Bulgaria in the EU

[cegorach]

Personally I cannot remember any good news coming from that country since it joined the EU.

Of course media are selective and good news aren't covered properly in most cases, but still - all I can recall is about corruption in Bulgaria, organised crime from Bulgaria (recently it is about cloning credit cards) and worse.

I realise that it is often too easy to make a statement in the Web, but in this case I'd still like to ask. Were they ready to join the EU?


Perhaps similar question could be asked about Cyprus, Romania or (if circumstances were more peaceful - so no Cold War etc) about Greece.


Not only the Center for European Reform finds that move premature.

http://centreforeuropeanreform.blogspot.com/2009/12/eu-must-learn-from-its-mistakes-over.html

[rory_20_uk]

No. What exactly do they bring to the EU besides making a statement that they're in the Western Hemisphere of influence - and is this a good in what way? :inquisitive:

~:smoking:

[Louis VI the Fat]

Were they ready to join the EU?No, Bulgaria and Romania obviously joined too early.

We should've used the prospect of membership to strenghten democracy in these countries. The EU is the pot with gold at the end of the rainbow. This is very succesful as a prospect, as a future reward, for democratic reform.

Instead, we allowed both countries in as mobster states. Thereby merely bolstering the men in leather jackets, who will now never loosen their grip over their societies since they themselves are now the ones with their filthy hands clutching the pot of gold.

A lot of money for the return benefit of these two trying to off-load their gypsies into the west.


Let's not repeat the mistake with Serbia and other former Yugoslav republics, and let's not let some mistaken sense of fairness be our judge again. Nobody is entitled to EU membership, no matter how loudly they mewl about discrimination and about neighbours that are being admitted.



Greek membership is not an undivided succes story, no. Not an unmitigated disaster either.

Cyprus is a different - and difficult - matter altogether.


Good blog post in your link, btw.

[Sarmatian]

Bulgaria was (is) extremely corrupt by Balkan standards, let alone EU standards. I think Romania's a different issue. It is much more organized and is taking steps to root out corruption.

I don't see problems with Greece in that regard.

For the rest of the Balkan countries, Croatia is in best shape (still far from good enough, though). Serbia not far behind. Bosnia, Albania, Montenegro and Macedonia are a total mess.

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

I'd say Slovenia is in good shape as well, though their policies often leave something to be desired. Greece is in very bad shape by our standards in terms of unrest and financial difficulties, but are decent for the region.

[InsaneApache]

Greek membership is not an undivided succes story, no. Not an unmitigated disaster either.


It's a basket case mate. They've just been downgraded to BB rating. Most of the Geeks havn't a clue about economics and tax evasion is the national sport. Nice place to have a beer and a fag at the same time though. :2thumbsup:

[Brenus]

Let's not repeat the mistake with Serbia and other former Yugoslav republics, and let's not let some mistaken sense of fairness be our judge again. Nobody is entitled to EU membership, no matter how loudly they mewl about discrimination and about neighbours that are being admitted."
Agree. However, too late for Slovenia, admitted in EU even if having a unresolved border problem with Croatia....

The latest integrations were done for political reason and perhaps to give our industries places to move in cheap but European countries...

[gaelic cowboy]

The main problem in this issue is that the during the process to join the EU has the ability to make a country change how it does business but after it has almost none as members are protected from each other I suppose.

[cegorach]

Agree. However, too late for Slovenia, admitted in EU even if having a unresolved border problem with Croatia....

The latest integrations were done for political reason and perhaps to give our industries places to move in cheap but European countries...

Interesting. So what stood behind welcoming Spain, Portugal, Ireland or Greece ? :inquisitive:

[Brenus]

"So what stood behind welcoming Spain, Portugal, Ireland or Greece ?" Same. Politic ixed-up with economy, increasing the market etc...
Don't get me wrng. I am in favour. EU is a political construction, not just a ecenomic zone as the English want it.

[Furunculus]

"So what stood behind welcoming Spain, Portugal, Ireland or Greece ?" Same. Politic ixed-up with economy, increasing the market etc...
Don't get me wrng. I am in favour. EU is a political construction, not just a ecenomic zone as the English want it.

ah, if only our politicians would be so honest with their electorate.............

[rory_20_uk]

ah, if only our politicians would be so honest with their electorate.............

As in which case you're welcome to it. The bigger the EU gets, the more English speakers and the more Pro USA sentiments that are brought in to.

With Labour we can bankrupt ourselves, we don't need Eastern Europe to do it.

~:smoking:

[Sarmatian]

we don't need Eastern Europe to do it.

~:smoking:

EVERYBODY needs eastern Europe!

Kidding aside, entire Balkan economy makes about 10% of the German economy. It's insignificant for the EU. It's simply to small to affect EU economy in any way. On the other hand, being in EU is much better for those countries in the long run, for their stability and progress and so is better for the EU in the long run.

Maybe Bulgaria and Romania weren't 100% ready but it's a good thing they were accepted, for them and the EU.

[Vladimir]

Ahh Bulgaria...hitman for the KGB. It's kinda shocking they were allowed in. Their cavalry isn't very good but their spear units are.

[gaelic cowboy]

Interesting. So what stood behind welcoming Spain, Portugal, Ireland or Greece ? :inquisitive:

Spain and Portugal plus Britain and Ireland those four came in with there neighbour the economy of Ireland is heavily dependant on UK and I assume the same goes for Iberia. The political and economic consequences of dividing those four was probably not worth the effort plus they were all stable and small apart from Britain obviously so it was no effort to integrate.


Greece I have no clue really

[cegorach]

"So what stood behind welcoming Spain, Portugal, Ireland or Greece ?" Same. Politic ixed-up with economy, increasing the market etc...
Don't get me wrng. I am in favour. EU is a political construction, not just a ecenomic zone as the English want it.

Actually that is almost exactly llike me. :2thumbsup:

Thanks for the explanation.



@gaelic cowboy


Originally Posted by cegorach View Post
Interesting. So what stood behind welcoming Spain, Portugal, Ireland or Greece ?
Spain and Portugal plus Britain and Ireland those four came in with there neighbour the economy of Ireland is heavily dependant on UK and I assume the same goes for Iberia. The political and economic consequences of dividing those four was probably not worth the effort plus they were all stable and small apart from Britain obviously so it was no effort to integrate.


Greece I have no clue really

Spain isn't so small. Anyway I get your point.

Interesting or perhaps just the usual, but before those four states joined the pre-EU tabloid press in France, Germany etc was warning about the 'imminent Iberic invasion'.

When I was in Ireland several years ago some people still recalled Portuguese workers who arrived, established bank accounts, took loans and took off 'forgetting' to pay them. :yes:

And now we have Bulgarian gangs emptying bank accounts using cloned credit cards in Poland.

I wonder who will be providing entertainment like this in a decade or two?

One thing is certain there will be always someone to blame.


@Sarmatian

EVERYBODY needs eastern Europe!

Several months ago there was a furious discussion in Poland if it is not the time to 'kill' Eastern Europe, but stories about supposed meltdown of 'eastern european' economies slowly vanished from western media so the discussion died from starvation.
Besides around that time Tusk and Sikorski started using (some say exploiting) support from other EE EU members to negotiate better conditions in climate deals or budget negotiations so the it wasn't all that useless as perviously predicted for a change.

I wonder how long will this term survive? After all it was established basically on the single fact of Soviet dominance and/or communism.



Kidding aside, entire Balkan economy makes about 10% of the German economy. It's insignificant for the EU. It's simply to small to affect EU economy in any way. On the other hand, being in EU is much better for those countries in the long run, for their stability and progress and so is better for the EU in the long run.

Maybe Bulgaria and Romania weren't 100% ready but it's a good thing they were accepted, for them and the EU.

Are you sure? Romania is no small country. Besides all this mess with latvia was simply enough to start this nonsense about 'crisis in the Eastern Europe' which angered Poland or Czech Republic so much.
When you join the EU term 'balcan states' might be used in a similar way - just because Montenegro sufferes doesn't mean that Serbia or Croatia does, yet some people will buy it.


P.S> Edward Lucas wrote pretty good piece about it in the latest the Economist

http://www.economist.com/world/europe/displayStory.cfm?story_id=15213108