On May 1, 2004, the European Union (EU) expanded to include an additional 10 countries, most of them former Soviet satellites in Eastern Europe. This new wave of enlargement has raised questions regarding the structure of the EU and its limits. Is the European Union more than a mere trading bloc? What geopolitical requirements must potential candidate countries fulfill? Should EU membership be extended to Turkey or, perhaps, Russia?
The importance of such questions has been amplified by the recent rejection of the proposed EU constitution in both France and the Netherlands. According to most experts, the failure of the constitution can, at least in part, be attributed to strong animosity towards EU enlargement. The inevitable accession of both Bulgaria and Romania in 2007 has fueled such sentiment.
Although Bulgaria and Romania have made remarkable progress since the fall of Todor Zhivkov and Nicolae Ceausescu, socioeconomic conditions in both countries are far below EU norms. Romania has a GDP per capita of $7,700 (2004 est.), which is slightly below 30 percent of the EU-15 average and 20 percent of the U.S. average.
Presently, a substantial portion of Romanians live in poverty. The average monthly wage is around 250 euros, while only a minority earn more than the minimum wage of 89 euros. Life expectancy in Romania is 10 years lower than in Sweden.
After contracting by roughly six percent each year from 1997-1999, the Romanian economy has managed to stabilize and has recorded impressive growth since 2000. Nonetheless, Romania continues to trail behind its EU counterparts.
Economic development is merely one criterion that distinguishes EU countries from Romania. In comparison to other regions of the world, the European Union and its member-states have become synonymous with bureaucratic transparency. On the other hand, Romania has been identified as one of the most corrupt societies in the world. Transparency International ranks Romania, together with Iran and the Dominican Republic, 87th on its worldwide corruption index.
Bribery and the misuse of public funds have plagued the country, compromising the legitimacy of its institutions in the process. The expectation that Romania will be able to reduce corruption to EU levels by its proposed accession in 2007-2008 is both idealistic and unreasonable.
Much like its neighbor to the north, Bulgaria fails to meet even the most minimal of EU standards. Following an inflation rate of 311 percent and the collapse of the Lev in 1996-1997, Bulgaria, with the assistance of the IMF and World Bank, has managed to implement many daunting structural reforms. Privatization, the liquidation of state-owned enterprises and price liberalization have resulted in consistent economic growth and progress.
However, Bulgaria, with a per capita GDP of $8,200 (2004 est.), remains poor by European norms. According to a recent survey, 42 percent of all Bulgarians would immigrate to Western Europe given the opportunity.
In addition to economic disparities, the crime rate in Bulgaria exceeds that of any individual EU country. Last month, Ivan Todorov, one of Bulgaria's most prominent mafia figures, was gunned down in Sofia in broad daylight. Like many Balkan countries, Bulgaria has become prominent for its gangland feuds. The nature and the frequency of such high-profile killings demonstrate the ineptitude of the Bulgarian judiciary. Without functioning or responsive institutions, the existence of the rule of law in Bulgaria and Romania comes into question. Under such circumstances, both Bulgaria and Romania fail to meet the necessary qualifications for EU membership.
It would be mutually beneficial for Romania, Bulgaria and the EU to delay accession until these two Balkan countries reach the level of development existing in current EU member-states. There seems to be a common misconception in many Balkan countries that equates EU membership with an immediate increase in the standard of living. However, comprehensive trade liberalization, although generally resulting in lower consumer prices, will inevitably spawn higher levels of short-term unemployment in Bulgaria and Romania.
In comparison to EU member-states, the economies of these two countries are inefficient. Local businesses incapable of producing cheaper goods of higher quality or, perhaps, unable to cope with the additional costs of boundless EU regulations will be smothered by competition from current member-states. Furthermore, crime and corruption will not simply disappear upon EU accession. It would be more beneficial for Romania and Bulgaria to tackle such problems before entering the EU.
Romania and Bulgaria should postpone their bids to join the EU until both countries have prepared their economies and societies for the demands of EU membership. Unfortunately, Romania and Bulgaria, like many of their Balkan neighbors, see the EU as an end in itself; however, the EU is merely a means to an end. As we have witnessed with many of the current Eastern European member-states, reforms seem to come to an abrupt halt upon accession. This comes as no surprise.
For this reason, Brussels must exhibit extreme caution with regard to EU enlargement in the Balkans. The EU should concentrate its efforts on ensuring that candidate countries have developed to an adequate extent. For their part, countries such as Romania and Bulgaria must focus on emulating the socio-economic achievements of current member-states.
In the center of Romania's capital, Bucharest, local authorities have constructed a public clock that counts the days until 2007 - the year when the country hopes to join the EU. The clock represents the false hopes and inflated expectations of many Romanians.
Alongside this existing clock, they ought to erect another clock, one that records something much more important than Romania's EU accession date. This clock should count the days until corruption levels drop, the crime rate decreases and the average Romanian wage equals that of its EU counterparts. In fact, such clocks should be constructed in every Balkan capital.
