On November 16th, 2012 the representatives of Strategic and Security Studies Group participated at the Conference “The EU, Central and Eastern Europe and Ukraine: Transformation, Prognosis and Perspectives”. The Conference was organized by Centre for European and Transatlantic Studies with the kind support of East-East Partnership Beyond the Borders Program of International Renaissance Foundation. The key-note speakers discussed the perspectives of the European Union and the EU-Ukraine relations.
The key ideas of the speakers can be found below.
Marjan Svetlicic (Slovenia): EU challenges at a Time of Global Strategic Reset
- BRIC domination – China and India dominated in the world since 1000s till XIX century (till 1st Indian Rev.), now they return their influence
- 3 possible scenarios:
- bipolar: US – China
- tripolar: US – EU – China
- one polar: pax Chinese
Basic problems:
- “Jungle” (unpredictability, volatility, lack of trust)
- be prepared for all scenarios (contingency planning, risk management)
- in which currency to save? ($, EUR, Yena?)
EU-US time lags (income – 18 years, employment rate – 25 years, productivity, etc.)
Why EU lags? (eurocentrism, view on the past backward rather than forward)
Yugoslavia lessons for freedom
- elimination of autonomy
- rent seeking redistribution coalitions
For the future:
- power to shape the world
- EU should become more proactive
Priorities set by business leaders (survey conducted by Ernst & Young, 2012)
! – improve education (47%) – top priority
Agnes Oros (Hungary)
Fundamental roots of the crisis: (Crisis is multilayer)
- existential crisis
- failure of SGP
- neglecting of private sector vulnerabilities (credit housing boom)
- lack of effective tools to foster structural changes
- lack of crisis resolving mechanism
- interdependence of banks
- interdependence of countries
- lack of euro-area fiscal policy
Importance of Germany – “German Model”
- reforms in the labour market
- competitiveness problem for periphery countries (Spain, Greece, Italy, Ireland)
Germany’s trillemma
=> Seeking bal-outs
- Needs for additional crises management
- Political union debate has started
Bogdan Nedea (Romania): Perspective Paramenters of the EU New Treaty
- peripheral countries are in depths
- ethnic tension, corruption, economic segmentation
- Russia intends to exploit own influence outside its territory
- New EU member states – they have dictatorship past
- Romania benefited a lot from EU accession – funds became more available, free travel, access to job market
- new EU member states might become so-called ‘3rd class members’ (periphery of the periphery)
- Institutional cooperation from both sides
- Governments have problems in communication (Poland defends Ukraine in the EU Parliament/EU Commission, but it won’t last forever)
- Lack of knowledge about Romania’s experience of EU accession and lack of communication between NGOs (question: “whom to call?”)
Viljar Veebel (Estonia): Baltic States and the EU Crisis – Political Calculations ad Strategy for Actions
- Academy + Media + Policy-makers => should act together on EU integration
- 2.5 bln.EUR Estonia contributed to bale-out fund
- Baltic cooperation is rather weak
- Critics of the EU is very rare, ministries rely strongly on EU money
EURO -> is seen as very positive, and should be saved as any cost
-Ministry for Foreign Affairs does not communicate with Parliament
- Government approves decisions regarding EU policy quickly, without communicating them to the Parliament, because if to communicate/discuss – opposition might inform wider public or media about them
- Multi-speak Europe
- Taxation: integration
- Solidarity in EU policy
- Estonia changed from English-speaking into German-speaking, but it seems that Germany is not interested in such cooperation with Estonia.
In Eastern cooperation triangle (Germany – Poland – Russia) Estonia was very pure informed about what-s going on (i.e.Nordstream pipeline)
Bartek Novak (Poland): Visegrad Group Conditions of “The European Project” Transformation
- Differences between B4 states in various aspects: Eurozone membership, energy policy; similar interests in Danube strategy;
- leadership in the group – Poland wanted to be a leader, but 3 other countries did not agree
- V4 is doing much better after joining the EU, because they were rather competitors before.
- However, their reaction / voting in the EU remains different for Poland and 3 other states
- EU money (money given to the EU) varies (Poland pays 1.95% of GDP)
- Defense policy – strategies are different (i.e. Libia case)
- Poland also watch much around, i.e. on Germany
Todor Tagarev (Bulgaria): Europe and the Balkans
Various security issues related to the EU
-The EU managed to talk to вааукуте former Yugoslavia states which were confronting – and it joined them
- Bulgaria and some other Balkan states are transnational states; they do not set the rules but adopt the rules set by the other countries
- People in Bulgaria say that their country is ready to join Eurozone
- Common energy policy is discussed by experts /players (Russia, Turkey). Yesterday [Nov15] – Southstream with Gazprom was approved which means 20% cheaper gas for Bulgaria
- Bulgaria and Montenegro were called “mafia states”, and Ukraine is also in the “mafia list”
-Opinion polls in Balkans show that attitudes of people towards Turkey became more positive