Europe’s East

1. Today the European Commission is supposed to adopt its annual report on the state of relations between the European Union and its partners from the Neighbourhood Policy. The document for the first time will apply to the new policy which we defined last year. And in the so-called meanwhile many things have happened…

2. There is a new word entering the EU language – GREXIT (Greek Exit). We know what it refers to but we do not know exactly how much it will cost the Greeks. The estimated depreciation of the new drachma to euro is at least 30%… By the way – Europe will certainly demand that Greece carry out a referendum on this issue.

3. Today Prime Minister Mykola Azarov arrives to Brussels. I will meet him in the evening and once again the same questions will be raised. I hope that the answers will be more promising that ever before.

The position of official representatives of Europe concerning the imprisonment of Ukrainian oppositionists has forced the leadership of Ukraine to postpone the Summit of  Central European States. The session of Ukraine-EU Cooperation Council  will pass amid sharp statements of European ministers concerning impossibility of signing and ratification of the Association Agreement. On the whole the strengthening of criticism on the side of European leaders concerning actions of the Ukrainian authorities becomes a tendency. Massive ignoring of the Euro-2012 by the European political establishment becomes the following stage. Sport becomes a player of big politics.

Meanwhile, the Ukrainian authorities obstinately ignore the official EU position. They are occupied with providing their own inviolability in Ukraine. With the Euro-2012 coming closer, the trust to actions of authorities is incessantly falling. Numerous inquiries of journalists about bribery during the preparation for this event, an imperfect infrastructure, cosmic prices for hotels and a spoiled international image — have become an integral part of the Euro-2012. The authorities, on the contrary, are happy due to the development of the multi-billion budget, and therefore sure that the football championship will pass at a “high” European level.    

The authorities have proved that they know how to shift all responsibility to their own people. Therefore, unfortunately possible losses from the political isolation of Ukraine will be felt, first of all, by ordinary citizens. Investments put up into the Euro-2012 have every chance to become not the improvement of well-being, but to turn into the growth of tax pressure upon Ukrainians.  

If all forecasts concerning the ignoring of Ukraine’s leadership during the football championship get realized by Europe, then the following logical stage of political isolation will become the non-recognition of results of the parliamentary elections in Ukraine. 

Obviously, preparatory actions of the Ukrainian authorities concerning the continuation of their powers will turn for them into the acknowledgement of their own illegitimacy. And the first among these measures are legislative initiatives of the authorities concerning complication of a procedure of organization and conduction of peaceful actions, the right to shutdown Ukrainian Internet sites without court decisions and, consequentially, transition of their activity to offshores due to actions of law-enforcement bodies. Protest moods of citizens and general discontent by actions of authorities will only grow in Ukraine.

 

I AM WRITING THIS TEXT IN CAPITALS BECAUSE THE ADDRESSEES OF THE PREVIOUS ONE (published on Wednesday) COULD HAVE SOME DIFFICULTIES READING IT. WHAT ELSE MUST HAPPEN TO MAKE POLISH DIPLOMACY WORK?

The previous text – 50 days of travel in a minefield

Yesterday, for a couple of hours, strange information was circulating around. It was about Van Rompuy (for the uninformed – the President of the European Council) who announced that the routine summit European Union – Ukraine will not take place, because he does not wish to see in Brussels the Ukrainian Prime Minister. Because of Yulia Tymoshenko, of course. I wiped my eyes in amazement. A few hours later, his spokesman denied this statement, mumbling something about his boss’ mistake, a kind of confusion between Yanukovych and Azarov. He also added that in general Van Rompuy was speaking about a meeting that took place last year.

WHAT ELSE SHOULD HAPPEN TO MAKE POLISH DIPLOMACY, MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS AND PRIME MINISTER WORK AND BEGIN TO FIGHT FOR THE RESPECT OF THE POLISH POSITION IN THIS MATTER?

Mrs. Ashton, responsible for EU’s foreign affairs policy, has disappeared somewhere. Just in case. The EU’s foreign affairs policy is shaped by the EU’s member states, via their respective foreign ministers. Perhaps it’s time for minister Sikorski to find Mrs. Ashton and discuss this issue with her. It would be also useful if the Prime Minister called his friend Angela Merkel (for the moment there is no place to call in Paris) and presented the Polish position asking for restraint on the issue of football championship?

When Jose Manuel Barroso, followed by the entire Commission together with the Polish Commissioner Janusz Lewandowski, announced a boycott of the Euro 2012, Poland recognized that this is not the announcement of the storm. But it was. The European Union is now playing at “who will boycott Ukraine the most?” At the time of individual gestures, we could pretend that nothing was happening. But the matter has become European, ours. I would like to remind you that last year the negotiations on Ukraine’s Association Agreement with the EU were slowed down because of the imprisonment of the former Prime Minister. It was supposed to be a punishment. Today, we all decided to punish Ukraine again. And the real problems are yet to come, when the championships will begin…

The cancellation of summit in Yalta is painful for Ukraine. It is a warning before diplomatic isolation. It is not a boycott yet, but it is already an affront. Those who determine standards in this case are the people who did not want to come, and not those who wanted. The only positive thing about this situation is that we avoided a public plebiscite on which president is good, and which one is bad.

For Poland this situation is particularly troublesome. We must make every effort make sure that this affront, which Poland has not joined, will not inspire the EU countries for similar actions in the future. If it happened, the situation would be dangerous because we can clearly see that the Polish interests at this stage are different from the interests of e.g. Germany.

When I write about 50 days I mean dozens of matches and the days which precede them. What do I mean exactly? Will the Polish President invite Mr Yanukovych to Warsaw? (With all its consequences). Will the Polish Prime Minister accept the invitation from his partner Azarov to take part e.g. in the final in Kiev? And then – what will happen if during a match, gentlemen (not necessarily invited) meet and do not intend to shake hands?

The case is very serious and ahead of Poland there is the hardest piece of football diplomacy. A very specific one. When Foreign Minister will return from his important Asian travels, he should immediately inform his bosses who will participate in which matches and when. There is no place for improvisation here.

Since the Polish policy at this stage of “the crisis around Yulia Tymoshenko” has been determined – and it is not a boycott of its own event – then we need to choose appropriate instruments for its implementation. And this requires finesse and speed.

According to the stereotype, Ukraine is divided into pro-Russian East and Pro-European West. I went to Lugansk (it is not possible to go further to the East) to see how much truth there is in this view.

I am not able to completely sum up the visit but one thing is certain – none from my interlocutors, from the regional authorities to professors and students from Taras Shevchenko University, has doubts that they want to be in the European Union. However, some images are touching and terrifying. For example, in the gallery of portraits of former rectors of the university, the first eight of them from 1921 to 1932 exercised their function for maximum two years. To my question – “Why?” – there was a simple answer – “they were all executed in Stalin’s time”.

Tomorrow Ukraine celebrates the Victory Day. On this occasion we laid flowers at the three monuments: the heroes of the war 1941-1945, mothers who lost their sons at that time and the people of Lugansk who were killed by the Ukrainian Insurgent Army.

It would be difficult to put what I saw in Lugansk into a simple scheme. They are not pro-Russian, they are not against, they learn Ukrainian language and they treat the location of the city at the crossroads of two European routes (4 and 7) as a quirk of fate and a chance for economic development.

I will probably get back to this visit many times because I expected grim mining settlements, destroyed wildlife and “one-dimensional” elites. It was different.

Der Hauptverfechter des Kiew-Boykotts ist Berlin… Die Appelle eines Teils der deutschen Politiker, die Spiele von der Ukraine nach Deutschland und Österreich zu verlegen, sind zwar chancenlos, doch sie zeigen die Ausmaße der Image-Schlappe von Präsident Janukowitsch…

Seit einigen Tagen wird die Ukraine in Deutschland wie Weißrussland behandelt, sagt Cornelius Ochmann von der Bertelsmann-Stiftung: In den Nachrichten wird nur davon gesprochen, wie sehr Julia Timoschenko im Gefängnis leide, und dass man sich solidarisch zeigen müsse. Die deutschen Medien verbreiten sich darüber, dass sich die Strafkolonie, wo Timoschenko einsitzt, nur einige Kilometer weit von dem Stadion befinde, in dem die deutsche Mannschaft ihre erste Partie austragen wird. “Die Lage ist explosiv”, sagt Ochmann.

Warum geschieht das erst jetzt?… Nun, die Deutschen fühlen sich vom offiziellen Kiew betrogen. Der Verwaltungschef des ukrainischen Präsidenten, Serhij Lowotschkin, habe Berlin vor einem Monat vertraulich zugesagt, dass die kranke Timoschenko zur Behandlung nach Deutschland entlassen werde. Er soll auch garantiert haben, dass ein neuer Prozess in Sachen Wirtschaftsentscheidungen der 90er Jahre eröffnet werde. Die Ukraine hat das Wort nicht gehalten…

“Die europäischen Politiker sollten nicht den Spielen fernbleiben, sondern Treffen mit Präsident Janukowitsch verweigern. Die Meisterschaften brauchen in erster Linie doch die Ukraine und ihre Bevölkerung, und nicht die Behörden”, appelliert der führende ukrainische Oppositioneller Arsenij Jazeniuk.

Auch Polen fürchtet, dass der Boykott die europäischen Ambitionen der Ukraine begraben und unser Land als Mitorganisator der Meisterschaften treffen wird. Boykott ist keine gute Lösung, obwohl wir natürlich die Methoden und die Art und Weise verurteilen, wie der Prozess gegen Timoschenko durchgeführt wurde, sagt Sprecher des polnischen Außenministeriums Marcin Bosacki.

… Das ukrainische Außenministerium versucht die Boykott-Informationen herunterzuspielen, doch inoffiziell heißt es von Seiten der Beamten, sie seien entsetzt, und die Situation sei außer Kontrolle geraten. “Die Entscheidung in Sachen Julia Timoschenko hängt von einem einzigen Mann ab. Was kann ich dafür, dass wir einen solchen Präsidenten haben”, sagt einer der ukrainischen Beamten, und bittet natürlich darum, nicht genannt zu werden.

No, this time I will not write about Yulia Tymoshenko and Ukraine. Another Julia just invaded the election in the US. And more precisely – 12 Julias. This is the number of images of women included in The Life of Julia, which Barack Obama presents to voters.

Looking at the individual images in white background you can find out how the good President Obama makes women’s life easier. Below, in the dark, you learn how Mitt Romney wants this life to be more difficult.

The described cartoon shows how much the “women’s issue” is important in this campaign. Watching American television, I can conclude that this year’s presidential election will be decided by women and youth. Yesterday Mitt Romney accompanied by his wife visited the enterprising ladies in Virginia. This morning President Obama in the same state, in Arlington, will talk to teen girls (voters) on the credit facilitation for their education. We can say – both images are very socialist.

Mitt Romney takes the campaign very seriously. He has already spent over $ 46 million for 81 000 polling spots, leading a fratricidal fight in the primaries. He has a lot of money – the old Bush’s team (Karl Rove) took care of it. Obama starts his campaign only now. Until then he did not have to fight. He was present on the screen as the President but he published 24 000 paid advertisement anyway.

Generally, if we were to leave the traditional campaign and trust only the tweeting community, Obama would have won the election already last week. During this time more than 200 thousand people responded to his posts while to Romney’s ones – only 134 thousand.

German policy has focused on EURO 2012. You can hear the call for boycott. More and more politicians declare that they will not participate in the Ukrainian part of the tournament. In addition, they encourage UEFA to withdraw the matches from Ukraine and move them e.g. to Poland, Germany or Austria. I warn politicians, especially those from Poland, not to join this boycott.

Football is an opportunity to engage in politics. During matches very often heads of states sit next to each other, and as they sit, they need something to talk about. President Yanukovych has lost this opportunity. However, between non-attendance and boycott there is a long way. In Poland we need to understand (and I repeated it many times) that the football championship for Ukrainians is a national question – a source of pride, regardless of political views. Ukrainians deserve to have this tournament in their country in an atmosphere of festivity, in spite of all. Moreover, let’s not forget that without their operability Poland would not host championship for many years.

When I hear that Erika Steinbach calls for the withdrawal of the EURO 2012 in Ukraine, I feel angry. Neither she, nor smaller German politicians should bias us against Ukrainians. I expect that the Polish Prime Minister will firmly speak out on this matter. Besides, as a whole political class, just as we act together in defence of Yulia Tymoshenko, in this case we should separate sport from politics. If there was somebody in Poland who would like to take this opportunity to rob something from Ukrainians, I warn – the political costs in the mutual relations will be long lasting and serious. Regardless of who is in power at the Dnieper.

PS By the way, European dignitaries have proven that they have no idea what this whole football-politics is about. Commissioner on Justice Viviane Reding will not come to Warsaw for the opening match and Barroso will not attend the Ukrainian part of the championship. He will watch it on television.

Governmental circles of Russia discuss now the draft bill “About development of Siberia and the Far East”. At the beginning of the year a political decision was made that a special structure should work on the development of Siberia and the Far East. The main priority is the construction of infrastructural objects at the specified territories. The idea was supported by V.Putin. At the beginning of February the future president declared that means of the Reserve Fund and Fund of the National Wellbeing can be used for the financing of state corporations on Siberia and the Far East. According to the Ministry of Finance of the Russian Federation, as of March 1, 2012, a total volume of the Reserve Fund makes up 62,4 billion dollars., and that of the Fund of the National Wellbeing – 89,84 billion dollars. The volume of means is amazing.

Already at the end of March Russian mass-media disseminated information that an independent noncommercial organization can be engaged in the development of Siberia and the Far East. However, actually it means the creation of the state corporation which will be directly submitted to the president of Russia, and the list of investment objects will be confirmed by the government.

On a whole the specified initiative provides for the introduction of a number of positive innovations by the government. Among the main ones are the exemption from taxes on profits, on mineral extraction, granting of privileges to concrete projects within the limits of activities of the corporation, and what’s most important, inhabitants of Siberia and the Far East will be provided with privileges on accommodation and studies. In the framework of the whole project it is planned to create 5 million workplaces. By the way, among the primary steps of development of Russia, voiced by Putin during the report on work of the government in the State Duma, is the creation of 25 million qualitative workplaces in economy in the nearest years. Moreover, variants of simplification of procedures of receiving citizenship by foreigners who will settle in the specified territories are discussed.

Along with positive moments, there are negative ones as always. There exist not unreasonable fears that the creation of the state corporation on the contrary will slow down the development of the specified territories. After all, any private investor who has a desire to work there will have the state corporation with special preferences as a competitor. Hence, nobody is talking about competition here. An accurately limited system of governmental admission to participation in the development of Siberia and the Far East will operate.

Realization of the specified project is also connected with geopolitical questions. The basic problems lie in the plane of cooperation of Russia with the countries of Asian-Pacific region. Especially this has to do with China. In one of his program articles, V.Putin already urged to more actively build communication with China on the basis of cooperation of technological and industrial potentials of both countries. Meanwhile, this cooperation is demonstrated by the saturation of the Russian market with poor-quality goods and cheap work force. Nobody hurries to share technologies. Also the realization of plans of the Russian leadership is connected with the creation and effectiveness of new international associations, such as the Eurasian economic union for example. In the realization of the development of considerable territories of Siberia and the Far East Russia can face the main problem – shortage of human resources. Unfortunately, the demographic crisis in Russia only deepens this problem. The way-out can be found in the historical experience of attraction of human potential of the countries of the former Soviet Union to the development of Siberia and the Far East. However today, these countries have their own social and economic and demographic problems. Hence, China can have all the advantages.

Strategically, the decision on the development of the infrastructure of Siberia and the Far East fits into the foreign policy concept of development of Russia, voiced by V.Putin. However, in case of the creation of the state corporation, it will be necessary to prove the efficiency of realization of the project of development of the specified territories. The experience of Russian state companies is an example here. Everything can end up right after budgets disbursement. In 2011 there was already created a financial structure – the Far East Development Fund. Despite the pumping of the Fund with means, there is no project realized by it today, although the creation of many workplaces was planned. However, the advantage in favor of the state corporation is the Russian reality now. It is paradoxical, but rigid state control at the highest level gives a chance to control corrupt practices at the level of top-management and regional power. At the same time, it will increase competition between foreign service and financial companies for participation in this mega-project.

Considering the importance and scale of the new mega-project, the creation of a new structure of development of Siberia and the Far East has every chance to be realized right after V.Putin’s inauguration. Anyways, the choice of the head of this project will show seriousness of intentions concerning the development and exploration of the major resource region of Russia.

 

Friends told me they were confused about an advertisement on Dutch TV, mixing Euro 2012, beer and sex. I don’t watch Dutch television, but I easily found the video on YouTube, with key words “Keep him home”.

“Keep him home” is he message of the advertisement, by the energy company, Nederlandse Energie Maatschappij, which offers for free a beer cooling machine against the signature of a long-term contract.
The video suggests Dutch women should use this machine to prevent their male partner from going to Ukraine to watch Euro 2012… A Google page is displayed with zillions of half-naked Ukrainian women. Many of the Euro 2012 cup football matches will be played in Ukraine very soon, from 8 June to 1 July. Ukraine co-hosts the football cup with Poland.
I would suggest watching those 26 seconds.
Ok. Now I will provide a minimum of guidance. The male individual, which I never saw before, is a famous Dutch journalist, Henk Spaan, whom his lady wife (presumably, we don’t see her), apparently prevents from going to Ukraine, thanks to this miraculous machine.
The ad is fueling controversy in Ukraine, but happily enough, also in the Netherlands. Many Ukrainians see it as an attempt to discredit the championship they are so proud of hosting, and also at promoting the stereotype that what Ukrainian women want is sex with foreigners. Many Dutch see it as sexist and xenophobic.

What do you think?

Die ehemalige ukrainische Regierungschefin Julia Timoschenko im Gefängnis, Bombenanschläge und ein Präsident, der mit Demokratie nicht allzu viel im Sinn zu haben scheint. Knapp sechs Wochen vor Beginn der Fußball-Europameisterschaft gibt die Ukraine als eines der beiden Gastgeberländer ein hässliches Bild ab.

So hässlich, dass hochrangige Staatsmänner wie Bundespräsident Joachim Gauck ihre geplanten Reisen in die Ukraine absagen. Die Rufe nach einem Boykott der Fußall-EM werden lauter, auch in Deutschland. Angesichts eines Schauprozesses gegen Timoschenko und deren Hungerstreik im Gefängnis ist diese Forderung verständlich. Aber das macht sie nicht richtiger.

Die Fußballteams und deren Zigtausende von Fans müssen nach Kiew, Charkow, Lviv und Donezk. Die Journalisten von Presse, Funk und Fernsehen müssen berichten, wie das Leben in der Ukraine unter der Regentschaft von Präsident Viktor Janukowitsch ist. Tun sie das nicht, bleiben Spieler, Anhänger und Journalisten also zu Hause, wird die Situation für die Opposition im Land sehr wahrscheinlich nur noch schlimmer. Unter Ausschluss der Öffentlichkeit fällt es Feinden der Demokratie erheblich leichter, ihre Machtstrukturen zu zementieren. Das heißt nicht, dass die Kritiker aus dem Ausland zur Tagesordnung übergehen dürfen. Und es bleibt auch richtig, dass Gauck sowie die EU-Kommissarin Viviane Reding Zeichen setzen und ihre Reisen in die Ukraine aus Protest gegen die Behandlung Timoschenkos absagen.

Aber die Vergangenheit hat dennoch gezeigt, dass Boykott und vollständige Isolation das Gegenteil von dem erreichen, was sie bewirken sollen. Die Teilnahme von Teams aus allen demokratischen Staaten an den Olympischen Spielen 2008 in China ist das jüngste Beispiel dafür, dass internationale Großereignisse zur Öffnung eines abgeschotteten Systems beitragen können. China ist in den Jahren seit der Vergabe der Spiele ein offeneres Land geworden, wenn auch noch kein demokratisches.

Die Fußball-EM kann die Ukraine auf ihren 2004 eingeschlagenen Weg nach Europa zurückführen. Wird das Land isoliert, entsteht an der Ostgrenze der EU andernfalls womöglich ein Krisenherd.

We got used to the impressive results of the Chinese economy. And we are not the only ones. A bit in the shadow of the giant there is Russia, where also interesting things are going on.

When Vladimir Putin ended the election festival, he began to speak specifically about the economy. He promised facilities for foreign investors, more economic freedom and that the economy will become a showcase of the new term.

The forecasts are encouraging. Western experts predict that during the next 5-7 years Russia will maintain the 3 percent economic growth and in the long term it might even reach 11 percent. Thanks to the high energy prices they attracted 514 billion dollars in reserves and the account surplus for last year was 100 billion dollars. Russia is a member of the World Trade Organization (WTO) and intends to join the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). The country recently ratified the Convention on fight against corruption, which does not mean, of course, that Russia itself fought it off.

I encourage that, while calculating the Chinese billions, you look more friendly behind the eastern border.

 

In conditions of the current financial and economic crisis, a question of access to resources of countries becomes critical, since the existing rates of their consumption don’t allow everyone to have enough resources.  The method of using resources acquires critical value.  An answer to the question “who will use the national wealth of states and receive preferences from this?” is crucial. Will this be citizens? Or bureaucrats? Or accountants and brokers?

No, to our opinion, – this will be monopolies, especially, – energy ones.  Precisely they have the greatest influence upon the political leadership of the countries-leading oil and gas exporters and influence the formation of the global politics on the whole.  And in fact, they optimize profits and taxes, spending means on the minimum charity.

Let’s take a look at Russia, for example.  The country is a leading world gas exporter.  “Gazprom” is not only a state gas monopolist, but also a private tool of political influence upon external and internal politics of the state. The curtailment of positions of “Gazprom” at the EU gas markets from 27 % to 23 % in 2009-2010 led to the activization of compensation of external losses of the company at the internal market.  Already now Russian governmental officials predict that starting from 2015 the RF will switch to the equation of the Russian gas prices for internal and external consumers.  This means that “Gazprom” management will again receive profits lost in the EU at the expense of internal consumers.

In April, 2010 the US went through the greatest technogenic accident in the Gulf of Mexico, along with an explosion and further flooding of the oil platform “Deepwater Horizon” which was rented by “BP” Energy Company.  Have simple American citizens whose business went bankrupt due to the ecological pollution in Florida and other states gotten a full compensation? Doubtfully.

One more example, – Ukraine.  Following the Russian analogue, Ukrainian energy-resources and energy infrastructure is used by the government and state energy monopolist “Naftogas” nontransparent for citizens.  Exactly due to this, there is no surprise in the last decision of the Ukrainian Parliament which has adopted the law on reforming the oil and gas sphere of Ukraine.  It opens possibilities for nontransparent privatization of the state energy actives (gas-transport system, gas storage facilities, distribution and heating networks).  Citizens have lost again.  They have no chances to participate in the privatization of state actives created by their taxes over decades.

Energy monopolies in the EU also play their games, often making arrangements about cooperation between themselves with the help of MPs who come to power with the help of citizens.

Thus, we have a conclusion – energy monopolies continue to project the future, hiding behind the interests of citizens.  And political parties and their leaders help them.

Consequentially, for citizens to restore their influence upon policies of their governments, it is necessary not only to “occupy Wall Street”, but also to “occupy” energy monopolies.  And officials always play in favor of the winners.

 

Guest post by Senka Neuman Stanivukovi?, researcher at the University of Groningen. As a part of novelized Enlargement strategy, the Commission has released a set of short videos to communicate the EU’s widening eastwards to the citizens. I suggest that the campaign not only prejudices against the Eastern members and to-be-members by portraying these as a derivative of the West, but it also verifies the East/West dichotomy as inherent to the EU’s political structure. In view of that, the article speaks up against the Westernization of European identity and the EU’s political order. La révolution dévore ses enfants. Provided that the post-communist transition and subsequent 2004/2007 EU enlargement in conjunction with the pending accession of the Western Balkans was revolutionary, then the ten Central European and the seven Balkan countries are a textbook example of the above-cited Danton’s claim that the revolution devours its own children. In an era when discourses of the PVV, the Front National, and the Lega Nord are becoming part of the mainstream public narrative vis-à-vis the EU’s Ostpolitik, to argue that the Central and Balkan Europeans are victims of the Europeanization process is certainly not without controversy. The enlargement fatigue discourse, de facto euphemism for Western Europeans’ uneasy relationship with their Eastern counterparts, is unfit to grasp that the biggest weight of the accession process has been and continues to be carried by the acceding countries. The West can never be as tired from expanding as the East is tired from transitioning towards the West. I argue that, notwithstanding the political rhetoric, in the context of the EU’s widening eastwards, the act of accession comes closer to Anschluss than to integration with the EU. Semiotics aside, for Central Europe integrating with the EU meant becoming more westernized than the West. Thus, in the same manner as Europeanization qua accession has reproduced the power relationship between Western Europe as certified Europe and Central Europe as its copie conforme, the newest Commission’s video clips on Southeast Europe, as a part of the pro-EU Enlargement campaign, portray this region as a derivative of old Europe and thus worth of EU membership. But is this so problematic? Faced with an institutional vacuum subsequent to the fall of communism, these countries were provided with a brand new set of political and economic institutions and were additionally given the very much needed financial and administrative support for putting these institutions into practice. The role the EU has played and still plays in helping membership candidates in swapping communism for capitalism is undeniable. More importantly, the impetus for joining the EU always comes from the candidate state. Nobody has forced Central Europe to join the EU and nobody has forced these countries to comply with EU rules and norms. Yet now, almost a decade after the 2004 enlargement, while witnessing continuous economic growth and consolidation of democracy in most of the new member states, I dare to call out the EU for victimizing these countries. The trick is that while being the engine behind the Europeanization process, the EU has simultaneously occupied this very process. It claims monopoly over democracy and capitalism, and, more importantly, it claims monopoly over Europe. In 1984, Kundera argued that Western Europe has kidnapped Europe. In the 1990s, by coupling the infamous Return to Europe with EU accession, the political nomenclatura of Central Europe and later of the former Yugoslav republics plus Albania has confirmed the EU’s hegemony over Europe. Put differently, in the same fashion as the West has stolen Europe during the Cold War, it has also stolen Europeanization in the post-Cold War period. In this context, the conformist non-members and to-be-members are labeled as good Europeans, whereas the recidivists are singled out as bad Europeans and, where geographical and cultural variables allow, as non-Europeans. Again, this is still not problematic per se. If the West is the EU and the EU is Europe, by joining the EU, Central Europe and the Balkans confirm their place within Europe and break away from their troubled past. At the same time, for Western Europeans, this means ultimate confirmation of the supremacy of their system, which is no longer vulnerable to internal or external contestation. It seems as a win-win situation, or, to quote Fukuyama, the end of history. But it is not. Scholarship on EU identity teaches us that the idea of Europe is established in opposition to the East. Ergo, Europeanism is not solely constructed in line with a Kantian ideal of a European federation nor does it solely progress towards constitutional patriotism basing itself on a set of commonly shared norms such as democracy, rule of law, solidarity, and respect for human rights. Au contraire, Kant himself sees Western European nation-states as a stepping stone for an emerging cosmopolitan order. European identity is therefore constructed vis-à-vis the Occident/Orient. The 20th century underpinned the West/East frontier awarding the Soviets with the role of the European other. Hereafter, pan-Europeanism was based on liberalism and capitalism and in opposition to an undemocratic and communist East. In 1938, Coudenhove-Kalergi framed the Paneuropa movement as, among others, a response to the emerging threat of Bolshevikization of Europe. This East/West dichotomy was further fortified against the background of the Cold War and was consequently embedded in the EU’s political order. When the founding fathers talked about the core of Europe, they talked of France, Britain, and Germany. Thus, the récidive of European ethnocentrism was sustained and reinforced by the bipolarity of the Cold War order. In effect, today’s EU exists as an artifact of Western Europe, defined in opposition to Eastern Europe. In this scenario, the former Soviet Block and the Balkans are read as the EU’s other or as the Zwischenland, at best. To what extent the fall of the Iron Curtain and subsequent events have made this borderline fussier or have moved the frontier further eastwards is debatable. On the one hand, in 2004, Prodi talked about the unification of the Continent. On the other hand, to many, Vienna still seems much closer than Prague will ever be with the us vs. them mentality continuing to shape the European public and political discourse. Nowadays, we tend to debate the finalité of the European project, but is seems that qua identity, this matter has been settled already with the Peace of Versailles. I argue that by moving the EU’s border eastwards, we have not deconstructed the East-West schism. Rather, we have internalized it. The present debates indicate that the Cold War dichotomies are still very much alive and kicking. While contained by the Iron Curtain, today these divisions have moved into our backyard with the other becoming our first door neighbor. For the countries that have taken the path of EU membership to establish their place in Europe this is tough luck. With EU membership failing to provide one with an external validation of one’s Europeanness, the enduring process of conforming to EU rules and norms is comparable to Sisyphus rolling the immense boulder uphill only to watch it fall down again. In an effort of becoming more Europeanized than the EU, the only thing these countries managed to establish is that they are more European than their first neighbor to the east. Consequently, the Central Europe of today and the Western Balkans of tomorrow are in a schizophrenic state due to a diametrical difference between the Ego and the Alter. Ultimately, this means that transition is a never-ending process. With the above-developed discussion in mind, I would like to reflect upon the current enlargement campaign. The EU’s 2005 enlargement strategy, as a summary of the lessons learned from the big-bang enlargement, highlights the need of improved communication of the future accessions to the citizens. Consequently, in 2012, DG enlargement released a set of video clips under the motto of narrowing the existing democratic deficit by advertising the upcoming new members among the common folks. Particularly interesting is the release on Southeast Europe entitled So Similar, So Different, So European. While escaping the hype of the more notorious Growing Together video, the ad on Southeast Europe is very much representative of the West-centrism in the EU’s order. In short, the add presents sights in Southeastern Europe such as the Lady of the Rock monastery, the Old Bridge of Mostar and the Zagreb National Theater to be identical to sights in Sweden, Italy, and Austria. The campaign is however a backhanded compliment to the essence and the uniqueness of Western Balkan identity. To be blunt, if the enlargement process reproduces the existing power relationships between the superior West and the backwards East writ large, this clip does exactly the same on a small scale. As such, it reinvents the Southeast against the image of the West in the same fashion as Central Europe was manufactured as a western corollary in the East throughout the 1990s. The arising narrative of the Western Balkans being good only if similar/comparable to France, Germany, the Netherlands etc. is stereotyping, patronizing and quite offensive. Unfortunately, however, with Western identity as a benchmark of certified Europe being deeply entrenched in the EU accession discourse, we often fail to see this. The question, however, is to what extent going along is worth it? Already today, the West has monopolized European culture, history, arts, education, the understanding of progress, social order, democracy etc. Now, with the above-discussed clip in mind, we are even witnessing a monopolization of landscape. Sure, it is certainly more rewarding for one to see her country represented as the New France than the villain of European modern history. But, again, I ask, is it worth for the East to become more western than the West, when, in the eyes of those who matter, they will never be good enough?

The Polish history after 1989 is very much bound up with the countries that emerged after the transition in Central and Eastern Europe. We cared about good relations with our neighbours, repeatedly boasting about the fact that all the neighbours were new and we did not have any serious conflict with any of them. Something is changing in this area. The example of Lithuania and the evident coldness is very characteristic.

The Polish authorities have recognised that they can condescend to the Lithuanians. The famous declaration of the Prime Minister that the relations with Lithuania will be determined by the local Polish community, was followed by gestures and counter-gestures. I wonder whether the Polish President is satisfied to hear the Lithuanian partner saying that she did not come to Warsaw before the NATO summit because decisions are made in Washington. In a moment it will turn out that the proud Poland withdraws from patrolling the Lithuanian airspace and in this place will be someone else, such as the Norwegians.

This mechanism works even more acutely in the European Union. Poland is struggling to maintain the Cohesion Fund, which will give us a chance to complete infrastructure projects. The country fights, however, the more and more alone. The Baltic states do not support us. Romania and Bulgaria have other problems (Schengen), the Czechs speak the language of the net payers (?) and on our side so far is Slovakia…

In relations with Lithuania, Poland goes down a blind alley. We assumed that we must force our reasons and yet it appears that the small one finds support much easier than we thought, and not necessarily in Moscow.