POL 144A Final Study Guide

Why is the EU model NOT the IMF model?

-IMF model -1. Liberalization: remove all price controls, open up country to competition, make currency convertible and have value, remove trade barriers -2. Macroeconomic Stabilization: Reduce/control inflation, end government subsidies, credits, etc. -3. Privatization: Private state property, encourage foreign investment/ownership, encourage new entrepreneurship -The EU model is NOT the IMF model --> it is the same "basic reform model" BUT--> -Billions of euro in EU aid -Teams of EU personnel to direct spending and implement EU law - build EU institutions -EU model is highly intrusive, not just conditional -FDI follows EU commitment -> possibly one of the main reasons why it was successful

Nationalist parties

-Parties that are more ethnic oriented -Parties that stand on the values of patriotism and value the well-being of that particular State above all else, even at the expense of other States. -Tend to be more right-wing and Euroskeptical than other

What has the EU done, if anything, to encourage accession among countries of the Western Balkans?

In 1999, European Council promised the former Yugoslavia and Albania: - "Status of potential candidate countries with a clear perspective of membership" • Stabilization and Association Process or SAP, established in June 1999 - Similar to the pre-accession policies offered to Eastern Europe. - Relationship begins with SAP and progresses toward accession agreement if country meets conditions. - Croatia and Macedonia were the first to sign SAP agreements.

"Losers" vs. "winners" of economic reform

What type of parties do losers support? 'Losers' are groups that suffer disproportionately from market reform --> they are more likely to support nationalist/eurosceptical parties What type of parties do winners support? 'Winners' are groups that benefit from market reform --> these groups are more likely to support pro-EU parties Who is most likely to support EU accession? Those who will benefit from market reform are more likely to support EU accession

"The EU: Russia and Post-Soviet Space" by Fisher

(democracy/integration narrative says that they want their eastern members (Ukraine) to integrate democracy and become western like. Russia views this as being a threat to national sovereign geopolitical narrative says that depending on where the state is located within the post-soviet countries the external factors can influence the way that state perceives EU and political ideologies. the value-empire narrative says that EU wants their members to value democracy, the rule of law and they want their members to be more dependent on EU conclusion: in order for Ukraine to fight against the corrupt authoritarian regimes within their country they need to adopt democracy which Russia does not approve and since geographically Ukraine is close to Russia they get influenced by them. Also, Russia can not be completely isolated from the EU since they depend on the EU for energy) -This article deals with Eastern European narratives about relations with the EU. Generally, EU norms and values encounter different receptions depending upon the country. The EU created a doctrine which attempted to "create a ring of well governed states along its new borders" with whom they could enjoy cooperative relations. The paper seeks to explain how the EU failed to attain their ambitious goal. Depending upon whether the EU norms and values are compatible with the countries' discourse, they will either be embraced, partially embraced or rejected if it undermines the ruling elite's authority. The EU has ultimately been relatively unsuccessful in influencing the consolidation of democracy, good governance and the rule of law in its eastern neighbors.For example, Ukraine's ambition toward democratization has decreased in early 2010 and other countries mostly follow suit except for Moldova which is often cited as an example of the EU's successful effort to promote its values on its eastern neighbors. Diverging perceptions of the EU are to be found at the domestic level in the post-Soviet states and in every country society competing political forces promote different concepts of national identity, relations, and how to regard the EU. -How does Russia perceive the EU? In Russia, the overwhelming majority of the political elite reject the democracy/integration narrative. This narrative expresses that the eastern states attempt to democratize and catch up with the western democratic states and ultimately to become part of it, blurring the line between outside and inside. However, in Russia the desire to become European, democratize/ westernize etc was directly perceived as a threat to sovereignty. -Geopolitical narrative - in this narrative the EU is considered one of the several external actors engaged in the post-soviet space. The geopolitical narrative is a driving force behind the policies of those governments in the post-soviet space who strive to counterbalance the influence of external actors. -'value empire' narrative - puts a special emphasis on the specific nature of the EU as a value-oriented foreign policy actor. This narrative views the EU's desire to promote democracy, the rule of law, etc is for the purpose of making their neighbors more dependent (Russia's view?). -conclusion: the democracy/integration narrative gained traction in Ukraine as a countermovement against corrupt and authoritarian regimes within the country. Complete isolation from the EU for Russia is not an option due to their dependence on them for energy. -In other words, with the exception of Ukraine and Georgia, where complex learning has taken place to a limited extent, leaderships and political elites in the EU's eastern neighbours have not gone beyond simple learning and partial adjustment of their policies to the demands and expectations of the EU

What does it mean for a party to be left, right, or center?

-Left: Westernized, pro EU, liberal -Center: Soft Euroscepticism, liberal but not opposed to EU -Right: Nationalist, Hard Euroscepticism, highly opposed to EU -Major parties of the left: ideologically socialist or social democratic -Major parties of the right: ideologically neoliberal (pro-market) or conservative -Core positions of the right (vs. left) Lower taxes, esp. on business & corp. Less government spending on entitlements More spending on security More conservative social values Soft euroscepticism Primary emphasis: Economic growth Core positions of the radical right Same as the right, but: Extreme opposition to immigration Hard euroscepticism Primary emphasis is on promotion of security and preservation of the Ethno-cultural homeland

Eurosceptical parties

-Parties that have negative attitudes/ do not support the EU(?) -Political parties that tend to be more nationalist, and have an identity that primarily stands with their State and not Europe.

What were the controversial issues surround enlargement from the point of view of Poland?

-Controversial issues that arose during negotiations about acquis (EU law) created anger and some "euro" skepticism about joining -Public reactions to the elections: -Inititally supportive (>80% population) -Growth of euroskepticism starting in 1998 -THREE controversial issues -1. Free movement of labor -2. Relationship to Ukraine: Border Controls -Controversial in poland, affected relations with neighboring Ukraine -Millions of Ukrainians working in Poland without visas -Lead to delayed implementation, 2001 -3. Aid to farmers -addition of Poland to EU increased total # of farmers by 1/3 -Many of them were subsistence farmers, low revenue and low tech -Was an area of intense negotiation -Farmers were main source of euroskepticism -EU provided Poland with substantial pre-accession aid to farmers -EU pledged to bring Polish farmers up to EU standards by 2013 -Right wing parties started to support the euroskeptical view and gained 1/3 of seats in 2001

European Union - what is it?

-EU is a political and economic union of 28 countries and approx. 500 million ppl -Legal foundation is purely based on treaties --> these treaties are ratified by EU members, not the populations of countries -New members have policies mandated upon them -Free movement of EU citizens -Strict monetary policy -No trade restrictions among EU members -No discrimination against minorities -Contributions required to common EU fund -Eventual application of Euro -Conceptual / ideological issue: EU vs national sovereignty -Implementation of the EU has interesting political science implications: it can serve as an independent variable for analyzing democratization, economic performance, turnout, corruption, etc.

Why would countries want to join the EU?

-Economic: -EU members are rich -Significant subsidies to help bring GDP/capita of new members to EU average -Over 40 billion euro between 2004-2006 -Substantial aid given, (in poland's case) increased tourism, possible benefit from lack of trade restrictions -incentive of aid tied with progress of democratic political system -Security -Nato membership / EU membership -Historical -Identify as European Economic benefits of joining EU Political benefits of joining EU

Importance of public opinion and complying elites in joining the EU

-In the "easy" cases for EU entrants, (eg:Hungary, Czech and Slovak Republics, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Slovenia) --> general conclusions for these cases: Elite driven, major parties or right and left sides supportive of EU entry, public support is strong -Romania and Bulgaria --> elites opposed EU entry. Despite this, the prevalence of public support for an EU entrance in these countries, when combined with the unknown future of these countries without EU intervention, allowed for an EU enlargement

8. How did the issue of joining the EU affect party competition in the prospective entrant countries?

29 post-accession elections in 10 CEE countries - 20 right or center right governments - 6 leftist governments - 3 centrist governments • Politics leans right in post-accession CEE countries

How do we measure public opinion?

Aggregate measure of individual opinion. Data can be derived from the eurobarometer. -1. Voting behavior -Proportion of vote share to particular parties is tied to distinct ideologies and policy preferences -Direct impact on politics -2. Surveys -Aggregate results of individual respondent's answers to specific questions --> reflects public opinion -indirect (possible) impact on politics, if opinions are turned into voting behaviors

EU philosophy

Economic prosperity based on: -Market capitalism -Progressive taxation -State-guaranteed social services State protection of civil and political rights -Free speech, press, assembly, the right to vote, open contestation to political office Tolerance -Strong protections of minority rights Death penalty is outlawed Generous provisions for asylum seekers, refugees EU's roles and impacts on region: -Impact to strengthen democracy / freedom -Desired to/ prevented countries from reverting to authoritarian/ autocratic rule Primary mechanisms for EU enforcement: membership or withholding thereof -Goal of EU involvement / enforcement: reform politically and economically -Carrot: promise of EU membership -Stick: rejection of membership for nonconformity to conditions - "conditionality" -Only three countries ever had to reprimanded by EU: Poland, Hungary, and Czech Republic -Also: AID was tied to democratic progress -EU halted aid to Romania in 1990s, Croatia in 1995 -EU halted accession talks with Slovakia in 1997 and threatened to do so with Estonia

Why does economic reform (IMF Basic Reform Plan) lead to immediate rise in unemployment?

IMF leads to high unemployment because when industries became privatized people were laid off as a result.

Polish accession

Why was Poland considered an "easy case"? Other easy cases: Hungary, Czech and Slovak Republics, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Slovenia --> general conclusions for these cases: Elite driven, major parties or right and left sides supportive of EU entry, public support is strong Poland was considered an easy case due to it being "on a fast track to join EU" - also a politically sophisticated place Poland's government was connected Public was not informed of accession The leaders of the two main political parties in Poland were strongly supportive of EU entry Public debate was characterized in two ways General information about Poland's progress towards joining - when exactly they would join Controversial issues that arose during negotiations about acquis (EU law) created anger and some "euro" skepticism about joining Public ended up getting a biased view Economically was guided by Jeffrey Sachs "Free Movement of People" concession to EU 15 FMP states that all people are free to move and work anywhere in EU Also mandates related policies that will be the same all over Europe: Professional qualifications Health services and benefits Legal practices on hiring and firing Business law, salaries Polish response is positive - FMP is in line with domestic interests Polish people WANT to be able to seek work in EU 15 EU 15 meets with resistance EU: demands limits on immigration EU position allowed EU-15 to ban CEE citizens from working in their countries until 5-7 years after accession --> against EU principles/law? discrimination? Fear from EU-15 of influx of cheap labor Public reactions and euroskeptical parties rise of nationalist parties - they were in favor of more independent sovereignty rather than collective government via EU How did they still join, despite euroskepticism? EU provided Poland with substantial pre-accession and post-accession aid for farmers. Pledged to bring farmers up to EU standard by 2013 Aftermath of Polish accession Poland was EU's largest new entrant 51 representatives to European Parliament 6th largest total membership Poland received an immediate 3.5 billion euro from EU budget Exports rose by 30% Tourism increased significantly Poland was the only EU country to not experience a recession

How and why did the EU lower their standards for R & B?

2007 --> How: EU gave concessions on EU law/conditionality --> neither R nor B had a functioning market economy Why: Public in both cases was very supportive of EU entry --> this was key also - > it was unclear if either R or B would succeed with political/economic reform without EU intervention 7 year reprieve given to the EU 15 helped R and B Impact of public support for EU accession

What kinds of incentives does the EU provide to encourage countries to comply with their criteria?

-Aid tied to democratic progress (PHARE) was one method they used in order to get countries to comply with their political reform ideology -BUT, the EU uses goal of joining as their primary condition to force countries to reform economically and politically The key actors in the joining countries are: The government AND the public. What role do the governments play? What role does the public play?

Partisanship: Why does party support change over time?

-Sometimes is responsive to economic factors. -For example in Poland Solidarity, the political party responsible for the extremely successful transition from communism to democracy after the fall of the USSR; had majority support in the new government. But in 1993 their support was so low that they did not even reach the 5% threshold to be in the 1993 parliamentary election. The voters most likely forgot what Solidarity had done to combat the Communist not only in the past election year but the decade leading up to the transition. After a while the views of the people were no longer represented by Solidarity, they were the only Democratic party at the time, so when new parties were allowed to form, the people of Poland could move to another party that more specifically supported their political views. Which goes to show that the polls are fluid (pun intended). What factors influence party support? -The state of the economy, also potentially external factors such as EU influence/membership How can we measure partisanship? -Vote share and seat share

What were the controversial issues surrounding enlargement from the point of view of the EU15?

-The GDP/capita of the prospective new members was on average is only 40% of the old members' GDP per capita --> implies significant new subsidies -Polish people WANT to be able to seek work in EU 15 EU 15 meets with resistance EU: demands limits on immigration EU position allowed EU-15 to ban CEE citizens from working in their countries until 5-7 years after accession --> against EU principles/law? discrimination? Fear from EU-15 of influx of cheap labor

"European Union Conditionality" by Grabbe

-The article examines the EU's accession conditionality levers and constraints on their use. It concludes that readiness for membership depends on not only the technical progress of negotiations, but also when the current member-states are politically ready for enlargement. The conditions for joining the EU, according to article, are deceptively straight forward. Entrance is conditional upon a stable democracy and a competitive market economy, and demonstrate that is willing to take on all EU policies present and future. However, these conditions are very general and it is subjective what constitutes a stable democracy and market economy. -Conclusion: the CEE countries will be ready to join when the Union is ready for enlargement. It is ultimately up to the members to decided when each applicant country is ready. It is mostly a question of which states can be brought into the Union as equal partners. For countries with limited resources, EU accession resources are highly complex and expensive and countries receive little aid from the Union in assisting the process. When the demands for EU accession divert resources from the countries' more basic needs, the aim of accession and basic development goals of the country (healthcare and education) are in conflict. (a country can not join when they are ready the eu members decide when they are ready, then they have to wait till next enlargement, countries that are not ready the eu policy would seem complex to them since they don't have the resources they receive little aid from the eu, this aid would be in conflict of what they actually achieve) What kind of members will the CEE states be? -Policy preferences on European integration differ All will clearly favor the transfers to assist poor member states Growing euroscepticism in the leading candidates (Poland) Inevitably, the way in which relationships are forming during the process of accession will affect behavior as member states. In order to build trust in them as equal partners, need to formulate a more consistent and legitimate set of conditions for membership that applies to both old and new member states.

Why do candidate countries have so little bargaining power?

-They had such little bargaining power because the threat to not join was not equal to the threat by the EU to restrict membership --> not a credible threat -EU as a whole is stronger and would survive/be fine without candidate membership -EU 15 had a substantial average GDP / capita and overall -> -EU was in very strong position --> each member country had power to veto enlargement -Eu was already providing huge amounts of support and aid to support EU law -EU strategy: NO concessions to prospective entrants, LOTS of aid from EU

Case study: Ukraine Why is Ukraine's situation so problematic with regard to its relationship with both Russia and the EU?

-Ukraine (and Moldova) sits geographically and uneasily between Russia and Europe -Ukraine is politically, linguistically, and culturally divided -Western Ukraine identifies as Euro, Eastern identifies as Russian -Key natural gas supply routes to European Union are via pipelines that run through Ukraine and Belarus, but ¾ of supply to EU travels through Ukraine. -The EU underestimated the significance of Russia's strategic interests in Ukraine. • EU did not understand Russia's objections to deeper integration of Ukraine into EU economy • Did not take seriously Russia's stated foreign policy, assertions of which began in 2009, that Russia had a right to protect Russians living outside the country and to use military force to do so. • EU did not understand the game that Yanukovych was playing

"European Integration, Nationalism and European Identity" by Fligstein, Polykava, Sandholtz.

-it is argued in this article that the issue of European and national identity plays a heightened role in European politics, particularly in the economic crisis of 2007-2011. The resolution of that crisis, which may result in increased European co operation, will have to take into account highly salient national identities that have so far resisted such co operation. (EU member states were trying figure out if they were nationalist or had European identity which let to a crisis. identity played a huge role. this crises resulted in them working together, but there are some noticeable member states that were opposed to cooperation) -Contemporary events have shown a resurgence of nationalist-oriented politics. European political and economic projects have created far more integration than has the social and cultural project of unifying Europe around a sense of shared national identity. Even ring wing ethno-centered political groups recognize the economic and political necessity of the EU. Far right parties are seen as a response to interdependency on the EU and its perceived effects on the national community. (events showed that eu member states were mostly nationalist, eu wanted to bring them together by social and cultural projects but that did not work instead political and economical project were more helpful in bringing them closer or making them cooperate, every party acknowledged that political and economical projects were important, the more eu tried to bring identies together to more right wing parties was favored) -The EU has failed to bring more jobs to less educated, blue collar workers and due to this members of these groups tend to view the EU as an elite project that only has benefited the educated. They have less interest in knowing their neighbors and more interest in maintaining a strong national identity. View immigrants as threat. (eu did not bring more jobs for the less educated, and people now view eu as a group who favors educated, members states care more about themselves then their neighbors and they dont like immigrants) -Educated people and those with high status occupations are more likely to be in favor of a mass European identity. They see the benefits of integration and think of themselves as cosmopolitan Europeans. Right wing parties have appealed to those who have not felt the benefits of integration. -It is impossible to create much economic integration and EU level regulation without the development of some sort of mass European identity

"New Member States of EU" by Dimitrova

-the key question is: whether informal rules and practices will also change following the change in formal rules and lead to institutionalization or; whether alternatively the imported rules will be reversed or remain empty shells. Institutionalization is therefore defined as a process whereby a new formal rule is supported by supplementary informal rules and both become the new rules in use. 'rules in use' is compromised by both formal and informal rules. Focus on rules in use instead of formal rules to identify the presence of an institution. -Enlargement brings changes in formal rules which may later be followed by changes in informal rules. Candidate countries were required to adopt the EU's policy that consisted of rules harmonizing policies. The main difference between implementation and institutionalization is that the former examines rules related to policies and the latter related to institutions. 3 possible outcomes may be specified with regard to the EU rules post-accession: -reversal of the new rules institutionalization (formal and informal rules are aligned) empty shells - actors ignore the new rules, parallel informal rules are used. (if a state adopts new formal rules which they also change their informal rules to or align then that means they truly institutionalized while if this does not happen and states continues to use informal rules then these new rules are just empty shells which do no good)

Why does delaying economic reform lead to high inflation?

Countries had to value their currency at the world market value,

How did it resemble the Fourth Enlargement (CEE + Malta + Cyprus)?

DIFFERENT: Second enlargement placed no conditions on joining countries because they figured that these countries would strengthen democracies on their own. But the fourth enlargement had lots of conditions countries had to meet I do believe the GDP/capita is the most important point here. The second enlargement set a precedent of not only allowing lower GDP/capita countries in, but assisting them through the transitionary process via aid. They were much more inclined to accept those countries after they had already granted entrance to lower performing economies, i.e. Greece, Spain and Portugal. The EU admitted the countries in the second enlargement hoping that their support would aid them in democratization. This is parallel to the fourth enlargement because the CEE countries were also democratizing and needed financial aid. The second enlargement was a success, so they were hoping to replicate this success with the CEE countries European Council in Copenhagen (1993) Made commitment to admit 10 postcommunist countries GDP/Capita was ⅓ of EU members General criteria for admission EU conditionality Political: country must be a democracy Economy: Country must have a "functioning market economy" Passage of Acquis Communautaire EU law

In the parliamentary systems of CEE (for example, Hungary), what or who was the 'incumbent'?

Definition of incumbent: Holder of office Who or what was the incumbent in the parliamentary system of CEE? Prime minister is the incumbent. Hungary PM is Imre Pozsgay For example, In Hungary, with the accession (attainment of power) of the real reform Communist, the way was open for serious roundtable discussion to begin, which they did on June 13, 1989, only a few days after the Polish election. A reforming Communist party was negotiating with the representatives of society for the purpose of a "peaceful and lawful evolution towards a constitutional multiparty system". Imre Pozsgay said that the party now accepted the principle of a democratic electoral system with free elections and rival parties. If it did not dominate the elections scheduled in 1990, then they would seek a coalition (joining parties/merging into one single party). By accepting the ideas of the parliamentary system, democratic socialism as practiced, "according the Western European ideas", and economic market, they began distancing themselves from the ghost of Stalinism.

How did the most recent enlargement benefit the entire EU?

EU 15's reaction to newest enlargement --> croatia ->2013 Their sentiment included the notion that, 'Enlargement has benefitted the new members at the expense of the old members' -Old member countries also held the contention that: FDI that would have gone to EU15 actually went exclusively to the new members -Old members: New member country's workers are taking unskilled jobs from EU 15 population due to migration --> influx of cheap labor -BUT there existed strict migration laws following accession of new mems, and also no empirical data supports any disproportional allocation of resources (Benefits: The extension of the zone of peace Boost economic growth Increase cultural density Strengthen the Union's role in world affairs) (EU 15's reaction to newest enlargement Resistance Demanded limits on immigrants Ban on CEE citizens from working in non-CEE countries for 5-7 years after accession. Fear in EU-15 of a influx of cheap labor)

What is EU Law?

EU law consists of: 31 chapters, and over 26,000 pieces of legislation in all -Selected laws from 31 chapters: -Free movement of goods (free trade), persons, and capital -Agriculture -Taxation -Economic and monetary union -Energy -Industrial policy -small and medium-sized enterprises -Regional policy and coordination of structural instruments -Environment -Consumer and health protection -Cooperation in the realms of justice and home affairs -Financial control -Institutions

How does the process of joining the EU impact political competition in acceding countries?

EU post-accession political competition: distribution of voters shifts rightward

EU institutions

European Commission, headed by president -EU executive (analogous to cabinet) -EC president is like prime minister -1 member per country European Parliament 750 of them -EU legislature -Members of EU parliament are directly elected every 5 years in member countries -Turnout for these elections is VERY low (<30%) -Members of European Parliament elect European Commission and its president European Council -EU "head of state" -Includes key executives (mostly PMs) of member countries -Nominates president of European Commission

What is the difference between euroscepticism and far-right nationalism?

Euroskepticism is a negative attitude towards european integration -European integration includes: -Interrelationship between EU member nations -Importance of EU level policies over national policies -Dominance of EU institutions over national ones -enlargement of the EU -Far-Right Nationalism -Ethnic nationalism -Commonality of religion, language, culture, ethnicity/race -More likely to hold a sense of national identity; More likely to define European as white christians, excludes non-europeans -Civic Nationalism -Citizenship as both a legal status and a set of shared values, each of which is obtainable by anyone -More likely to hold a sense of European identity defined by values of peace, tolerance, diversity, and democracy.

What is euroskepticism?

Euroskepticism is a negative attitude towards european integration -European integration includes: -Interrelationship between EU member nations -Importance of EU level policies over national policies -Dominance of EU institutions over national ones -enlargement of the EU Hard euroskepticism --> do not support membership Soft euroskepticism --> Do not support further integration or enlargement

Why would some countries still not be in the EU?

Former USSR and the EU Belorussia, Ukraine, Moldova, Georgia Perception of EU as "value empire" Former Yugoslavia and the EU Hasn't reached the economic or political benchmarks Macedonia, Serbia, Hasn't reached the economic or political benchmarks Albania and the EU EU's plan for these three regions

What is the prognosis for countries of the former Yugoslavia for joining EU?

Former republics of Yugoslavia (except Slovenia) did not initially turn to EU. -Croatia is part of EU (2013) -Macedonia, Albania, Montenegro, Bosnia, and Serbia have all signed and ratified SAP. -Negotiations have only begun in Montenegro, and have been announced in Serbia -Kosovo/Bosnia have recently gained their independence and have signed SAP. Albania: governed by EU-oriented party Macedonia: governing party is strongly pro-EU and NATO Serbia: governing party - "For a European Serbia" Montenegro: governing party - "Coalition for a European Montenegro" Bosnia & Kosovo: recently gained sovereignty, not primarily EU oriented yet, but the process has begun

In the mixed presidential-parliamentary systems of CEE (for example, Poland), who could be considered the 'incumbent'?

In this type of system, the incumbent is the president and he chooses the prime minister For example in Poland, in their mixed presidential-parliamentary system (a system of government in which a president exists along with a prime minister and a cabinet, with the latter two being responsible to the legislature of a state ), Lech Walesa (against the economic reform because it affected many people of Poland) was elected president and he chose his own prime ministers

Which of the following countries was NOT a republic of the Soviet Union?

Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Ukraine, Russia, Moldova, and Belorussia WERE republics of USSR

EU enlargements

Originals are Belgium, Germany, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands The first enlargement in 1973, when Denmark, Ireland, and the UK joined. They understood that to harmonize the economies of the member countries, they needed to have a more strict monetary system, so they created the European Monetary System in 1979. They agree to monitor exchange rate, peg their currencies to the most stable currency in the market (the German mark at the time), and enforce inflation limiting policies. The second enlargement was Greece, Spain, and Portugal. These three countries did not democratize until the late 1970s. They were less prosperous than the first 9 countries. In 1995, there was a third enlargement when Austria, Finland, and Sweden joined. The EU had 15 members, which is often referred to as the EU 15. In 2002, the Euro began circulating. The Fourth Enlargement : New requirements for membership. European Council, Copenhagen 1993, is the commitment to admit 10 postcommunist countries. Their GDP per capita was 1/3 of EU members. They announced the Copenhagen Criteria. They open the invitation to all the CEE countries, committing themselves to admitting between 10 and 18 new countries. The 10 CEE countries are Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia also Cyprus and Malta Fifth was Crotia in 2013 which makes it the newest member of EU

Why have some of the CEE countries not joined the EU?

Problems facing former republics of USSR and Yugoslavia • Unresolved problems of national identity have led to 5-10 year delays in each country's decision on EU integration. • Countries were vulnerable to efforts by regionally dominant actors to absorb them into their sphere of influence. • Actors?--> Serbia, Russia Kosovo just recently gained independence, has not really had time to complete the relatively long process of joining Severe divide in Ukraine in culture, language, politics Western Ukraine identifies as Euro, Eastern identifies as Russian Russian interest in Ukraine NOT being EU

What is economic (or retrospective) voting?

Retrospective Voting: When voters hold the incumbents accountable for their actions, voters do this by not voting for the incumbent party in elections and instead for another party. Usually when in a bad economic state, is when voters choose to pursue this option. Also relate the idea that the incumbent is more concern with lining their pockets than making change, hence corruption. Think of the idea, "Were you better off than you were four years ago?" No? Then vote for the opposition.

What are the Copenhagen conditions?

The Copenhagen criteria are the rules that define whether a country is eligible to join the European Union. The criteria require that a state has the institutions to preserve democratic governance and human rights, has a functioning market economy, and accepts the obligations and intent of the EU.

Ideological spectrum:

Western Europe (EU15) since enlargement - Increased sense of national identity under threat - Mainstream right - soft euroscepticism - Far right - hard euroscepticism • CEE 2004/07 members (8-10 year post-accession) - Politics is dominated by the right - Euroscepticism is increasing, but is lower than in Western Europe • Former Yugoslavia (in process now) - Identity issues are particular acute - Euroscepticism is fairly high, but people still support joining EU

What were the basic steps that each of the ten CEE countries that joined in 2004/07 had to go through?

The Fourth Enlargement included new requirements for EU membership -Political criteria: Country must be a democracy -Economic criteria: Country must have a "functioning market economy" -Passage of acquis communautaire - EU Law European Council, Copenhagen, 1993 -Commitment to admit 10 countries, 8 of them post-communist countries -Average GDP/capita was 1/3 of current EU members -Total population: 105 million -Commitment to extend membership to all post-communist countries Steps: -Associative relationships: first step towards becoming a member -non-binding, can last for years (eg. Turkey) -1990 - Poland, Hungary, and Czech Republic 1993 - Baltics, Bulgaria, and Romania 1995 - Slovenia, former Yugoslavia, and Albania -Aid given but tied to progress on democratic political system (PHARE) -EU halted aid given to Romania in 1990s, Croatia in 1995 -EU stopped accession talks with Slovakia in 1997 and threatened to do so with Estonia Final hurdles for 2004 entry: -National parliaments of the then 15 member countries must support the enlargement --> no problems here -National parliaments AND populations of joining nations must support enlargement --> parliamentary votes were unanimous , popular support was strong, but varied

What is income inequality?

The extent to which income is distributed in an uneven manner among the population. Romania and Bulgaria have a lower income per capita population leading to hesitancy for admission to EU

What effect did economic reform (IMF Reform Plan/Shock Therapy) have on public opinion? Example: Poland

Those whose status declines oppose economic reform. Who are they? What parties do they vote for and why?: Those who voted for the left wing who were former communist parties. They were elderly working class and farmers Those whose status increases support economic reform. Who are they? What parties do they vote for and why?: People who are the opposition parties also known as the right wing. Those people are young, educated individuals, and those who can change careers or just starting on their careers.

Stokes: Chapter. 7: The New European Order

To sum up what can be seen as an interminable logjam of negotiations, agreements and treaties, while Communism was collapsing in Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union and Western European countries were reforming their economic relations, strengthening their mutual interconnections, and preparing for future growth. Eastern Europe now found itself confronting a peaceful Germany, collapsed Russia, and a united Europe that emphasized human rights, democracy, and operated a functioning social economy. Now the problem was how to take advantage of the opportunity that this new European order now offered.

Why was the Second Enlargement important?

What was the Second Enlargement? It was admittance of Greece, Spain, and Portugal to the European Union in the late 1980's ('81, '86) the GDP per capita of these countries was significantly lower than that of ECC (EU) members, which the ECC (EU) saw as an opportunity to help The ECC (EU) adopted new policies to help poorer members Members with a GDP per capita lower than 75% of ECC (which is now the EU) average, would receive aid Why was this important? The treaty of Maastricht What is the treaty of Maastricht New countries were not fully democracies, and had GDP per capita of around 30% of ECC members. As a result, the EU was formed in 1992 with the Treaty of Maastricht with anticipation of enlargement. It created a monetary union (the Euro), European citizenship with no travel restrictions within EU to EU citizens, and common security and foreign policy was adopted. Keep in mind, the Euro was not adopted until 2002 -Greece, Spain, and Portugal -Did not democratize until the late 1970s -1981, Greece joined the EEC (European Economic Community) -1986, Spain and Portugal joined EEC -These countries' GDP/capita was lower than the average for existing EEC countries -EEC adopted new policies to help poorer members -members with <75% of EEC (now EU) average received aid

Romanian and Bulgarian accession

Why were these more difficult cases? Romania and Bulgaria had corruption --> elites also opposed EU entry Romania also had very poor healthcare (will need help/subsidies), had discrimination against Roma (gypsys), and also extremely bad conditions in orphanages Very limited GDP / capita (Romania 1992 GDP pc $5442) (Bulgaria '92 GDP pc $5651) Romania: initial lack of democratic movement, poor economic performance, lack of commitment to economic reform Bulgaria: poor economic performance, lack of commitment to economic reform Other cases of "farther to go" for joining EU Clearly Romania and Bulgaria Baltics, Latvia Lithuania and Estonia all had legalized discrimination against Russian speakers Argument could be made that Poland had "farther to go" ; they had a very large, technologically backwards agricultural sector (40%)