We accept

Definition of European countries in the 21st Century

"European countries is ringed - from Kalingrad in the North, to the Caucasus and Central Asia, to the Balkans - by an arc of hazard and instability. " (EU Commissioner for external relations Christopher Patten, July 2001).

Does this mean that at the present time 'European countries' and the Western are one and the same thing?


The Western or EU citizen reaches the present time becoming synonymous with this is of the point to where the continent of European countries extends. This seems to be the truth with today's reaction to enlargement and the concentrate on crime from beyond your edges of the EU and the fears of offense from the newly integrated countries and from those countries that ring the EU. Enlargement will illustrate the new tiered system in the European union, the recently ascended countries from post-Communist countries, which are considered not truly Western. Therefore this discussion will illustrate the way the description of what European countries is in the 21st Century has been narrowed from the expanse of the Western european continent to the membership of the European union; whereby countries are aiming to join this political unit to be able to gain legitimacy within the global political and economic structure.

Enlargement - A Case Study of a Narrow Definition of Europe:

Enlargement of the European union is a merged blessing, because on one hand it is helping to achieve a position of stability and cohesiveness throughout the spot. Alternatively, there are concerns that to make the Union bigger will in simple fact de-stabilize the spot. This is credited to prejudice of certain communities which could have free access in your community, one such group will be the Roma Gypsy migrants from Slovakia. In the past few months the papers have exhibited the concerns of the United kingdom public and politicians about these migrants when the nation joins the European union. Therefore this introduces the question if the European union really respects the integrity of ethnic difference? Other problems are the possible de-stabilizing of the economy by including smaller, less affluent countries; marginal and battle torn countries; and transitional countries. These countries could also cause the European union problems in regards to its unique strategy of ensuring cohesiveness utilizing the rule of legislation, because if the European union gets too big it might not exactly be possible any longer to ensure its politics and legal balance. Therefore the reliability and coherence that the rule of law ensures is no more apparent because of the sheer size of the Union. Another problem is based on the actual fact that smaller nations may not have the legal, politics and financial clout to ensure that their plan is known as. Although previously it has been mentioned that the EU's guideline of law serves as a check and balance to more powerful nations, in truth the initial countries in the EU were mainly ex-colonial empires. The newer countries that are subscribing to the EU are akin to colonies of a colonial electric power, therefore there is an inherent imbalance in the Union.

However in response to the negative effects of the possible de-stabilization of the spot, one must consider that to be able to join the Union each land must have satisfied the Copenhagen Requirements. This criterion says that each joining nation must be:

Be a stable democracy, respecting human being rights, the rule of laws, and the cover of minorities; have a functioning market economy; adopt the common guidelines, standards and plans that make up the body of EU legislation.

The European union paints an extremely enthusiastic picture of enlargement, where the only result of enlargement is beneficial. In reality this is a very lopsided picture because of the public outcry against the possible immigration into the original EU expresses. This can be seen in the article by Cathy Newman in the Financial Times:

Britain will throw open its gates to workers from the ex - communist countries subscribing to the European Union on May 1, but the ones that refuse to get a job will be denied benefits and trashed, the government has pledged

Tony Blair - after months of pressure from the Tories and the right wing press over concerns of an influx of immigrants from the former Soviet bloc - vowed: "If indeed they can't support themselves, they'll be released of the country. "

This article illustrates the problems that have happened within one region over the plan of enlargement. But the enlargement is supposed to bring together the Western region, the general public thoughts and opinions of at least one EU region is resisting the enlargement, in relation to economic migrants - migrants that your nation has typically refused asylum applications. However these fears may be unfounded because as Kraus & Schwager claim that increased migration from East to West EU countries would only arise under the fear of rejection to Union regular membership. In fact they argue that the EU's development will have a beneficial effect on the economy of the smaller nations which will result in a boost of these economies and job market, hence lowering the quantity of migrants from East to Western world. The conclusion of the article they state that:

Policy makers who are, for reasons uknown, reluctant to simply accept large numbers of immigrants should not feel stressed with enlargement. On the other hand, the prospect of getting started with the EU may well reduce immigration. The economic and cultural benefits which probably accrue to Eastern Europe from accession should be provided as a means to lowering the bonuses to emigrate. Guidelines which enhance convergence of income levels in eastern and American Europe, including the inside market and, possibly, Structural Cash should be marketed. . . In this technique, diverging passions of major EU people have created substantive doubt about the particular date and conditions of accession. It is quite plausible that such uncertainty has raised the fear among potential migrants that accession may fail or be postponed for a long period. According to our result, this might have increased immediate immigration. Thus, if immigration is not suitable, for future accession rounds an easy and predictable negotiation process is to be recommended.

Hence Kraus& Schwager argue that the worries of the right, which were fed to the general public through the multimedia, regarding immigration from the East that will de-stabilize the current economic climate, have no place. This is because the possible migrants would prefer to stay in their homeland with a more robust and growing overall economy rather than move to another land. However, although these concerns may be unfounded the amount of resistance to these new people from the Eastern European countries illustrates the possible de-stabilization of the EU politically. In addition to this it causes problems officially because the cornerstone and the uniqueness of the European union is placed within the rule of rules and one of the most crucial laws that is upheld is the Free Activity of EU Individuals, which includes their capability to operate, reside and work partly of the European union. Yet, the accession of the new Eastern European countries has heralded blocks to the ability by many of the original and major European union players. In the united kingdom it has induced a question because the government was going to allow a free movements of possible immigrants but this has been resisted by the right, as well as members of the general public. This is illustrated by the arguments of Michael Howard, head of the Conservative Party:

Mr Howard, wanting to make political capital out of Labour's pain on the problem, will accuse the federal government of complacency within the implications of the EU's development in May. This comes as the Government sought to play down doubts that Britain would be flooded by migrants seeking work in more profitable elements of the EU. During a high-profile stop by at Burnley, the arena of contest riots in2001, Mr Howard will demand that Britain duplicate the "transitional plans" used by Germany and France to prevent citizens from new European union participants from working there. Mr Howard will say: "The Traditional Party has always supported the enhancement of the European union to take in the former communist countries of Eastern European countries. We continue steadily to do this. "

But he'll continue: "Another country in the European union has quite rightly used the precaution of putting in place transitional arrangements to deal with immigration from the accession countries. It really is still not too later for the English Government to set up place transitional preparations as well. If we were in administration, we would accomplish that. THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT has approached this issue in typical fashion. First it failed to address it, then it disregarded it, now it is claiming to face up to it. "

In brief the cohesiveness that the EU has stated will take place with the enlargement has not happened in the expected manner. Since enlargement there were a greater amount of problems combating structured crime, because of decreased security, corruption of public representatives in favour of organized crime organizations in the newly acceded countries and the breaches of human being privileges in arrests. Therefore this creates problems for combating structured crime with either prisoners being let off on technicalities, the vastness of places to cover up decreasing the effectiveness of policing or the police not enthusiastic about fighting organized criminal offenses. Kennedy has commented that the European union is focused on justly and pretty fighting organized criminal offense within the realms of human being protection under the law and justice; however its weakness is the fact it relies only on specific home member state brains:

We are being advised that Europol and Eurojust - the new Western european body to reinforce cooperation between justice ministries and prosecution services- will only take action on specific intelligence. This is to count on the integrity of the state and its representatives [I]t does mean counting on the intellect of other countries and, as I've said before, we've no idea about how exactly this may be collected and by what standards. Justice will not permit shortcuts, but governments will easily go after quick and dirty solutions to problems if not held under scrutiny.

Therefore by solely relying on only specific intelligence this will certainly reduce the potency of the fight organized crime, in particular when there is the added issue of corrupt post-communist regimes that contain joined the European union after enlargement; whereby the real Western, i. e. the EU citizen needs to be protected especially those original member claims which define the true Europe.

More than 7 000 students trust us to do their work
90% of customers place more than 5 orders with us
Special price $5 /page
Check the price
for your assignment