Юсупова Гульнара Рафиковна
Казанский (Приволжский) Федеральный университет

Данная статья посвящена проблеме расширения Европейского союза на Восток в указанный период. Проведенное исследование показывает сложность и неоднозначность данного процесса, а так же наличие нерешенных проблем. В связи с современной ситуацией, данная тема является наиболее актуальной, так как проблема расширения ЕС до сих пор остается открытой.

Ключевые слова: двустороннее сотрудничество, Европейский союз., политика, политический диалог, Россия, экономика, энергетическая сфера


Iusupova Gulnara Rafikovna
Kazan (Volga region) Federal University

This article deals with the issue of EU enlargement to the East in the period. This study shows the complexity and ambiguity of the process, as well as unresolved problems. In connection with the present situation, the topic is most relevant, since the issue of EU enlargement is still open.

Рубрика: Политология

Библиографическая ссылка на статью:
Юсупова Г.Р. Influence of the trend of eastern EU enlargement on relations with Russia in 2000-2008 // Гуманитарные научные исследования. 2015. № 7. Ч. 1 [Электронный ресурс]. URL: https://human.snauka.ru/2015/07/12036 (дата обращения: 14.05.2024).

Result of the expansion in 1995, 2004 and 2007 was an increase in the EU member states to 27. Among these countries were listed as allies of the Soviet Union and the former republics of Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia. We understand that this situation had not very favorable impact on the relations between the EU and Russia.

- First, new “Europeans” have had their claims to Russia, so the relationship has become less friendly and watchful.

- Secondly, the majority of EU member states at the same time entered into the North Atlantic Alliance. The differences in the views of the NATO-Russia also has a great impact[3].

Mainly, Russia cared expansion of these two organizations in the East, because in that case we lost not only our allies but friendly neighbors.

After the collapse of the Soviet Union, the EU has become the main task of rapprochement with the countries of eastern Europe. At the beginning of 2004 (May), the EU had adopted the Czech Republic, Poland, Hungary, Slovenia, Slovakia, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Malta and Cyprus. At the beginning of 2007 – Romania and Bulgaria. The European Union was pursuing political goals, most countries have not complied with EU economic requirements, but included in its composition. The expansion of Europe was divided into two parts: the “donors” who are opposed to the further expansion, the influx of migrants in Germany, France, United Kingdom; and “little europeans” who hold pro-US stance, aggressive-minded against Russia, who did not feel improvement after joining the EU. [2]

The question of further expansion is still open, but many believe that after the adoption of Croatia process will stop.

The zeal of the EU nothing inexplicable and even sometimes very strange. According to statistics from the EU accession countries such as Poland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, GDP per capita has decreased, but the country still remain the most backward in Europe. For the benefit of the European Union – is expanding markets and new areas of political influence for newcomers – for grants and financial aid. Poland and other Baltic countries are now completely dependent on the EU, they had to close the banks, the powerful factories, mines and nuclear power plants.

However, this bitter experience did not discourage the desire of other countries to fight for the accession to the EU. Ukraine since 2004, with the arrival of Yushchenko, rushes into the EU, in 2005 it recognized as a market economy, but so far the chances are very small. Europe feeding only promises to review the status of Ukraine and keeps it “short leash.”

Identical situation with Turkey, although it has the status of a candidate with, 1999, but all it is clear that many member states are unlikely to agree to approve the entry of such a large and varied country in all respects.

Armenia and Azerbaijan have also repeatedly tried to improve relations with the European Union, but it has not led to a rapprochement.

As a result, after the “Eastern expansion” in 2004 and 2007,the European Union have accepted 12 new countries, so they make up almost 45% of the EU. Until now, the question remains open for further expansion of the European Union. Scientists argue about this, and nobody knows what will turn this whole process for the European Union itself, to its member states, as well as for neighbors.

The majority of the members observed a noticeable “tired of the enlargement process” [4]. Some countries even try to suggest that the development of the country and possibly outside the EU, such as Norway and Switzerland are developing independently. “You can live outside the EU … the competitiveness and prosperity of the country does not depend on membership in the European Union” [4] . In 2005 the Netherlands and France did not ratify the EU Constitution. Deputies stressed that saying “no” to the European Constitution, they thereby renounced further expansion. Hence, the position of many European politicians, “prior to the ratification of the Constitution should be less talk about the further expansion of the EU, and even more so for such a radical, as an extension of Turkey or Ukraine.”

His outline of the ENP (European Neighborhood Policy) have found the first days of March 2003, it was then, in his report, the EU Commission has formulated the idea of ​​”Greater Europe”. The plan was to include in the program countries such as Belarus, Ukraine, Moldova, Algeria, Morocco, Tunisia, Syria, Libya, Lebanon, Israel, the Palestinian Authority, Jordan and Russia.

Work began in July 2003. announced the launch of the Neighbourhood Programme were connected to the program of Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia, and in May 2004. – Published a strategic report on the European Neighbourhood Policy. The program envisages the construction of relations on the principles of respect for common values, but without the prospect of joining the EU.

The two countries negatively perceived this idea – it was Belarus and Russia. According to Sergei Yastrzhembsky, while the Assistant to the President on cooperation with the EU, with none of the countries listed in the European Union there were no such relations with Russia, so the calculation was to closer cooperation [1, c. 5]. As a result of the negotiations at the EU-Russian Federation in St. Petersburg (May 2003), the issue was settled. Russia and the EU launched a bilateral cooperation in the formation of four common spaces.

It is also worth noting the issue of the rights of Russian-speaking population in the European Union, to be specific – in the Baltic countries (Latvia and Estonia). This problem seems obvious enough, but within the European Union it does not pay enough attention.

Another important factor was the attempt of Europe to intervene in the settlement of conflicts in Moldova, Georgia, Abkhazia and South Ossetia before August 2008., Edging, while in Russia. The European Union was not prepared to take full responsibility for the maintenance of peace in the region, but always demanded reducing the presence of Russian forces.

After the EU enlargement to the East the problem of “unrecognized states” have become even more acute. Get at least the name of the data structures in a variety of sources, so the Russian papers call them “unrecognized states,” Europe also calls “illegal secessionist entity” [6, p.54-58]. There was a direct threat to the displacement of Russian troops from the conflict zone. Before negotiations on Transnistrian settlement were held in the format of “3 + 2″ – Russia, Ukraine, the OSCE and the parties to the conflict, in 2005, as an observer, joined the European Union and the United States.

Even if the EU’s policy towards the CIS countries is not an integration strategy, it is, however, complicates the implementation of Russian projects in those countries. For example, a project of the Common Economic Space of Russia, Ukraine, Kazakhstan and Belarus have not emerged from the preparation stage, as the EU reminded Ukraine that in case of accession to the Customs Union countries, the EEA, its further rapprochement with the EU will be impossible.

Another important factor in the deterioration of relations, was the fact that the EU support the regional union of GUAM, which in May 2006 with the help of the European Union and the United States has been transformed into an international organization with headquarters in Kiev. Thus, the documents were signed, the EU expressed its intention to assist the formation of the Euro-Asian oil transport corridor, which will be news from Central Asia to Europe [5, p.158].

Because of all the problems of Russia and the CIS countries have become each other, bypassing the search for ways of transporting oil and gas. Turkmenistan and the European Union discussed the issue of the direct sale of gas and the construction of the Trans-Caspian gas pipeline, involving Azerbaijan and Turkey. Azerbaijan prepares the project of oil transportation, which will be an important part of Romania. In turn, the Russian side is looking for opportunities to sell oil and gas to bypass Ukraine and Moldova.

These trends clearly indicate a deterioration of relations of the CIS countries and distant from Russia in favor of the European Union. “Joint Action Plan”, “The program is a partnership for peace”, bilateral dialogue, and numerous memorandums, economic projects, and the main questions on the country’s entry into the EU – are aimed at adapting the CIS countries to Western political and economic system, which complicates the process of interaction in the post-Soviet space.

Thus, in two directions of Russian foreign policy there is a crisis. CIS have chosen a better partner, increases the influence of Europe in the east of Europe, and any attempt by Russia to take steps leading to a deterioration of relations with the European Union. The priority task of the EU is strengthening its political and economic power, but because of its financial constraints, the European Union conducts its activities only on the declarative level, which in turn also makes the situation worse.

  1. International Herald Tribune, 10 November 2004.
  2. Dergachov V, online edition of the Russian geopolitical encyclopedia, 2010. URL: http: //dergachev.ru/Russian-encyclopaedia/index.html (Date of treatment: 21/01/2014)
  3. Journal of Economics of Russia in XXI century №17. Svetlana Glinkina. EU enlargement to the East: pros and cons. URL: http: //www.ruseconomy.ru/nomer17_200410/ec05.html (Date of treatment: 12/15/2013)
  4. Interview with the President of Finland Tarja Kaarina Halonen. “The EU will not put an end to the further expansion of the Union” – “Zerkalo Nedeli” Ukrainian International Social and Political Weekly, 21-27 October 2006 URL: http://gazeta.zn.ua/ (Date Treatment 23/12/2013)
  5. Kosikova LS The EU’s relations with the CIS countries within the framework of the European Neighbourhood Policy. // RECEP Reports, № 13. – Moscow, Russian-European Centre for Economic Policy, 2006, 325s
  6. Russia – European Union: the possibility of partnership / [IM Busygina (hands.) And others.] [Ch. Ed. IS Ivanov]; Russian Council of Intern. business. – M.: Spetskniga, 2013. – 96 p.

Все статьи автора «Юсупова Гульнара Рафиковна»

© Если вы обнаружили нарушение авторских или смежных прав, пожалуйста, незамедлительно сообщите нам об этом по электронной почте или через форму обратной связи.

Связь с автором (комментарии/рецензии к статье)

Оставить комментарий

Вы должны авторизоваться, чтобы оставить комментарий.

Если Вы еще не зарегистрированы на сайте, то Вам необходимо зарегистрироваться: