European Union and its Expansion

Abstract

This article deals with the enlargement of the European Union (EU). The main issue lies in how the EU, which includes twenty-seven member countries as of 2023, will evolve in the future. From its Christian Democratic roots, the European Union places political and moral values at the forefront of its mission toward a European super-state. However, the third component of this entity, economic expansion, takes precedence in modern society. The eight members admitted to the EU in 2004 were post-communist states, and Euro-skeptics were quick to downplay these nations' rights to join an organization with firm roots in democracy and "old European" ideals of responsible freedom and value relativism. And with these EU inductees, whose economic and social systems were not up to par with the rest of the EU members, the question of who is able to gain entry into the union rose to its peak. A chief point of interest was the EU's decision in December 2004 to allow accession talks with Turkey, a largely Muslim state that has taken the social and political steps toward democracy necessary to gain admittance to the EU. This issue remained in 2023, with Turkey still not part of the EU. Further, in 2020, the United Kingdom left the EU in a controversial decision.

Overview

Formation of a European Super-State. At the turn of the twenty-first century, the EU had fifteen member states. In 2004, the union added an additional ten central and eastern European nations. Included were Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia. The year 2007 saw the induction of Bulgaria and Romania, and in 2013, Croatia also joined the ranks of EU member states. These member countries joined the likes of the United Kingdom, Germany, and France in a movement toward a fully functional European super-state. The intent was to have one Europe with common goals and ideals that could stand united as a strong international power.

Copenhagen Criteria

The EU has a regulatory path for inclusion known as the Copenhagen Criteria. Established in 1993 as a means for formal membership into the EU, the Copenhagen Criteria requires three principles of its applicants before they can submit for accession.

• First, each member state must have a stable democratic government that focuses on human rights.
• Second, they must have an economy open to the entire EU market and with the ability to handle the inevitable competition that will follow.
• Third, each country desiring inclusion in the EU must have in mind the ultimate goal of being one common body, economically, sociopolitically, and monetarily, when it comes to the greater good of the union. An amendment to this refers to the need for the absorption of new members in order to ensure growth.

In 2013, only seventeen of the twenty-eight EU members had enacted the Euro as their common currency (European Union, 2013a). In 2023, that number had increased to twenty (European Union, 2023). The Maastricht Treaty of 1993, which eventually gave birth to the EU, sets the specific criteria for monetary union. Despite this criteria, the main issue goes beyond tying these nations together under one regulatory code of money. The goal of the European Union is to have all the member states stay true to their individual cultures while focusing on greater moral and political aspirations outside of their homelands. Each member country adopts a responsibility for the well-being and economic concerns of the European community at large in addition to its own citizens.

Christian Democratic Roots. These ideals of unity based on greater moral responsibility stretch from the Christian Democratic roots of the European Union. The European Christian Democrats who began the movement toward union did not see a true European alliance as something based solely on economic expansion capabilities. They instead wished it to be a union of common legal, moral, and economic conditions. They perceived Western principles based on Christian ideals, human rights, and common law for the greater good as necessary components of a Euro-Atlantic civilization. The modern-day EU became increasingly concerned with how these older perceptions fit with the present day and onward into the future expansion of the European Union. The two main attributes to keep in mind theoretically when it comes to these concerns are the concepts of "responsible freedom" and "value relativism."

• Responsible freedom is the idea that each nation individually has the task of creating a social situation that mirrors its political practices.
• This very strong Christian hope morphed into the idea of value relativism, which states that every nation has the inalienable right to create its moral structure. This gives a lot of freedom to the individual nations but makes them responsible for being moral and ethical in their dealings at home and, ultimately, in the greater community of Europe as a whole.

Due to the 2004 wave of EU inductees, the "Old European," Christian ideology–based hopes for a unified Europe were brought into serious question. These member nations were all relatively poor, post-communist states whose focus is on monetary subsidies, as opposed to the higher purpose and moral standards that have been central to the European Union.

Euro-Skepticism. Euro-skeptics questioned why these countries were admitted. They also wondered what message it sent to future candidate nations who fit the Copenhagen Criteria. Euro-skeptics wanted to know how the EU went from an organization of higher moral purpose to one of welfare programs that could be perceived as throwing money into the hands of inductees as a token for their fitting the bill outlined in the Copenhagen Criteria. It reached a level that many refer to as “enlargement fatigue.” These member nations, many from the former Soviet bloc with nationalist movements, were seen as putting a hindrance on the establishment of a truly unified Europe. Several countries, including Poland, Slovakia, and Lithuania, all had shifts in political power that moved their nations away from the guidelines of the EU. The economic growth and success of the EU in these poorer countries stopped at the major cities, leaving the smaller, rural areas without the benefit of "Europeanization."

Enlargement Fatigue. An original intent of the EU was to give subsidies to farmers in poor countries such as these. Because the allotment of monies is based on a country's gross domestic product (GDP), a smaller, poorer country would not get the same money in subsidies as a larger nation. These post-communist EU members have GDPs several times smaller than the long-standing member countries. They have not felt all the positive effects of a Euro-Atlantic social market economy through every social class. This contradicted the aim of the EU to allocate monies to member nations in order to encourage the economy of the recipients, both for the common good of the nation as well as the entire union as a whole. Detractors stressed that the EU’s monetary budget was not infinite. In 2011, there was a budget of 140 billion Euros to disperse, only 30 percent of which could be devoted to agriculture and infrastructure programs (European Commission, 2012). With increasing membership levels of poorer countries that needed more funds, the enlargement fatigue faced by the EU was substantial.

The concerns over enlargement fatigue increased further as the European Union headed into its next stage of development, which included the inclusion of Romania and Bulgaria in January 2007. This brought the total number of EU member nations to twenty-seven. The originally stated maximum for EU commissioners was twenty-five, as outlined in the treaty that established the European constitution. Each member nation had one commissioner; thus, with the inclusion of more nations, there was concern that there would be less than one voice per country and a lack of representation. Consequently, in December 2007, following the induction of Bulgaria and Romania, the member states signed and ratified the Treaty of Lisbon, which amended earlier treaties, expanded democratic rights and freedoms, and made it possible for members to withdraw from the union (European Union, 2013b; European Union, 2013c). One more country, Croatia, was included six years later, in 2013.

In addition to representation, at the time, Euro-skeptics expressed concern about the flurry of migrant workers who leave their own country to work in another member nation. This became a significant problem immediately after the 2004 accessions, with statistics showing that 427,000 Eastern European migrants signed up for work in three nations that opened their labor markets between May 2004 and June 2006. The original number projected for worker migration was only 13,000 ("Second Thoughts," 2006).

Many Euro-skeptics blamed the newer EU member states for the economic crises felt in the EU during and after the 2008–9 global recession. They particularly pointed to the newest members, Bulgaria and Romania, but also accused older EU nations of fiscal irresponsibility, arguing that Croatia and other candidate nations should therefore not have been included (Vukadinović, 2013). Some speculated that reluctance to admit Turkey into the EU was related to the European economic picture (Morelli, 2013).

Controversy over Turkish Membership. The next stage of the expansion of the European Union was also crucial to its development. This was the issue of the accession of Turkey, which began in December 2004. Some said adding Turkey could bolster the image of the EU by harkening back to its original intent of truly uniting the entire European nation, of which Turkey is a part. Others believed that the country was beyond the scope of what the EU was created for, especially in a post–September 11 world. Turkey is a large agricultural Muslim state. The EU was founded on Christian ideals for human rights and a democratic way of life. Turkey began to make the necessary arrangements to qualify it to fit the guidelines of the Copenhagen Criteria. Turkish membership in the EU raised very serious issues regarding enlargement fatigue, the Euro-Atlantic at large, and the fundamental principles under which the European Union was first formed. In 2023, Turkey remained a candidate country to the EU and its relationship with the EU has slightly soured since it initial application. Still, Turkey remained one of the EU’s largest allies and a member of the European Union-Turkey Customs Union (Yenel, 2023).

Applications

The Continuing Issue of Turkey Accession. In December 2004, the EU began accession considerations for Turkey. The accession of Turkey brought to the forefront the overall question of what defined the European Union. Turkey is a Muslim country, and as such, it would be the first country to be admitted to the EU that is not a predominantly Christian nation. The other implication is that since Turkey borders states in the Middle East, the EU could potentially border countries such as Iran, Syria, and Iraq. In an era when terrorism is of great concern, particularly in the Middle East, the impact of this could be huge. The Turkish question also brought up the possibility of the future candidacy of countries such as Turkey's neighbor Armenia or Ukraine, which would further expand the already enlarged union. Another major concern was one of sheer size. Turkey would become the most populous nation in the EU, and its inclusion would most likely carry with it the issue of migrant workers leaving their home country to find work in other member nations. This was already a huge issue for countries that had opened up their labor markets within the EU. It was believed that the accession of Turkey would bring the migrant worker problem to an even larger fever pitch than it has already created.

After World War I, Turkish leader Mustafa Kemal Ataturk stated: "There is only one road to salvation… to adapt ourselves to Western civilization completely" (as cited in Kubicek, 2005). Turkey made an association agreement with the European Economic Community (EEC) in 1963 based on the fact that its location qualified it for eligibility. It made a bid to fully join the EEC in 1987 but was turned away based on the fact that it lacked a democratic government with respect for human rights. In 1997, several post-communist states were determined to have met the standards outlined in the Copenhagen Criteria. Turkey was not included in this group as it did not meet the necessary political and economic criteria. Turkey's constitution at that time had many restrictions when it came to individual expression. Overall, it lacked a democratic frame of mind. In 1999, however, at the Helsinki Summit, Turkey became a candidate for inclusion in the EU. At this summit, Turkey was given leeway because of the post-communist countries that had received the bid in 1997. However, since it had not yet met the Copenhagen Criteria, it was put in a special candidacy group of its own. Soon after, Turkey went through a slew of reforms: it did away with the death penalty, enhanced freedom of expression, cut its military, released political prisoners, and made many amendments to its constitution. In 2004, the EU began accession talks with Turkey. Between 2006 and 2013, several rounds of negotiations were conducted on various sticking points (European Commission, 2013).

The issue of "Europeanization" in regard to Turkey causes much concern among Euro-skeptics:

• Just because something is put down on paper does not necessarily mean that it will go through. This was the argument in the case of Turkey's constitution and its allowing for more basic human rights within its borders.
• Secondly, Turkey seemed to be in a state of merely following the directives of the EU to gain membership but not truly adopting the spirit of what it meant to be a part of based on the original Christian Democratic ideology. With values and morals having served such a high purpose historically for the EU, it seems somewhat doubtful to the skeptics that Turkey would have made these changes almost overnight. For example, in September 2004, Turkish prime minister Tayyip Erdogan wanted to make adultery a crime, a proposal that struck many as an attempt to interpose Islamic law into the country’s penal code ("EU Irked by Turkish Adultery Law," 2004). Things like this put into question the nation's overall ability to adhere to and welcome the EU's value system.
• Third was the issue of a Muslim state in a post–September 11 society and the War on Terror as a whole. Islamic nations were vehemently opposed to the actions of the US and the West. However, the hope here was to encourage democracy in these areas. And as it is stated in the Copenhagen Criteria, Turkey must embrace democracy if it desires accession.

In this sense, some Europeans did want the EU to dismiss Turkey completely. Should Europe be a true melting pot of cultures under one set of common regulations with a focus on the strength of the overall super-state and respect for the individuals therein? While this was the original intent of the EU, most members of the European Parliament in 2010 viewed Turkish accession unfavorably, with significantly fewer supporting it than had in 2006 (Yuvaci, 2013). Turks, for their part, became more ambivalent about the necessity of joining the EU to better their country, as the Turkish economy grew while Europe faced economic difficulties in the wake of the 2008–9 recession (Morelli, 2013).

Turkey would add to the power of Europe, as its military is the largest on the continent. It would also put a Muslim nation working with Christian nations for the betterment of a European super-state. It is a crucial decision for the EU that some think is necessary to advance the European Union and Turkey alike, yet, as of 2023, the issue had not been solved and Turkey was not a member nation of the EU.

Migrant Workers & the Implications for Britain. Another hot-button issue was the number of migrant workers that left their home nations to go work in other member nations under the EU. This was completely legal and encouraged. However, the migrant worker population expanded faster than anyone had imagined. As stated earlier, the EU projected 13,000 migrant workers between May 2004 and June 2006. The total ended up at 427,000 ("Second Thoughts," 2006). In May 2004, the EU expanded to include post-communist countries. At that time, only three of the original members allowed for migrant workers from Eastern Europe to come in and work within their borders ("A Case of Enlargement Fatigue," 2006). Britain became the only big country to open its doors to migrant labor. Ireland and Sweden also allowed migrant workers. Countries such as France were completely opposed to it and saw no real change in their job market due to the enlargement of the EU. The opening of labor markets gave rise to some short-term benefits, such as dramatic increases in the population of working-aged individuals ("Second Thoughts," 2006).

The migrant worker movement showed signs of depressing wages when compared to the working population of a country like Britain, however. Statistics show that in 2006, nearly 80 percent of all migrant workers were earning anywhere between £4.50 and £6 per hour, leading to wage cuts for workers overall ("Second Thoughts," 2006). Increased immigration for work also caused disarray in the social system of the country of settlement. Take, for example, the British town of Slough. In just one of its elementary schools, it admitted 50 additional Polish students in one term alone ("Second Thoughts," 2006). These migrant workers and their families tended to spread themselves around the area, not merely in the capital. As a result, there was much stress placed on the social institutions within the small towns of nations like Britain, further exacerbating expansion fatigue.

In 2015, as hundreds of thousands of Middle Eastern and African refugees sought asylum in the EU, Euroskeptic parties such as UKIP in the United Kingdom and the National Front in France argued that the migrant crisis was related to terrorist attacks in Brussels and Paris. In response to pressure from UKIP and Euroskeptics within the Conservative Party, British Prime Minister David Cameron held talks to renegotiate the UK's status within the EU. Despite the talks, the UK held a referendum on the nation's membership in the EU in June 2016. The referendum resulted in nearly 52 percent of voters choosing to leave the EU. The departure, which became known colloquially as "Brexit," took effect on January 31, 2020.

While the effects of Brexit are still being determined, leaving the EU has caused a massive hit to the UK’s economy which is seen as worse off in 2023 than it was prior to the 2016 referendum. The UK has experienced a loss in trading partners, bureaucratic difficulties, and a general economic decline since the decision (Spisak & Tsoukalis, 2023).

Terms & Concepts

Accession: Gaining acceptance to the EU.

Christian Democratic: Political movement that is the source of the concept of the integration of a European super-state that is a union of common legal, moral, and economic conditions for the greater good of the whole.

Copenhagen Criteria: Set of rules that governs the accession process by which a nation will seek to enter the EU.

Enlargement Fatigue: The idea of absorption of future nations into the EU and how it puts a strain on the entire organization.

Euro-Atlantic: Members of Western Europe forming under one vast, unified region of states, not for monetary gain, but for spiritual and human rights focus with legal codes of conduct.

Europeanization: The concept of dealing with forming one large European super-state.

Euro-skeptics: People who doubt the merit of one wholly combined European super-state for the common good of each individual nation as well as the European Union as a whole.

Maastricht Treaty of 1993: Outlined the foundations of what became the European Union.

Responsible Freedom: Idea that each nation individually has the task of creating a social situation that mirrors its political practices.

Social Market Economy: Economic structure that combines free-market potential and personal responsibility for such decisions with a social safeguard.

Value Relativism: Concept that every nation has the inalienable right to create its own moral structure.

Bibliography

The absorption puzzle. (2006). Economist, 380(8484), 50. Retrieved December 15, 2006, from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=21449440&site=ehost-live

Archick, K. (2012). European Union enlargement. Current Politics & Economics of Europe, 23, 249–257. Retrieved November 26, 2013 from EBSCO online database Business Source Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=buh&AN=87433497

A case of enlargement fatigue. (2006). Economist, 379(8477), 60. Retrieved December 15, 2006, from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=20853874&site=ehost-live

EU irked by Turkish adultery law. (2004, September 9). BBC News. Retrieved November 26, 2013, from: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3641026.stm

European Commission. (2012, April 18). Myths and facts: EU budget myths. Retrieved November 26, 2013, from European Commission Financial Programming and Budget: http://ec.europa.eu/budget/explained/myths/myths%5Fen.cfm#7of15

European Commission. (2013, June 11). Turkey. Retrieved November 26, 2013, from European Commission Enlargement: http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/countries/detailed-country-information/turkey/index%5Fen.htm

European Union. (2013a). The euro. Retrieved November 26, 2013, from Europa: http://europa.eu/about-eu/basic-information/money/euro/index%5Fen.htm

European Union. (2013b). Further expansion, 2000–2009. Retrieved November 26, 2013, from Europa: http://europa.eu/about-eu/eu-history/2000-2009/index%5Fen.htm

European Union. (2013c). Treaty of Lisbon: The treaty at a glance. Retrieved November 26, 2013, from Europa: http://europa.eu/lisbon%5Ftreaty/glance/index%5Fen.htm

Hunt, A., & Wheeler, B. (February 20, 2018). Brexit: all you need to know about the UK leaving the EU.BBC News. Retrieved February 21, 2018, from http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-32810887.

Kubicek, P. (2005). Turkish accession to the European Union. World Affairs, 168, 67-78. Retrieved December 15, 2006, from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=19007826&site=ehost-live

Kucera, R., & Pontuso, J. F. (2005). European union enlargement to the east. Perspectives on Political Science, 34, 162-168. Retrieved December 15, 2006, from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=18583050&site=ehost-live

Larrabee, F. S. (2006). Danger and opportunity in Eastern Europe. Foreign Affairs, 85, 117-131. Retrieved December 15, 2006, from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=22891423&site=ehost-live

Morelli, V. L. (2013, August 5). European Union enlargement: A status report on Turkey’s accession negotiations. Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service. Retrieved November 26, 2013, from: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/RS22517.pdf

Platt, K. (2018). European Union enlargement announcement and corporate valuations. Emerging Markets Finance & Trade, 54(2), 430–449. doi:10.1080/1540496X.2016.1250210. Retrieved February 21, 2018, from EBSCO Online Database Business Source Ultimate. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bsu&AN=127185323&site=ehost-live&scope=site

Recent political events. (2006). Economist Country Profile. European Union, 8-10. Retrieved December 15, 2006, from EBSCO Online Database Business Source Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=23290843&site=ehost-live

Second thoughts. (2006). Economist, 380(8492), 45-46. Retrieved December 15, 2006, from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=22171491&site=ehost-live

Spisak, A., & Tsoukalis, C. (2023, Feb. 3). Three years on, Brexit casts a long shadow over the UK economy. Tony Blair Institute for Global Change. Retrieved June 1, 2023, from https://www.institute.global/insights/geopolitics-and-security/three-years-brexit-casts-long-shadow-over-uk-economy

Uçak, H. (2011). Turkey's population dynamics as a candidate country for EU membership. International Journal of Economics & Financial Issues (IJEFI), 1, 180–198. Retrieved November 26, 2013 from EBSCO online database Business Source Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=buh&AN=69583744

Using the euro - your Europe. (2022, Dec. 22). European Union. Retrieved June 1, 2023, from https://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/travel/carry/using-euro/index‗en.htm

Vukadinović, L. (2013). Croatia's entry into the European Union and perspectives of further EU enlargement to the Western Balkans. Megatrend Review, 10, 49–64. Retrieved November 26, 2013 from EBSCO online database Business Source Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=buh&AN=91837289

Yenel, S. (2023, Feb. 2). Turkey's disengagement from the European Union strengthening transatlantic cooperation. German Marshall Fund. Retrieved June 1, 2023, from https://www.gmfus.org/news/turkeys-disengagement-european-union

Yuvaci, A. (2013). Views on Turkish accession in the European Parliament: A comparative analysis. Suleyman Demirel University Journal of Faculty of Economics & Administrative Sciences, 18, 101–117. Retrieved November 26, 2013 from EBSCO online database Business Source Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=buh&AN=91872953

Suggested Reading

Anghelache, C., & Anghel, M. G. (2017). The strategy for reducing unemployment. Employment in the European Union. Theoretical & Applied Economics, 24(4), 25–32. Retrieved February 21, 2018, from EBSCO Online Database Business Source Ultimate. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bsu&AN=126740805&site=ehost-live&scope=site

Baltas, N. C. (2001). European union enlargement: An historic milestone in the process of European integration. Atlantic Economic Journal, 29, 254-266. Retrieved December 15, 2006, from EBSCO Online Database Business Source Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=buh&AN=5473120&site=ehost-live

Future shock. (1999, Nov 22). Business Eastern Europe, 1. Retrieved December 15, 2006, from EBSCO Online Database Business Source Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=buh&AN=4268025&site=ehost-live

Meardi, G. (2012). Social failures of EU enlargement: A case of workers voting with their feet. New York, NY: Routledge. Retrieved November 26, 2013 from EBSCO online database eBook Collection (EBSCOhost). http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=nlebk&AN=443946&site=ehost-live

Ready for the challenge. (2003). Business Europe, 43, 8. Retrieved December 15, 2006, from EBSCO Online Database Business Source Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=buh&AN=10229948&site=ehost-live

Zenko, Z., & Marne, J. (2005). Enlargement of European Union and shrinking of trademark rights: Case of Slovenia. International Journal of Management & Enterprise Development, 2, 1. Retrieved December 15, 2006, from EBSCO Online Database Business Source Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=buh&AN=16435238&site=ehost-live