What shall we do about the EFTA states?

[Ciceronian]

This thread is concerned with how the EU should handle the four EFTA states, Norway, Switzerland, Liechtenstein and Iceland. I think their integration into the EU should ultimately happen, and nobody would deny that they meet all the crieteria and are culturally an integral part of Europe. However, they are too wealthy to consider joining the EU for economic benefits. How could we induce them to join? I would propose offering them full membership under the condition that they don't have to pay a penny for the first 10 or 15 years, or that they start paying after a while in small increments. They would probably find this solution more acceptable. I am especially interested in what Norwegian and Swiss posters think about this (I believe that our two most active Swiss posters, mitsho and Ovi, would support full membership), although I don't think we have any Icelanders here (if we do, then please post). Please limit the discussion to the EFTA states and how they could be induced to join the EU, and avoid discussion of other potential member candidates.

 

[holy king]

embargo if they refuse!

 

[Babbler]

Why should the EU induce more skeptical memberstates? They have enough with the UK as is.

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

Why is it so important to convince EFTA states to join the EU, save for the sake of continuity (though for Iceland that's certainly not true)?

 

[GenMarshall]

Why is it so important to convince EFTA states to join the EU, save for the sake of continuity (though for Iceland that's certainly not true)?

I guess people want the EU to be much larger than it is.

 

[Grisu]

4. Let them join of their own accord

If I understand option 1 correctly you mean: Join now or never? That would be a sure way to make sure we never join the EU

Option 2: seems unfair to all those paying members of the EU, especially since we're not talking about poor countries here. I'd think that especially the biggest contributors within the EU would heavily oppose this. What's more, the main opposition to the EU from within Switzerland is not because of the money, but because of the supposed loss of sovereignty.

Option 3: Considering that all EFTA states probably fullfill every last one of the requirements, I don't think this would be a smart move.

Option 4: my pick I'm still in favour of a slow integration into the EU (let's face it, speaking economy wise we're already de facto members). The problem will be the political integration, especially considering our political freedoms and rights that would undoubtedly be curbed a bit if we got full membership.

 

[ArneHD]

Both Norway and Iceland have little reason to join at all, even with a pay reduction. But the real obstacle for Norway and Iceland at least is CAP and CFP. Iceland is not going to relinquish it's fishing right easily, and neither is Norway. We both have good deals as it is with the EU and if we joined these could be endangered.

 

[dosed150]

well they already know the eu will let them join whenever they want, so if they ever change their mind they can join but i dont see the point in trying to entice them to join

 

[Newbunkle]

If they don't want to join, leave them alone. What their citizens want is ultimately the most important thing.

 

[Ciceronian]

I think if I hadn't included option 4, number 2 would've gotten a lot more votes.

If they don't want to join, leave them alone. What their citizens want is ultimately the most important thing.

Of course, but it's all about offering some incentives to make joining a preferable option.

Why is it so important to convince EFTA states to join the EU, save for the sake of continuity (though for Iceland that's certainly not true)?

The EU wouldn't be complete without them in the long term. For some people the EU is merely union whose merits are practical, such as guaranteeing peace, stability, and economic growth. For many others, like me, it is also an ideological construct, and should at one point encompass all of Europe. Thinking of a united and prosperous Europe just makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

If I understand option 1 correctly you mean: Join now or never? That would be a sure way to make sure we never join the EU

Option 3: Considering that all EFTA states probably fullfill every last one of the requirements, I don't think this would be a smart move.

Yes, of course 1 and 3 aren't serious options for me, but let me address 2 and 4:

Option 2: seems unfair to all those paying members of the EU, especially since we're not talking about poor countries here. I'd think that especially the biggest contributors within the EU would heavily oppose this. What's more, the main opposition to the EU from within Switzerland is not because of the money, but because of the supposed loss of sovereignty.

I can't see why anyone could seriously object (except for the Brits, who object to just about everything). Having them in the EU but not paying for a while isn't going to cause anyone any detriment, is it?

As to the supposed loss of national soveignity, the principle of making decisions at the lowest possible level guarantees that decisions concerning only Switzerland will be made only there. I appreciate that you would be loath to give up your partially direct democracy, but that's something which the EU will hopefully start imitating (or, as we say in German, "sich eine Scheibe davon abschneiden wird").

Option 4: my pick I'm still in favour of a slow integration into the EU (let's face it, speaking economy wise we're already de facto members). The problem will be the political integration, especially considering our political freedoms and rights that would undoubtedly be curbed a bit if we got full membership.

As I said, I would not support the EU interfering with your internal issues, and hope that it adopts a more direct democracy.

Both Norway and Iceland have little reason to join at all, even with a pay reduction. But the real obstacle for Norway and Iceland at least is CAP and CFP. Iceland is not going to relinquish it's fishing right easily, and neither is Norway. We both have good deals as it is with the EU and if we joined these could be endangered.

The CAP is a problem for many states, and I can see its budget being reduced in the near future. As to the CFP, I see whaling as a big problem for Iceland and Norway. They will have to conform to international whaling policies before they join.

 

[Grisu]

I think if I hadn't included option 4, number 2 would've gotten a lot more votes.

definately

I can't see why anyone could seriously object (except for the Brits, who object to just about everything). Having them in the EU but not paying for a while isn't going to cause anyone any detriment, is it?

I don't know, I just think it would be a hugely unpopular move to let some of the richest countries in europe for free, while the rest has to pay for it. I admit, though, that it would take some wind out of the sails of the 'we don't want to waste our hard-earned money on those lazy sods in brussels'-crowd.

As to the supposed loss of national soveignity, the principle of making decisions at the lowest possible level guarantees that decisions concerning only Switzerland will be made only there.

true enough, but a lot of what (especially the conservative) Swiss view a s internal issues are seen as international issues by the EU (just look at the current row over the taxing between Switzerland and the EU). So a loss of sovereignty would be inevitable (though the magnitude of it is vastly overblown by our 'friends' in the SVP).

I appreciate that you would be loath to give up your partially direct democracy, but that's something which the EU will hopefully start imitating (or, as we say in German, "sich eine Scheibe davon abschneiden wird").

As I said, I would not support the EU interfering with your internal issues, and hope that it adopts a more direct democracy.

if the EU adopts a more direct (and federalized) form of democracy, I'll be the first to raise the EU flag

as for the CAP. evil as it is, I'd be happy to exchange this for the highly protected agricultural market we have now in switzerland :cringe.

 

[Disenfrancised]

The EU wouldn't be complete without them in the long term. For some people the EU is merely union whose merits are practical, such as guaranteeing peace, stability, and economic growth. For many others, like me, it is also an ideological construct, and should at one point encompass all of Europe. Thinking of a united and prosperous Europe just makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

I really find such absolutist ideology rather disturbing - what is the goal of this superstate europe that a practical union (for peace, stability, economic growth, and all that jazz) of those who wish to join it couldn't do? Should the US unite with Canada just because they are on the same continent? I'm happy surrendering power to a trade union - cults not so much .

The EU adopting direct democracy would be nice, but cause legistlative and administrative nightmares for a population a hundred times the Swiss one

I can't see why anyone could seriously object (except for the Brits, who object to just about everything).

Wha wha wha. Seriously, Britain pulls its weight in the EU and if it left tomorrow you'd just find some other country less than 100% willing to abase itself to Europe and whine about how they are stopping europe being a magical wonderland.

The CAP is a problem for many states, and I can see its budget being reduced in the near future. As to the CFP, I see whaling as a big problem for Iceland and Norway. They will have to conform to international whaling policies before they join.

The CAP is an abomination really, and I really don't see why nations who don't have to signing up to pay for french farmers. And having them join without paying for anything would be kind of a kick in the teeth for every nation who did have to pay/heavily restructure themselves to get in.

 

[Lillefix]

This thread is concerned with how the EU should handle the three EFTA states, Norway, Switzerland and Iceland.

Correction: There are four efta-countries. I challenge everyone to guess the last one without looking at wikipedia.

 

[Ciceronian]

Yeah, I know, I forgot about Liechtenstein. I'll edit the OP.

 

[knez]

This thread is concerned with how the EU should handle the four EFTA states, Norway, Switzerland, Liechtenstein and Iceland. I think their integration into the EU should ultimately happen, and nobody would deny that they meet all the crieteria and are culturally an integral part of Europe. However, they are too wealthy to consider joining the EU for economic benefits. How could we induce them to join? I would propose offering them full membership under the condition that they don't have to pay a penny for the first 10 or 15 years, or that they start paying after a while in small increments. They would probably find this solution more acceptable. I am especially interested in what Norwegian and Swiss posters think about this (I believe that our two most active Swiss posters, mitsho and Ovi, would support full membership), although I don't think we have any Icelanders here (if we do, then please post). Please limit the discussion to the EFTA states and how they could be induced to join the EU, and avoid discussion of other potential member candidates.

burn their houses, salt their fields and rape their woman
cursed be those who don't see the light of EU

 

[gangleri2001]

burn their houses, salt their fields and rape their woman
cursed be those who don't see the light of EU

What about of changing the name of the EU for "The New Age Huns Empire"? TNAHE ROOLZ!!!!

 

[bhsup]

America should beat the EU to the punch and offer them massive inducements to accept Statehood in our glorious federation.

 

[dutchfire]

They're de facto members anyway, so I don't really care about the official status. We should focus on integrating even more in practise, but we don't really need to integrate them into the big european bureaucracy.

 

[Winner]

This thread is concerned with how the EU should handle the four EFTA states, Norway, Switzerland, Liechtenstein and Iceland. I think their integration into the EU should ultimately happen, and nobody would deny that they meet all the crieteria and are culturally an integral part of Europe. However, they are too wealthy to consider joining the EU for economic benefits. How could we induce them to join? I would propose offering them full membership under the condition that they don't have to pay a penny for the first 10 or 15 years, or that they start paying after a while in small increments. They would probably find this solution more acceptable. I am especially interested in what Norwegian and Swiss posters think about this (I believe that our two most active Swiss posters, mitsho and Ovi, would support full membership), although I don't think we have any Icelanders here (if we do, then please post). Please limit the discussion to the EFTA states and how they could be induced to join the EU, and avoid discussion of other potential member candidates.

Well, I don't think that offering them opt-outs would work, especially in financial areas. British rabate is a neverending source of controversies and I am afraid these countries would not give up these benefits.

First I think we should forget about Liechtenstein, because it is not a serious country (35,000 inhabitans, no thanks).

We should focus on getting Norway on board, since it has more to offer. I can see two main obstacles: whaling, which they're not willing to give up and the EU would have to give them an exemption, which in turn would be extremelly unpopular among other EU citizens; and oil, which is giving them a sense of independence ("we don't need the others, since we're much better off without them"). In this case, the EU should guarantee them that it won't interfere in any way with their internal social matters, that their oil-funded welfare state will remain intact.

Iceland is similar, fishing and whaling are the main problems. EU would have to convince them that it won't interfere with these matters.

Switzerland is the toughest nut to crack, because of their deep-ingrained culture of neutrality and an unique political system, which does not exist outside Switzerland. I don't think the EU can offer them something so compelling they'd quickly change their opinion. They don't want more influence, they're rich enough already and they don't really care about the rest of Europe so long as it leaves them in peace.

In all three cases, the EU should improve its image among the people. EU is often presented as a bureaucratic empire severely limiting the freedom of ordinary people. If this negative image is mitigated, the voters may be more inclined to the membership.

 

[ComradeDavo]

Iceland and Norway we have a problem with over the issue of whaling. Untill they give that up I won't be happy with them joining the E.U, and it would cause arguments with other E.U. member states.

Liechtenstein just follows Switzerland, and Switzerland is a country I would like to see join.