalize the other and did not make any attempt to cerate a common cultural zone.
There is no way of democracy without the existence of society. There is neither a homogeneous society nor a unity among the people. “European democracy” faces the problem of legitimacy at this point. Power in a society without democracy falls in the monopoly of the administrators. Being incapable of integrating itself politically an showing no interest in political participation the Europeans bring about “unsufficient democracy” and consequently the “problem of legitimacy”.[42] Clearly put, citizenship, feeling of belonging and resposibility can not be created without a common European identity.
Two different views on the formation of the European identity exist on the fore gorund. While the first view asserts that the conditions helping the formation of national identity should be protected, the sencond one takes as base that feeling of seperate belongings can exist in harmony (plurality of identity).[43] The aim of the latter view is to combine the national identity to the European identity which has emotional roots and rational respectively; to make the national identity flexible and universal; to form a new official identity by taking this new identity as the base; and to create a new culture resting on common values.
As to globalization, it plays an important role putting pressure on the national identity.
The Future of European Identity with Respect to Orientalism
The most poblematic contadiction of Europe was that she did not accept the cultures which she externalized and made “other” when the Union started debating identity within itself. Although the concept of barbarian formed by Europe thraughout its history was referred to various cultures and civilizations it is still alive in minds. The reaction corresponding to this description in EUrope and displaying the Europe’s intolerance to veriety is named “islamophobia”, “fear of Islam” in other words, which it displays itself as “anti-Islamism” in reality. The reasons for that are ignorance and a conception of western origin : Orientalism. Throughout the age of colonization western countries used orientalism to discover the weak points of a culture;to reform Islam in a way that Moslems be driven into hesitation and westeners be depicted as saviours in their eyes.[44] As the result a by westeners defined and still alive religion full of by orientalism distorted concepts such as jihad, ummet, tevhid, fundamentalism appeared. Edwad Said deccribes orientalism as “to learn a world of different function; to keep it under control in some cases and to resolve it.”[45] and emphasized that imperials conquests were legitimized through religion.
Nowadays Europe is afraid of that religion made up in the 19th. century, forget that itself is the maker of it and is trying to suppres Moslem refugees, migrants through the policies of externalization and Violence.[46] Being made “the other” of Moslems in Europe that is proud of its principles of tolerance and multiculturalism is related to an ever-going-on misperception and prejudice that Islam be a powerful enemy, a deviated and egxotic structure, have introspective people as believers, a civilization that was incapable of reforming itself and a reaction against the modern age.[47]
Europe is trying to create an unity and identity within itsself depending upon the comon enemy, “the other” which it defines and alieates as different form itself. Europe externalizes the dissimilar cultures and develops an aggressive attitude and asserts being culturally superior to them. Europe puts universal values under the monopoly of some cultures defined and chosen by itself asserting that Islam not be in harmony with the universal values.[48] This clutural reductionism is in contradiction with democracy and supported by a European centric perspective.
As formation which asserts to be global Europe slould not reject cultural interactiveness, display its sincerety openly to dissimilarities through sharing. Inter-religious dialogue and the reference to universal values instead of Chirsitianity is a good start for this purpose. However, European identity is to be colmplete its formation process upon it accepts “the one” which is not different from it and those dissimilarities find their places in the political culture without being assimilated.
Conclusion
E.U. is as much a political itegration asseting to be a global power as an regional economic integration within its borders limits. Its cultural heritage from its past became its carrier upto today. This heritage has been enhanced not only with a rich historical past but also with characteristics which have set the color Europe has today. Europe, at this point where it is today, has already made its choice to return to its esence for peace and satability furthermore developing more careful and self-possesing attitude than the past ones. E.U. formed for the economic purposes has become one of the three largest blocs of the world today. However, being able to be a union rests upon social and political policies rather than economic ones and this points at the porblem of acception in formation process of the European identity in the member states of the Union. Thus it is concluded that Europe has not yet been able to form a unity depending on European identity consciousness and a common culture which can move masses. Culture is the most important elememt of identity formation. People become more loyal to their state as fairlier they share. Thus resistant elements such as religion, language, race, increase the loyalty to identity. Since people are related and loyal to these values a Europe contending more flexible or universal values remains unattractive; those who believe in the attractiveness of Europe has an attitude of thankfullness.
To close the doors to the world outside, to reject every possible interaction with its own culture, not to accept the dissimilar one is in contradiction with the democracy and human rights perspectives of Europe. Founding a welfare satate but to externalize those that are dissimilar and to monopolize its own culture by hindering inter-cultural interction has the meaning of destroying its own legitimacy with its own hands. Europe is to find its own real identity the day it is able to live alongwith “the other” and even to learn something from him without fear.
Bibliography
1. BAYLIS John-SMITH Steve, The Globalization of World Politics, Oxford University Press.
2. ERDENİR Burak, Avrupa Kimliği (European Identity), Ümit Press, Ankara 2005.
3.GÖKÇEN Salim, “Balkanlarda Bölgesel Yaklaşım:Avrupa Birliği’nin Balkanlar Politikası”(“Regional Perspectives in Balkans : Balkan Policies of the Eupean Union”), 2023 Journal, November 2004.
4. HEYWOOD Andrew, Politics, Macmillan Press, 1997.
5. HÜSEYİN Asaf-OLSON Robert-KUREŞİ Cemil, Oryantalistler ve İslamiyatçılar (Orientalists and İslamicists), İnsan Press, İstanbul 1989.
6. IM HOF Ulrich, Avrupa’da Aydınlanma (The Enlightenment in Europe), AFA Press, İstanbul 1995.
7. JUDT Tony, “Europe: The Grand Illusion”, The New York Review of Books, July 11, 1996.
8. KOÇAK Mustafa, Devlet ve Egemenlik (State and Sovereignty), Seçkin Press, Ankara 2006.
9. KORAY Meryem, Avrupa Toplum Modeli (European Social Model), İmge Press, İstanbul 2005.
10. SAID Edward, Şarkiyatçılık (Orientalism), Metis Press, İstanbul 2004.
11. ÜLGER İrfan, Avrupa Birliği Ansiklopedisi (European Union Encyclopedia), TÜRKAB, İstanbul 2003.
12. www.europarl.ep.ec/enlargemet_new/positionep/resolutions_en.html
13. www.tihv.org.tr/belgeler/kopenhag.html
14. Gonzalo ESCRİBANO, “AB’nin Genişlemesi:Önceki Deneyimler” (“Enlargement of the European Union : Past Experiences”), www.bizimeczane.com.tr/detay.php?id:21956
15. SAVAŞ Menent, “Avrupa Birliği:Derinleşme-Genişleme Sorunları” (“European Union : Problem of Deepenin and Enlargement”), www.stradigma.com, May 2003, vol. 4
[1] SAVAŞ Menent, “Avrupa Birliği:Derinleşme-Genişleme Sorunları” [“European Union : Problem of Deepening and Expansion”], www.stradigma.com/mayıs2003,sayı4
[2] KORAY Meryem, Avrupa Toplum Modeli [European Social Model ], İmge Kitabevi, İstanbul 2005, p. 239
[3] ÜLGER İrfan, Avrupa Birliği Ansiklopedisi [European Union Encyclopedia], TÜRKAB, İstanbul 2003, pp. 36-39
[4] Ülger, op. cit., pp. 32-33
[5] Ülger, op. cit., p. 42
[6] The thought of “United States of Europe” resting on the Germany-France cooperation was formed by Churchill in 1940s. U.K. remained in a supportive position. For details see KORAY, op. cit., p. 240
[7] JUDT Tony, “Europe: The Grand Illusion”, The New York Review of Books, July 11, 1996, pp. 6-8
[8] Koray, op. cit., p. 243
[9] Gonzalo ESCRIBANO, “AB’nin Genişlemesi:Önceki Deneyimler” [“Expansion of the European Union : Past Experiences”], www.bizimeczane.com.tr/detay.php?id:21956
[10] Escribano, ibid.
[11] Savaş, op. cit.
[12] Escribano, op. cit.
[13] Koray, op. cit., pp. 245-246
[14] Escribano, op. cit.
[15] Savaş, op. cit.
[16] E.U. consists of three pillars : European Commision, (E.C.), Common Foreign and Security Policy, (C.F.S.P.), Law and Interior Affairs.
[17] Savaş, op. cit.
[18] Accepting primary and secondary law sources, founding agreements recently signed, reviosion agreements, directives, regulations. In other words candidacy obligations.
[19] www.tihv.org.tr/belgeler/kopenhag.html
[20] Savaş, op. cit.
[21] Application dates and referenda results as percentages of yes votes with an exception of Norway with no votes : Austaria : July 17th, 1989 / 66,6, Sweden : July 1st., 1991 / 52,2, Finland : March 18th., 1992 / 56,9, Norway : November 25th., 1992 / 52,3 ( no votes )
[22] Koray, op. cit., p. 252
[23] Koray, ibid., p. 322
[24] www.europarl.ep.ec/enlargemet_new/positionep/resolutions_en.html
[25] GÖKÇEN Salim, “Balkanlarda Bölgesel Yaklaşım:Avrupa Birliği’nin Balkanlar Politikası” [Regional Perspectives in Balkans : Balkan Policies of the Eupean Union], 2023 Journal, November 2004, p. 74.
[26] HEYWOOD Andrew, Politics, Macmillan Press 1997, p. 156
[27] Gökçen, op. cit., p. 73
[28] Savaş, op. cit.
[29] KOÇAK Mustafa, Devlet ve Egemenlik [State and Sovereignty ], Seçkin Press, Ankara 2006, p. 280
[30] Koçak, ibid., p. 280
[31] Koray, op. cit., s. 345
[32] Koray, ibid., p. 343
[33] Robert H. JACSON, “Evolution of International Society”, The Globalization of World Politics, John BAYLIS-Steve SMITH (eds.), Oxford University Press, p.35
[34] Burak ERDENİR, Avrupa Kimliği [European Identity], Ümit Press, Ankara 2005, pp. 29, 70
[35] Jacson, op. cit., p. 38
[36] Erdenir, op. cit., p. 61
[37] Erdenir, ibid., p. 71
[38] Jackson, op. cit., p. 42
[39] Erdenir, op. cit., p. 73
[40] IM HOF Ulrich, Avrupa’da Aydınlanma [The Enlightenment in Europe], AFA Press, İstanbul 1995, p. 261.
[41] Judt, op. cit., p. 7
[42] Erdenir, op. cit., p. 17
[43] Erdenir, ibid., p. 22
[44] Asaf HÜSEYİN, “Oryantalizmin İdeolojisi” [“Ideology of Orientalism”], Oryantalistler ve İslamiyatçılar [Orientalists and İslamicists], Asaf HÜSEYİN - Robert OLSON - Cemil KUREŞİ (eds.), İnsan Press, İstanbul 1989, pp. 15-19
[45] Edward SAID, Şarkiyatçılık [Orientalism ], Metis Press, İstanbul 2004, p. 131
[46] Erdenir, op. cit., p. 197
[47] Gordon E. PRAETT, “İslâm ve Oryantalizm” [“Islam and Orientalism”],Oryantalistler ve İslamiyatçılar [Orientalists and İslamicists], Asaf HÜSEYİN - Robert OLSON - Cemil KUREŞİ (eds.), İnsan Press, İstanbul 1989, p. 161
[48] Hüseyin, op. cit., p. 28
Hiç yorum yok:
Yorum Gönder