Le dilemme de l'Union européenne sur la Turquie
Dans cet article, Krzysztof Bobinski évoque le dilemme de l'Union européenne sur la Turquie à la lumière des conflits sur le budget à long terme de l'Union qui ont précédé le sommet européen des 15-16 décembre 2005.
Dans cet article, Krzysztof Bobinski évoque le dilemme de l’Union européenne sur la Turquie à la lumière des conflits sur le budget à long terme de l’Union qui ont précédé le sommet européen des 15-16 décembre 2005.
Tony Blair’s bid to save the United Kingdom’s budget rebate by cutting funds for the ten new member-states that joined the European Union in May 2004 has shocked central European capitals. London, they have realised, is not willing to shoulder its share of the cost of enlargement. As the 15-16 December summit that will crown Britain’s disappointing six-month presidency of the union approaches, Blair is not alone. Other net contributors like Sweden and Germany would like the 2007-2013 budget to be limited to 1% of GDP, or to be reduced to less than it was when the EU had fifteen members rather than twenty-five.
The leaders of the fifteen pre-enlargement EU states got no less of a shock when voters in France and Holland voted down the constitutional treaty in May-June 2005, partly in reaction to the perceived threat to their lifestyles through the accession of ten poorer, more needy countries mainly to the east.
Why the surprise? After all, enlargement was well prepared from the point of view of the acquis communautaire, the body of law that aspiring member-states have to subscribe to before joining. The former Soviet-bloc entrants were keen to join. Old member-state leaders said they wanted the continent reunited after the cold war. The dream of the founding fathers of a Europe whole and at peace was achieved. But no one told the good news to the voters in the « EU fifteen ».
It is clear that before accession the two sides — the « fifteen » and the « ten » – never really faced up to the political and financial implications of reunification. There was little discussion between old and new members on establishing a consensus on what they could expect of each other so that post-entry shocks could be avoided. Thus the entrants continued to hope that EU funds would flow from richer to not-so-rich states as they had after previous enlargements. Meanwhile, the old member-states made a mental note of the fact that the days of generosity on the Helmut Kohl scale were over.
To read the full text of the article, visit the Assyrian International News Agency website.