The limits of EU

[Mr. Blonde]

1)No countries East of or including the Brest-Litovsk Line.
Other that that,
2) any country geographically within the continent of Europe, with
3) a Democaratic system of government with more than one major party,
4) and a strong enough sense of national identity that it's not likely to break out in civil war anytime soon.
5) Also, not Switzerland. The Swiss are contitutionally neutral, and thus must abstain from joining any kind of Union, be it for military OR economic reasons.
6)These rules ought to be followed without exception.

The economics of a country must alos be brought into consideration, but no definite rules ought to be laid down concerning them. For example, Romania is due to enter the EU come the end of this year, correct? Her ( or is Romania a him?) joining the EU will do so much for that country, but there are worries about it dragging the EU economy down as a whole, no? I think the economcs must be taken case-by-case.
On that note, I am all for Romania joining the EU. I remember how extatic Mirc was about it, too.

Huh? Constitutional neutrality a problem? Tell that Austria and Sweden which are already part of the EU. Seriously, the EU is NOT a military union and that´s where neutrality would be a problem.

Edit: Aren´t Ireland and Finland neutral as well?

 

[simonnomis]

I think there should be some geographical proximity (except Australia and New Zealand which I think should be admitted already), but beyond that Im really not decided. Theoretically I agree that the EU should be an extremely broad federation of nations, stretching beyond and around the Med and further east too.

However, at this present moment I cant see how any of those countries could be accepted without causing a serious economic, security and immigration problem for the rest of the Union, especially with the cultural and religious difficulties many of those predominantly Muslim nations have with the mostly Christian EU. So maybe one day in the far distant future, but not in this generation certainly.

 

[Dionysius]

Even if you ignore the UK, that's bye-bye Greece, Ireland, and Sweden.

"Norway, Iceland, Finland and Denmark, all have a constitutional link between church and state and are far more progressive and liberal societies than some countries without such a link."
wikipedia quote.

anyway, i think monarchy and state religion of any kind should be done away with.

Edit: Aren´t Ireland and Finland neutral as well?

ireland is and hopefully will, remain neutral. we do peacekeeping, thats it.

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

Huh? Constitutional neutrality a problem? Tell that Austria and Sweden which are already part of the EU. Seriously, the EU is NOT a military union and that´s where neutrality would be a problem.

Edit: Aren´t Ireland and Finland neutral as well?

Well are the Austrian and Swedish constitutions written to say that they cannot enter war?

I don't think Ireland or Finland are consitutionally neutral, more so just currently unaligned.

 

[Dionysius]

theres a vote every so often on whether to remain neutral, anyway, so i doubt its constitutional.

 

[Gladi]

theres a vote every so often on whether to remain neutral, anyway, so i doubt its constitutional.

or you know, some countries may actually change their constitution?

 

[Mr. Blonde]

Well are the Austrian and Swedish constitutions written to say that they cannot enter war?

I don't think Ireland or Finland are consitutionally neutral, more so just currently unaligned.

Neutrality is part of the Austrian constitution and Austria can not enter a war except for self-defense nor support foreign military engaged in a war. Austrian military may join peacekeeping forces under UN mandate and does so. Where did you get the idea the EU has something of a military union?

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

Neutrality is part of the Austrian constitution and Austria can not enter a war except for self-defense nor support foreign military engaged in a war. Austrian military may join peacekeeping forces under UN mandate and does so. Where did you get the idea the EU has something of a military union?

Well first of all, I said it wasn't a military, but rather an economic union (NATO being the military equivalent, though). However, there are several instances, even in this war in Lebanon, that I have heard of "EU intervention" oand "EU forces," leading me to believe there are parts of the EU I am not familiar with.

 

[Gladi]

Well first of all, I said it wasn't a military, but rather an economic union (NATO being the military equivalent, though). However, there are several instances, even in this war in Lebanon, that I have heard of "EU intervention" oand "EU forces," leading me to believe there are parts of the EU I am not familiar with.

obligatory wiki link

deals within deals

 

[Mr. Blonde]

Thanks for that link, Gladi

To put it short: depending on the mandate of the engagement Austria may join the task force although it is neutral. I guess EU politics look sometimes confusing to the outside because it is based on consensus/ bargaining between independent nations.

 

[jameson]

I agree with you Mirc. You got the EU figured. Also sounds like I'd fit right in in Turkey. Morroco is not at all eligible IMO for EU membership, less so than Turkey since Morroco dosn't even have a meter in Europe.

On the other hand though, Europe does have a meter in Morocco (Ceuta and Melilla) .And to play devils' advocate a little more here, Morocco already has a significant degree of integration with Europe through the immigration issue, both legal and illegal.

I didn't vote for them just yet, but who knows what will happen in 50-100 years. Turkey's a far stronger candidate since they're already democratic and secular (the main criteria IMO).

I don't think precise geographical conditions are in order here really, since no-one is complaining about Turkey, Greece, Italy, Poland or the Baltic Republics being part of NATO either. There is obviously a limit to how far out you can push it though.

 

[Kyriakos]

And why exactly should Greece/Italy not be part of Nato?

Imo EU has to focus more on building up internally, rather than expanding. Theoretically in the future it will include all european countries, but probably not Russia or Turkey.

Turkey is not all in favour of joining either; the military cast is definately against it, since that would mean more state control of it. Also the issue of lack of stability in eastern Turkey would cause problems.
It would seem that western Turkey is more willing to join, and probably is more european (?) but central and eastern are still quasi-feudal and very different from the west of that country.

 

[kryszcztov]

I voted :

It must be a democracy
It must be geographically in EU (so, Turkey and Russia out : otherwise the EU has a border with both Iran and North Korea, and otherwise it's not the European Union, but something else)

Switzerland (but we really don't care if they don't join, do we ?)
Belarus (I thought the question was "someday", as Belarus isn't even a contendent today)
Ukraine (I'd still wait for a good number of years before things get stable there)

 

[jameson]

And why exactly should Greece/Italy not be part of Nato?

North Atlantic Treaty Organization.

I'm not saying that they shouldn't be, I'm just saying that we shouldn't get too hung up on the moniker.

Anyway, I interpreted Steph's question as saying which countries could be part of the EU provided they met some set of to be defined characteristics. I'm firmly opposed to letting Romania join right now because they don't meet all my standards (thoroughly democratic, uncorrupt, secular, and with some degree of a decent economy) for joining, but I'll be in favour in a heartbeat once they do.

 

[Oruc]

It must be economically strong / advanced
It must be culturally close
Switzerland
Turkey
Israel
Ukraine
Russia
Belarus*

* I didnt vote for Belarus as I didnt see it

 

[ironduck]

I don't care about geography. To me the important part of the EU is that it promotes certain ideals. Therefore democracy and culture are my criteria. With the assumption that the EU will operate properly this should lead to enrichment of new member states, so economy is not a necessary qualifier for me (only indirectly).

Therefore I include countries like Canada, but not Russia as Russia is currently moving away from democracy and not towards it. Also included Turkey (in my opinion they still have work to do, but assuming they move in their current direction), but excluded Belorussia for the same reasons..

 

[Mirc]

What I don't understand from the results of this poll is why so many people voted for Russia.

 

[Gladi]

What I don't understand from the results of this poll is why so many people voted for Russia.

From sea to sea! It is our Manifest Destiny!

 

[King Alexander]

I voted :

It must be a democracy
It must be geographically in EU (so, Turkey and Russia out : otherwise the EU has a border with both Iran and North Korea, and otherwise it's not the European Union, but something else)

Switzerland (but we really don't care if they don't join, do we ?)
Belarus (I thought the question was "someday", as Belarus isn't even a contendent today)
Ukraine (I'd still wait for a good number of years before things get stable there)

I agree with you.

As for religion, since I don't want anyone outside Europe, it'll be Christian, right? Right. I have no problem with it: what I certainly don't want is to have problems with multiple religions, a situation that ALWAYS occurs problems, one way or another(and since atheistic isn't an option...).

I also don't wish any further expansion until we agree in a common policy and until we're able to guarantee the safety of our borders, a MAJOR factor about why many of the newcomers joined and sold[/B themselves to NATO, just to be and to feel safe, since the EU is no more than a joke politically and cannot defend even it's own borders, which is really unthinkcable after all those years of it's existance. So, I don't want again to hear complaints by anyone who'll accuse newcomers of trusting NATO and not EU: it's the EU's fault for not having a common defence.---
I think, I've said it very clear. Of course for that to happen, some "players" inside Europe should start thinking about the common good of the EU and not just of their own. Unless, we admit the EU is nothing more than an economic organization who behaves like a slave to third parties and/or is unwilling to have a clear position for any reason.

 

[Brighteye]

They need to be culturally similar. We have a parliament that makes laws and regulations, so we should only let countries join who share reasonably closely our ideals and principles. Otherwise the EU will just become a giant monstrosity with no decision-making power at all, constantly stalled by endless disagreements and wasting a huge amount of money...

oh whoops. we're already there.