EU enlargement: forcing the issue Diana Wallis, a British MEP, had it right when she denounced the entirely unacceptable way in which the EU handled membership negotiations with Bulgaria and Romania.
She said the EU was simply "going through the motions" in negotiating with the two countries, since both already had firm guarantees they could join the club in 2007 or 2008 at the latest. "EU membership is an attractive proposition and a sought after goal," she said. "It should not be some sort of freebie to be handed out with cornflake packets." Bulgaria and Romania will join the EU on January 1 and we should rejoice at the fact: both countries suffered grievously under communism and their accession to the club will be of benefit both to them and to the Union as a whole. But the conduct of the membership process has done nobody any favours. The crucial mistake was made when the old EU of 15 tacked Bulgaria and Romania on to the "big bang" enlargement of 2004. Because of their particular political and economic problems they were not ready to join at that time. The EU should have simply said that they would join when they were ready. Instead of which France (which wanted Francophile Romania inside the club) and Britain (which likes the Atlanticist tone of their foreign policy) insisted they be given a firm timetable for entry. The result? Romania - but especially Bulgaria - will join next year when their criminal justice systems have not yet proved themselves able to stamp out corruption, organised crime and financial fraud. As Klaus Jansen, a senior German policeman and expert EU adviser, reported earlier this year, some Bulgarian judicial and police officials took a "kiss my ass" attitude to reforms, because they knew the country would join the club anyway. By giving up its ultimate sanction - the postponement of membership - the EU gave up the best means of forcing through the reforms which the people of Romania and Bulgaria deserve, and which citizens elsewhere in Europe expect. Sergey Stanishev, Bulgarian prime minister, told me recently the FT was unfairly harsh on his country. The fact is that Mr Stanishev appears genuinely committed to reforms, but his task would have been much easier if he had the threat of Bulgarian exclusion from the EU hanging over his country. Although the EU is threatening sanctions if reforms do not continue, wouldn't it have been better to apply more pressure before the countries joined? The whole episode has harmed the interests of people in Bulgaria and Romania who want to live in a clean society and raised further public suspicion about the pace and scale of the EU's enlargement process. George Parker Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2006 "FT" and the "Financial Times" are trademarks of The Financial Times. -- ______________ EuroAtlantic Club monitoring Romania's journey towards the EU http://www.europe.org.ro/euroatlantic_club/ mail to: P.O.Box 13-166, Bucharest 011737 e-mail to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** sustineti [romania_eu_list] prin 2% din impozitul pe 2005 - detalii la http://www.doilasuta.ro *** Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/romania_eu_list/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/romania_eu_list/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
