OLIMID, ANCA PARMENA (2004): E.U. and “Made Eastern Europe Reform”: from old perestroika (restructuring) to new European (construction). Published in: Analele Universităţii din Craiova, Seria Filosofie-Sociologie-Ştiinţe Politice No. no. 13/2004 : pp. 301-314.
Download (187kB) | Preview
For European Union and Eastern Europe, the immediate legacy of the Cold War was the decisive torn-parts of the world history, because the dangerous „ myth of the red cell” and the Soviet collapse in 1989 announced the new foreign policy of East. This analysis searches to be a key instrument for E.U. - Central and Eastern European countries political approach and economic adjustment. For the West, the communist system’s failure was evident and emphasis a new aspect for the East relations. In particular, this new Central and East reality concerns three concentric circles: The first circle: Initially skeptical because of past experience, Eastern European transition announced a rethinking of national interests. After 1990, this „made Eastern Europe reform” potentially more dangerous that other predecessor, saves the East from the dangers of its own traditionally thinking. E.U policy- makers call it „the bad side of freedom”: perestroika (restructuring) turned into katarastroika, a neologism that was heard more and more on Moscow’s streets as reform program faltered and then failed. The second circle: From the national economic reality … For E.U., the freedom’s advantage, its flexibility and tolerance for change, does not ensure that the recovery will be long and satisfying. It may-or not…Jobs might be lost to cheap imports from China or from West, because the reform cycle creates some anomalies-jobs, for instance. In this period, the severity pressures coming from communitarian programs, the new economy, the rising living standards and class distinction become rigid. The nearly ten years of market reforms have failed to transform agriculture and industry, and the devaluation of the national currency has made imports of food and goods much more expensive, further straining budgets. The third circle: ... to E.U. technical and financial assistance: For E.U. that was the moment to promote and develop a private sector in each Eastern country: this plan was designed as a framework for a communitarian action: the operation PHARE, the support for transition to open market reforms coming from Bank for Reconstruction and Development, because, after 1990, this „made Eastern Europe reform” potentially more dangerous that other predecessor, is the major opportunity to save the East from the dangers of its own traditionally socialist thinking. The E.U. needs to ensure that the costs of economic change to the new economy posture do not overwhelm the benefits, to carrefully think and calculate the reform programs, in all their dimensions, because, each strategic period shares a political responsability from E.U. communitarian major assistance has to adapt to each economy and has to emphasis new previsions for european integration. „European agreements” create a new dimension for communitarian commercial and economic support, because East faced major challenges preventing hyperinflation, productivity, the severity of competitive pressures causing companies to keep reducing employment even after modest economic growth resumed in late 2000, the privatization and, for Russia, obtaining a better price for oil exports. This analysis agrees the significance of Eastern economic transition, predicting that it was about to become a „system change” and that their crisis completes the image of the „regional crisis of Eastern”. The combination of politics, external influences, inefficiencies and system’s corruption could force the self-destruction of reform programs. While emphasising the importance of reform, this analysis also examines E.U. political strategies to push the reform process forward in different countries. E.U has to face East challenges: one of the most important factors missing from the Eastern reform program is a widespread knowledge of capitalism, new social classes, etc. For East, its new transition goal was to reach a consensus on E.U. policy reform goal.
|Item Type:||MPRA Paper|
|Original Title:||E.U. and “Made Eastern Europe Reform”: from old perestroika (restructuring) to new European (construction)|
|Keywords:||EU reform, Soviet collapse, transition,national interest|
|Subjects:||A - General Economics and Teaching > A1 - General Economics > A19 - Other|
|Depositing User:||ANCA OLIMID|
|Date Deposited:||05. May 2009 01:47|
|Last Modified:||14. Feb 2013 12:29|
Gerard K. Haines, At Cold War’s End: U.S. Intelligence on the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, 1989-1991, published by The Center for the Study of Inteligence (CSI) of the Center Intelligence Agency and George W. Bush for Presidential Studies at Texas A&M University co-sponsoring the conference U.S. Intelligence and the End of Cold War on Texas A&M University Campus at College Station from 18 to 20 November 1999, p. 2
For a general overview, see Courtois Stephane, Werth Nicolas, Le livre noir de communism, Robert Laffront, Paris, 1997.
Neal Ascherson, 1989 stands out as a pivotal year in the 20 th century: Chain reaction ends Cold War, Washington Times, April 26, 1999, p. A 17.
Anca Parmena Popescu, Les moyens d’intégration du bloc communist, allocution at University of Lille 3, Lille, class of „Etudes européennes ” („European Studies”), Lille, 19 November, 2001, p. 4.
Claude Frioux, Feeling the pinch/Painful transition for Russia’s intellectuals, from the web site du journal Le Monde Diplomatique: http://mondediplo.com/1998/11/03frioux, November 1998.
OJ L374 of 31.12.1988 (article 110 of the Regulation implementing the coordination of structural founds).
Kristina Montgomery, Transition to Market in Russia/Social aspects of the transition to market capitalism, from web site: http://econc10.bu.edu/economic_systems/economics/transit/overview/trans_overview_russia.htm.
Daniel Barbu, From Hard Communism to Soft Populism. Some remarks on the Romanian Cultures of Nationhood, Studia Politica, vol. I, Meridiane, p. 730.
Christian Caryl and Frank Brown, No more excuses, Newsweek, 15 march, 2004, p.27
For a general overview on E.U.-former Soviet countries new relation, see Une Union forte pour un élargissement réussi, Office des Publications Officielles des Communautes européennes, Luxembourg, 2000, p.2.
***, Agenda 2000. Renforcement et élergissement de l’Union Européenne, Office des Publications Officielles des Communautes européennes, Bruxelles, 2001, p.9.
***, Consommation éthique, proposal of International Congres: „L’Assemblée mondiale des citoyens”, organized by „Alliance pour un monde responsable, pluriel et solidaire”, Lille, 4-10 December, 2001, p.8-9
George W. Bush, Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents, from the 2002 Presidential Documents Online via GPO Access [frwais.access.gpo.go]/Remarks to the People of the Romania in Bucharest, November 23, p.2085-2086
Nicholas Moussis, Handbook of European Union, EDIT-EUR, Rixensart, 1995, p.329.
OJ L319 of 21.12.1993 and OJ C315 of 22.11.1993. ***, L’Union Européenne dans le monde/ La Russie et les Nouveaux Etats indépendants, Office des Publications Officielles des Communautes européennes, Bruxelles, 2001, p.8.
Michael Kramer, Rescuing Boris, Time, July 15, 1996, p. 28-37.
Frank Brown, A Rushuffled Deck, Newsweek, 22 march 2004, p.5.