Europe in Middle Age Crisis

Does it ever come a Day?

Europe climbed out of wars and disunity. Eastern and western countries are improving social welfare and creating civil society. Every day is a new gain - more and more is done to align old and new member's economic situation. Union is expanding. However, fortune never walks alone. Europe is already in its middle age, so critics do not humble to talk about the Old continent's middle (of) age crisis. There are serious arguments


By IEVA BARAUSKAITE
from Vilnius, LITHUANIA


The 50 years European Union's anniversary was recently celebrated. To mention this unique occasion, Berlin declaration was announced on the 25th March 2007. So many debates, inrush of harsh criticism, supporting voices and floating opinions were heard on that date. But did the initial six leaders, when signing the Treaty of Rome on 25th March 1957, even dream about huge society of more than 494 million people, unified not only economically, but also culturally, socially and politically? Would they believe, that already 27 countries have entered the Union and now it is considered to be one of strongest political and economical powers in the whole world? Maybe it is too idealistic to call EU the only paragon of peace and tolerance, but if we compared today's situation to the one 50 years ago, we would perceive that the incredible progress was made.

Europe climbed out of wars and disunity. Eastern and western countries are improving social welfare and creating civil society. Every day is a new gain - more and more is done to align old and new member's economic situation. Union is expanding - Romania and Bulgaria are most recently joined countries and even more of them are waiting in the queue - Croatia, Macedonia and Turkey have already applied for being introduced into European community. As well, Albania, Montenegro, Serbia, Bosnia and Herzegovina are potential candidates.

However, fortune never walks alone. Europe is already in its middle age, so critics do not humble to talk about the Old continent's middle (of) age crisis. There are serious arguments: ratification of European constitution is moving straight to nowhere, as Netherlands and France have rejected it on national referendums in 2005. Germany, which is the leader of ES in first half - year of 2007, has endeavoured to include this topic into the Berlin declaration and did not succeed because of unambiguous resistance of these countries. There is still a possibility of changing constitution's text. But there are countries, in which it has already been ratified, and these do not wish to change the approved document.

The other question, stopping EU improvement, is it's national value. Euro as such has not been accepted not only by new members (Cyprus, Check Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Slovakia, Slovenia, Bulgaria, Romania), most of which are still achieving it, but also in old and economically strong countries - Sweden, Denmark and Britain. N. Sarkozy, the candidate to French president's chair on the elections in 22nd April 2007, has recently stated his intention to weaken Euro's value.

What else makes analytics worry is the demographic situation. Now EU is "winning" as one of possessing the lowest fertility numbers in the world. Pessimistic counting shows that by year 2050 there would be five pensioners/ jobless per one working person. That would mean a total collapse of whole European economics. Even immigration and new members accession would not stop decreasing of the population.

One more silent reproach lies on the differences between the new and the old members of EU. The economy of the new is experiencing intense growths, however, most of these countries are ruled by weak coalitions with no ideas or high purposes. Such dull politicians seek only for staying in authorities. The lack of pure democracy and unrestrained corruption is often discussed, whereas old members are named as having deeper political values. Not surprisingly, many are sceptical about plans to accept more members, as the new ones are thought to assume the Union as an inexhaustible source of financial grants. Their economy model is more likely to capitalism, as the importance of social country's welfare is usually heightened, but no finance for improving that is being committed. What else is important, foreign policies towards Russia seem to be distinct. New countries are more suspicious about it - they countenance European Union's expansion to East and are more tend to adjoin USA (as an opposite to Russia) and assent to its tendency to initiate violence.

Likewise, the new leaders of EU are often blamed. It is said, that Europe now has only characterless, not inspirational politics as J. M. Barroso (president of European Commission) or A. Merkel. Also, complaints about Brussels bureaucrats are made, claiming, that decisions irrespective of citizens wishes and objectives are being taken.

The other fear is Europe's culture. Alongside with decrease of labour force, immigration from Middle East and Latin America is mounting up. Europe has already faced cultural discrepancies when integrating Muslim immigrants. Some say, there is a realistic threat to amalgamation or even evanescence of unique European cultural values and Christian traditions. The fact that not a word about these eternal verities was involved into the text of Berlin declaration, even when Poland demanded that, is quite meaningful.

On the other hand, Europe has softer, more diplomatic ways to safeguard the peace than, for instance, USA, and that makes the Union exclusive and worth holding respect to. It distinguishes in some kind of new ideal, replacing the old fashioned "American dream". May it be called "European dream", or have any other name, but it boosts social intercourse instead of individual's autonomy, cultural diversity there gains advantage over assimilation, and higher living standards are preferred to worshipping a mammon. Cohesive development is advantaged to boundless material growth, and finally, complicated play - to remorseless intrusion forward.

Will the European Union ever expand more than Europe's continent itself? The controversial question of Turkey cannot be answered yet. What if one day Russia, Ukraine and Belarus make a wish to join as well? Nobody can predict, if in future this sounds more possible than today. Anyway, the questions of common value (euro) and constitution must be solved in coming decade. The new members will have advanced in economical and social sphere, so the general wealth of European society shouldn't stop growing. The restrained demographic policy must be developed so that decrease of population would be at least slowed down, and cultural promotion programmes must be continued to retain the right approach to European values. Undoubtedly, environment protection is a matter of great significance. This sphere must be paid exceptional attention to, as ruining your home is equal to becoming a beggar. However, nowadays material profit seems to be essential to some, who do not admit their nearsightedness and violence to nature.

European Union is hegemonic in sexual equality, policy of actions against all kinds of discrimination, civil and human rights security. Economic growth is ,ore or less matched with social and environmental protection. Its obvious, that 27 unified countries are better prepared to tackle the problems of 21st century: to overcome the menace of increasing terrorism in whole world, warrant secure energy reserves, establish governmental structures, adjudicate the conflicts. In the beginning European integration was the way to avoid one more war. Now it is the recipe of peaceful, moving, innovative society, which knows, how to deal with ructions, or at least can find it out. Does it ever come a day, when we will see a unified, prosperous Europe, celebrating its year 100?