| |
|
|
Second-class
allies
Monday 19th April 2004
In the ten countries that will soon accede, support for the EU has now given
way to
disillusion – not least because of new migration policies. By John
Kampfner
I don't imagine there are that many Slovaks who have seen a
bloke in a skirt. As James McCarthy, a burly Scotsman, walked
through the cobbled streets of Bratislava's old town, he was
the object of much giggling and finger-pointing. A piper from the
Black Watch regiment, he was an unlikely emissary for Britain on
a day rich in symbolism. This was 2 April, and a few hours earlier
Slovakia and six other former communist states had, at a ceremony
in Brussels, joined Nato. On 1 May a similar group of
nations will accede to the European Union. The dismemberment
of the Soviet empire, first dreamt of by Ronald Reagan and Margaret
Thatcher, will be complete.
McCarthy put it in less grandiose terms. "It’s a great day for
these people," he said. "I feel so happy for them." Our conversation
was interrupted as locals, among them uniformed Slovak
squaddies and their girlfriends, lined up to be photographed
next to him. Then he entertained them with a turn on his bagpipes
before an American military band playing Joe Cocker and cover
versions of pop tunes by other artists took over. Hviezdoslavovo
Námestie, one of Bratislava's main squares, where in years gone
by torchlit marches proclaimed the virtues of the socialist brotherhood,
teemed with Nato flags.
So much for predictions at the end of the cold war that the
Atlantic Alliance would wither away. It is a remarkable transformation,
one that could have begun only in that brief window of
opportunity in the mid- to late 1990s, when Boris Yeltsin was in
no state to object. "We would never have got it through in the present
circumstances," said
a senior UK diplomat,
referring to the chill in relations between the west and
the Russia of President Vladimir Putin.
The celebrations were replicated in other countries.
They mark the biggest and strategically most important
expansion in Nato's 55-year history. But they
were deliberately low-key, in recognition not just of
Russian sensibilities but of the mixed feelings voters in the new
member countries have towards the organisations to which they
are linking their future. Hostility is even more marked in attitudes
towards the EU than towards Nato. The eight formerly communist
accession states – Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic,
Slovakia, Slovenia and the Baltic states of Latvia, Lithuania and
Estonia – have been required to open up their markets and reform
their economies in just a few years. They have done so with varying
degrees of enthusiasm and success.
In Slovakia, one of the poorest, steep tax increases on goods and
services took effect in January, and more changes are scheduled
for May. VAT rose to 19 per cent for basics such as bread, water
and medicine. At the same time, social benefit cheques were
trimmed and government institutions including the armed forces
and the state-run railways started cutting jobs. Thousands of
small businesses that could not comply with EU-related rules
have closed. Slovakia's unemployment rate has reached 16 per
cent. Budget reforms and job cuts have led to strikes and protests
involving everyone from students and civil servants to doctors and pharmacists.
Hardest hit has been the impoverished Roma
minority mainly in eastern Slovakia. In February, thousands of
troops and police were deployed to stop looting from food shops.
Throughout the unrest Slovakia's centre-right prime minister,
Mikulás Dzurinda, and his counterpart in the wealthier Czech
Republic, Vladimír Spidla, have vowed to stay the course. Within
three months of Dzurinda's re-election in 2002 he was rewarded
with offers of membership of both Nato and the EU. Since the
reforms began to bite, however, his grip on power has loosened.
Both leaders are counting on enlargement to provide jobs, foreign
investment, tourism and exports. Their first major success
has come in the motor industry, with Toyota building a factory in
the Czech Republic and Hyundai picking Slovakia for a similar
plant that will be worth 1.1bn euros and will produce 300,000
cars a year. With Peugeot Citroën and Volkswagen already there,
Slovakia will produce more cars per head of population than any
other country in the world. The Koreans said they chose it over
Poland partly because of better road and rail links to the rest of
Europe, and partly because of a staggeringly low flat rate of corporate
and income tax: 19 per cent.
The bottom line for all these countries, however, was reciprocal
access to the rest of the EU for the Union's 73 million
new citizens. They did not expect that all 15 existing
members would impose restrictions (although Britain’s hasty
response has been to restrict welfare rights but not work).
The sense of discrimination and humiliation is strong. A poll
conducted recently for the government in Poland, where unemployment
is running at more than 20 per cent, found that just
10 per cent of voters believed EU membership would produce a
better standard of living. The reaction in Hungary has been similarly
hostile, but for different reasons. Hungary's economy is
considerably healthier than those of some of the established
states. Its jobless rate of 5.9 per cent compares favourably to the
11 per cent in Spain, 10 per cent in France and 9 per cent in Germany.
It is thinking of imposing its own restrictions, partly for
revenge and partly because, it says, it wants from abroad only
people with skills or serious money to invest.
Many voters fear that rich foreigners will not only push up
property prices, but that they will buy up swathes of farmland
and other assets.
The mood has swung in only 12 months since the referendums
in which voters overwhelmingly backed EU membership (albeit
with low turnouts in some countries). I met a group of students
who voiced the deep-seated scepticism one now finds in the
region. "It’s fine for people like you to come for the weekend for
our cheap beer," said Martina, noting with disdain the various
British stag parties that descend on the capital, "but what do we
get in return?" With no memory of dictatorship, her generation
takes free speech and free travel for granted.
Two days after the Nato celebrations in Bratislava, Slovaks
voted for Vladimir Meciar in the first round of their presidential
election. Meciar, a former boxer and prime minister between
1994 and 1998, is seen by western governments as corrupt and
hostile to both the Atlantic Alliance and the EU. His comeback
highlights the disquiet Slovaks feel about their new allies. A similar
backlash may take place elsewhere.
Anxieties over the economy and national identity have been
compounded by another fear – vulnerability to terrorism. Most
of these "emerging" countries supported the Bush administration
in its war on Iraq. Now they fear they may pay the price.
Countries such as Romania and Bulgaria were quick to open their
bases and airspace to US troops on their way to Afghanistan in
2001. They soon contributed troops of their own. Both are now
likely to play host to permanent US bases. Polish and Slovak
forces are involved in Iraq. As for the Hungarians, they did not
appreciate being lied to by the Americans on the eve of war. The
US said it needed a large airbase in the country to "train translators".
It later emerged that the base had been temporary home to
an Iraqi administration-in-waiting.
With little thanks from the US for their armed
forces being targeted
in Iraq – and with little reward from "old Europe", led by
France and Germany, for joining the EU – many in these countries
wonder whether they have made the right choices. In reality,
they had little alternative. In any case, the die is cast.
This article first appeared in the New
Statesman and may not be reproduced
without permission.
|
|
|
|