EU - what's next?

Gargantua wrote:

William Murderface wrote:Po mom mišljenju jedino što nije tačno je ovo:



Ne mislim da Vučića u rešavanje Kosova gura šargrepa, nego uprvo štap, odnosno mogućnost da mu EU, ili bar njene najjače članice ukrate podršku i umesto toga podrže opoziciju.

Možda ali pitanje je zarad čega bi je podržala i, izvedeno iz toga, kakvu opoziciju.

Osećaj je da ne postoji poseban interes od strane EU da se gura da se stvari ovde menjaju, bar na kratki i srednji rok. Oni bi voleli da je drugačije ("bolje") ali između načelnih želja i aktivnosti da se nešto ostvaruje je poveći jaz. Drugo, ako ih zanima "geopolitika" i tema "ko će i kako iz Srbije da prizna Kosovo" više od teme "idealtipski kandidat za ulazak u EU" onda se prema tome opredeljuju da li i koga podržati, a to nije isto.

No Country wrote:Косово као сарма, што га више подгреваш оно те све боље учвршћује на власти. 

Stalni izvjestilac Evropskog parlamenta za Bosnu i Hercegovinu i odlazeći zastupnik Cristian Dan Preda pitao je Mogherini da li je urađeno dovoljno?
"Zapadni Balkan je veoma važan za Evropsku uniju. Napravljen je određeni napredak u posljednjih pet godina, ali u nekim područjima nije. Interesuje me da li mislite da je EU napravila dovoljno? A u svjetlu toga me interesuje uticaj zemalja poput Turske, Rusije i zemalja Zaljeva", pitao je Dan Preda.

Njemački eurozastupnik Elmar Brok, veteran sa više od tri decenije iskustva u Briselu, upozorio je Mogherini, ali i njenog nasljednika, na uticaj Kine na prostor Zapadnog Balkana.
"Da li stvarno razumijemo da je kineska inicijativa "Jedan pojas, jedan put" samo dijelom ekonomska, a drugim dijelom sigurnosno-diplomatski uticaj. To je velikim dijelom imperijalizam koji svi moramo dobro razumjeti", poručio je Brok.

Viktor Orbán “has always been a hero,” European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker said Sunday, stating that he holds the Hungarian prime minister in the “highest regard.”

In an interview with Polish newspaper Rzeczpospolita, Juncker described his respect for the Hungarian leader, whom he previously famously once greeted with the words “Hello, dictator.”

“I have known him since the latter half of the '90s, when he first became prime minister. Previously, I admired him for the courage he showed when the Soviet army was still stationed in Hungary,” Juncker said.

“For me, he has always been a hero. I also have a good personal relationship with him. And I am sure he would say the same of me,” Juncker said. He added: “For years I called Orbán, privately, a dictator and he would laugh about it.”

https://www.socialeurope.eu/where-are-the-limits-of-europe

Where are the limits of Europe?
by Branko Milanovic on 14th May 2019
...

Almost nobody looked at inequality as a limiting factor in the growth of a union. Yet there at least three reasons why it may be.

First, a union with member states at very different income levels requires large transfers form the richer to the poorer to function normally.

Secondly, a very unequal union is, by definition, composed of member states whose endowments of capital and labour are very different. Hence the optimal economic policy for a poor member may not be the same as the optimal policy for a rich member. (We find here echoes of the optimal currency area.)

Thirdly, and currently perhaps most importantly, if such a union implies freedom of movement systematic labour flows which then follow—with people moving from poorer to richer members—may be politically destabilising, if richer members are unwilling to accept migrants.

...

We can then legitimately ask: are there limits to EU enlargement—limits imposed by the higher inequality arising from the accession of new and poorer members? If Turkey alone joined, the underlying Gini of a new union would be 17 points. If the western Balkans’ four candidate members joined as well, it would rise further to 17.5. This underlying inequality, which is not subject to domestic or EU-wide economic policies (the latter because the EU budget is so small), would then represent close to half of the overall inequality among 615 million citizens of the union.

It would be an unmanageable union.

This is why the EU should not continue with its unsustainable policy, which seems to offer candidate countries potential membership at the end a very long (or, rather, interminable) tunnel. That policy leads only to frustration on both sides. The EU should look at things as they are and create a new category of countries which will not be members for any realistic period of time.

Perhaps it could wait until such potential members become richer on their own, which means the EU should by all means encourage greater Chinese investment and involvement in those countries—the opposite of what it is doing now. Or perhaps it could wait until convergence of incomes within EU members and lower all-EU inequality permits another round of enlargement—which is unlikely to happen before the second half of this century.

Gargantua wrote:

https://www.socialeurope.eu/where-are-the-limits-of-europe

Where are the limits of Europe?
by Branko Milanovic on 14th May 2019
...

Almost nobody looked at inequality as a limiting factor in the growth of a union. Yet there at least three reasons why it may be.

First, a union with member states at very different income levels requires large transfers form the richer to the poorer to function normally.

Secondly, a very unequal union is, by definition, composed of member states whose endowments of capital and labour are very different. Hence the optimal economic policy for a poor member may not be the same as the optimal policy for a rich member. (We find here echoes of the optimal currency area.)

Thirdly, and currently perhaps most importantly, if such a union implies freedom of movement systematic labour flows which then follow—with people moving from poorer to richer members—may be politically destabilising, if richer members are unwilling to accept migrants.

...

We can then legitimately ask: are there limits to EU enlargement—limits imposed by the higher inequality arising from the accession of new and poorer members? If Turkey alone joined, the underlying Gini of a new union would be 17 points. If the western Balkans’ four candidate members joined as well, it would rise further to 17.5. This underlying inequality, which is not subject to domestic or EU-wide economic policies (the latter because the EU budget is so small), would then represent close to half of the overall inequality among 615 million citizens of the union.

It would be an unmanageable union.

This is why the EU should not continue with its unsustainable policy, which seems to offer candidate countries potential membership at the end a very long (or, rather, interminable) tunnel. That policy leads only to frustration on both sides. The EU should look at things as they are and create a new category of countries which will not be members for any realistic period of time.

Perhaps it could wait until such potential members become richer on their own, which means the EU should by all means encourage greater Chinese investment and involvement in those countries—the opposite of what it is doing now. Or perhaps it could wait until convergence of incomes within EU members and lower all-EU inequality permits another round of enlargement—which is unlikely to happen before the second half of this century.

evo roknuću se od ekonomizacije politike