NationStates Jolt Archive

Should they be allowed to join?

Chaotic? Excuse me, it may sound offensive, but when the culture flourished in the Balkan countries (Byzantine and Bulgarian empires f.e.) like never the "western world" has seen before, west Europe didn't even had a united country and it consisted for a long time just of bunch of barbarians (except Charlemagne's empire ofcourse). So, please, don't think the present has always been the same in the past!

Balkan countries should be allowed to join, but only if their people agree and they meet the requirements.

Umm, Slovenia is already in the EU.

But, then again Slovenia is pretty much the only Balkan country which isn't a dump.

and Croatia is a candidate and Macedonia has an application pending.

Other countries just haven't been too pleased with Croatia's inefficiency on bringing war criminals to justice. (which I guess everyone knew already...)

It is unfortunate that the Balkans are in the truest sense of the word, a mess. Constant fighting, ethnic cleansing...(sigh) humans...

If they can get their shit together however, they can do anything.

We should unite the Europe as one.

We should unite the Europe as one.
scary...I remember what happened the last time someone tried to do that.

scary...I remember what happened the last time someone tried to do that.

Well after 3 attempts, of which 2 were out right war, i think we should steer clear of unification right now....

Dont let them join they are too untrustworthy!

Well after 3 attempts, of which 2 were out right war, i think we should steer clear of unification right now....
exactly. Just check how many new countries there are in Europe. Atleast 10 new independent countries (+3 if you count Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaidzhan) during past 20 years. Europeans don't want to be too unified.

exactly. Just check how many new countries there are in Europe. Atleast 10 new independent countries (+3 if you count Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaidzhan) during past 20 years. Europeans don't want to be too unified.

Exactly.

Personally i just think its a big excuse so we can actually say we have been to another country on holiday, but we only drove for two hours to get there :D

Besides, its always good to say "Yeah, i talk with an über gorgeous finnish girl on NS" rather than "Yeah, i talk with an über gorgeous EU girl on NS" caus then you have no idea where they are from. ;) :D

Exactly.

Personally i just think its a big excuse so we can actually say we have been to another country on holiday, but we only drove for two hours to get there :D

Besides, its always good to say "Yeah, i talk with an über gorgeous finnish girl on NS" rather than "Yeah, i talk with an über gorgeous EU girl on NS" caus then you have no idea where they are from. ;) :D
Two hours? That's ages. You can drive not only to other countries but through countries in that time. :)

and your second point. That's definately the most important one. You got to know where the über gorgeous people come from (=cheshire).

Two hours? That's ages. You can drive not only to other countries but through countries in that time. :)

and your second point. That's definately the most important one. You got to know where the über gorgeous people come from (=cheshire).

Lichtenstein for example...I walked width ways across that country in less than two hours.

And Cheshire rules :D

scary...I remember what happened the last time someone tried to do that.

There's a difference between a democratic alliance for the common good and the "last time".

There's a difference between a democratic alliance for the common good and the "last time".
Theoretically yes, practically no. (cause it's impossible)

Lichtenstein for example...I walked width ways across that country in less than two hours.

And Cheshire rules :D
I thought you might agree...

I thought you might agree...

Actually its not that great...still, you were there once so its obviously had its good points at one time :D

Actually its not that great...still, you were there once so its obviously had its good points at one time :D
I'd never left if I'd met you. We would have turned Cheshire into a paradise on Earth *birds start singing, you can see a rainbow arching over the peaceful hills of northern Cheshire, some scary violinists have been hiding in nearby bushes and now start playing some classical tunes...*


:D

I'd never left if I'd met you. We would have turned Cheshire into a paradise on Earth *birds start singing, you can see a rainbow arching over the peaceful hills of northern Cheshire, some scary violinists have been hiding in nearby bushes and now start playing some classical tunes...*


:D

http://img148.echo.cx/img148/9967/lollerskates3ut.gif

I'd never left if I'd met you

You could always come back ;)

http://img148.echo.cx/img148/9967/lollerskates3ut.gif



You could always come back ;)
heh, no way. Paradise sounds pretty dull. Besides, you're not there! :O

heh, no way. Paradise sounds pretty dull. Besides, you're not there! :O

Ah good point, give it 3 months...and your right, where I live is pretty dull. :D

Go Europe! I think we should just keep on expanding so that we have to change the name to the "Global Union." I would go for a tiered system. The 25 will be soon be one country called Europe, and we could have a few countries like the Balkans and Turkey in the second tier, where they get to join the European Union (consisting of them and the United States of Europe) and single currency, which is just a stop gap for them joining the USE. Then there's the Council of Europe level, where you get all the Human Rights stuff and intermediate trade agreements. Finally we would have the trade pact countries. And all the while each level would expand and gain more states from the lower levels, until the whole world is one county under the EU.

Wait...they're doing that already aren't they?? Well apart from the fact that I made the first two levels a bit more advanced than they actually are. Still...Go Europe!

European Hegemony rocks so much more than American Hegemony!

It is important for stability on the continent that all the Balkan countries come within the fold of the EU. Europe is not being forcefully unified so this present unification is really like nothing that has been seen before. I have heard Slovenia is fairly rich, I used with work with a Slovenian lady and she seemed a nice person. It will take some time for countries like Albania to join but eventually all the Balkans will be EU members in time.

Go Europe! I think we should just keep on expanding so that we have to change the name to the "Global Union."

We are not the UN, it is important that all the members are cooperating closely with each other, size does not matter if Europe cannot move as one when it needs to. A wider union is nice, but a deeper more integrated union is what is needed right now for economic security and political reasons and because people are suffering from apathy or fear because there has been so much enlargement over the last year or so and more to come in under two years time.


I would go for a tiered system. The 25 will be soon be one country called Europe, and we could have a few countries like the Balkans and Turkey in the second tier, where they get to join the European Union (consisting of them and the United States of Europe) and single currency, which is just a stop gap for them joining the USE.

I am not sure there will ever be a country called Europe not for 100 years or more anyway, but a tiered system will probably evolve anyway because of the differences between most passionate pro-Europeans and their more reluctant cousins.


Then there's the Council of Europe level, where you get all the Human Rights stuff and intermediate trade agreements.

The Council of Europe will remain separate from the EU for the foreseeable future, and perhaps that is a good thing.


European Hegemony rocks so much more than American Hegemony!

No, hegemony breeds corruption and arrogance. I am against American hegemony (quickly fading) and I would be against European hegemony; it would be the death of European ideals.

The title of the Thread was "What I want for Europe"

We are not the UN, it is important that all the members are cooperating closely with each other, size does not matter if Europe cannot move as one when it needs to. A wider union is nice, but a deeper more integrated union is what is needed right now for economic security and political reasons and because people are suffering from apathy or fear because there has been so much enlargement over the last year or so and more to come in under two years time...

The European Constitution paves the way for a more integrated Union. The EU will now have a Foreign Minister and a proper president, rather than the titular head of the Commission. There will be a common foreign policy (although unfortunately I think the veto applies here.) Essentially though, Europe is moving towards a serious attempt at putting itself as a unified body in international law with the EU taking over many of the foreign affairs of Member states. It should be interesting to see what the position will be of the European Security Council members when the body is restructured at some point in the near future

The Consititution also increases the areas in which the Union can legislate. There is now the potential for unified European criminal law with the JHA pillar becoming much less of an abstract area and the EU having the power to legislate on criminal matters.

The terms of accession for the 10 new Member States stipulates that they MUST join the Single Currency AS SOON AS they meet the necessary criteria.


I am not sure there will ever be a country called Europe not for 100 years or more anyway, but a tiered system will probably evolve anyway because of the differences between most passionate pro-Europeans and their more reluctant cousins...

I think there will be a country called Europe within the next 30 years, especially for the reasons above.

Tiered Europe already exists. There are the 11 Euro countries, the wider Europe of the 25, the countries with Accession Agreements, the EEA, individual states with customs union agreements (if there are any of these that don't now have accession agreements) the states with partnership agreements, the Council of Europe States and the countries in, for example, North Africa which have association, aid and trade agreements. Essential this is all part of European expansion - once you get on the bottom level, the EU starts to attempt to push for closer ties (depending on who you are), and most of the countries also want this.

The Council of Europe will remain separate from the EU for the foreseeable future, and perhaps that is a good thing..

I didn't say there were or indeed were going to be conjoined, however there is a very, very strong relation between them. The Copenhagen criteria basically required that the 10 new member states and any future member states; Romania, Turkey, etc comply with the Council of Europe's human rights requirements (as well as general economic matters necessary for the single market) and is therefore heavily reliant upon reports by the CPT and the Commisioner for Human Rights. Several high profile people in the Council of Europe have seen fit to comment on European Union membership matters eg

Terry Davis: ''Turkey can count on the Council of Europe’s continued support''
''Turkey fully deserves these negotiations'', stressed the Secretary General on 17 Décember, welcoming the agreement for the European Union to begin accession negotiations with Turkey.''I have been hugely impressed with both the speed and the impact of the reforms which have been implemented in Turkey over the last few years'' he said, adding that ''Turkey, which has been a member state of the Council of Europe since 1949, has achieved substantial progress in the fields of human rights and democracy, and has clearly demonstrated its commitment to fundamental European values''.

Essentially, you CANNOT BE A MEMBER OF THE EU WITHOUT BEING A MEMBER OF THE COUNCIL OF EUROPE. This is not necessarily a legal requirement (unless you want to join) but it is a practical reality - a member state is not likely to leave the CoE but remain in the EU (this is implausable, why would it happen???), but could leave the EU and remain in the CoE(although this is also debatable - the EU constitution makes it legally possible, but many consider it a practical impossibility at this stage, or at least very stupid - you would end up being in the EEA and effectively subject to Union Law without having any say in its creation)




No, hegemony breeds corruption and arrogance. I am against American hegemony (quickly fading) and I would be against European hegemony; it would be the death of European ideals.

I was kidding.