Poland's fairly brilliant EU negotiating strategy
 

"We are only demanding one thing, that we get back what was taken from us," Prime Minister Jaroslaw Kaczynski told national radio this week.

"If Poland had not had to live through the years of 1939-45, Poland would today be looking at the demographics of a country of 66 million."


I'd seriously laugh my cock off if they bring that argument into play during the summit especially with merkel as president, their point on majority voting power has merit, but mentioning the war let alone bringing in 'imaginary populations'!

Re: Poland's fairly brilliant EU negotiating strategy
 

Why did we let them in in the first place?

Re: Poland's fairly brilliant EU negotiating strategy
 

I say if we are going to bring in the majority voting power system the EU contribution of a nation should also be calculated by the population of a nation.
The Dutch are going to be fecked over again. With a population of 16 million the Dutch are going to get very few votes, whilst still paying a great deal of contribution to the EU.

Re: Poland's fairly brilliant EU negotiating strategy
 

Wanted our shoes back! :p

Re: Poland's fairly brilliant EU negotiating strategy
 

made me laugh a bit but then i saw they wasnt joking :o well what did it take for them to surrender -39? 3 days? think they lost the right to be cocky by now, bah

Re: Poland's fairly brilliant EU negotiating strategy
 

It was either them or the Turks.

Re: Poland's fairly brilliant EU negotiating strategy
 

Alessio is disappointed :(

Re: Poland's fairly brilliant EU negotiating strategy
 

we should have gotten the constitution first, then let the oothers join. It would have been hard enough to find an agreement with 15 members, with 27 its close to impossible.
we should use the population figures before WW1, problem solved.

Re: Poland's fairly brilliant EU negotiating strategy
 

Do you support the EU Constitution?

Re: Poland's fairly brilliant EU negotiating strategy
 

the genral idea, yes. i know too little about the details though.

Re: Poland's fairly brilliant EU negotiating strategy
 

wu_trax shows his support for big capital!

Re: Poland's fairly brilliant EU negotiating strategy
 

so basically they've to put off that decision until a few years time, when the current prime minister of poland will no longer be in office

Re: Poland's fairly brilliant EU negotiating strategy
 

basically, yes.

Or if he uses WWII, then we might as well tell them that most of their intelligentsia was murdered. That the intellegentsia after that were trained and educated by the soviets and that the real Polish culture, self-consciousness and science was hence mutilated.
Therefor they should be entitled to less votes, since they are not fully recovered or developed.

I wonder how he would react.

Re: Poland's fairly brilliant EU negotiating strategy
 

That was hardly imminent last time I checked. Various economic actors almost certainly wouldn't have wanted enlargement to have been delayed by x years waiting for everyone else to stop fagging around.

Besides, the EU constitution (or at least, what some are proposing) is so dependant/involved with economics that to introduce it before changing the makeup of the EU so radically (enlargement is eventually going to end up adding what, 100-200 million people?)

Re: Poland's fairly brilliant EU negotiating strategy
 

In my eyes enlargement is pretty much done and over with. The former Yugoslavian states (Croatia, Macedonia, Bosnia, Montenegro, even Serbia) will join eventually, as will the Ukraine if it chooses the West over Russia. But I don't think that Turkey will join the EU within the next 30 years.

Re: Poland's fairly brilliant EU negotiating strategy
 

If it gets over its human rights record, why not?

I would like to see Norway join at some point, and probably switzerland.

I am a pro European. I believe in the idea and I believe that it can only eventually do good. We have two world wars to teach us the lesson that we should fight at the diplomacy tables rather than on the battlefields.

As one we could also be one of the strongest, most advanced alliance in the world.

That rivalling the middle east, the asian countries and the americas.

Yet we are still being divided. It is down to countries like Britain, Poland, France, Germany who think they are bigger than Europe. No country is bigger than Europe. We are one. We should really become the united states of europe, give up our nationality and become just European. Everyone should be forced to learn at least three european languages and then we will all live happily ever after.

I hate Britain at the moment. I think I want to move to Spain.

Re: Poland's fairly brilliant EU negotiating strategy
 

Duh! they're Muslims!

A you crazy, do you really want to dilute our pure European bloodline? :rolleyes:

Re: Poland's fairly brilliant EU negotiating strategy
 

GET YER DIRTY HANDS OFF OUR OIL!!! :( :(

Re: Poland's fairly brilliant EU negotiating strategy
 

switzerland will NEVER join,y have it better now than they ever could under the EU

Re: Poland's fairly brilliant EU negotiating strategy
 

There's numerous cultural differences, as well as the spectre of religion. Also, Turkish immigrants are far more widespread in Continental Europe than in the UK - with the accompanying problems that immigration can cause.

Ditto, but they're doing pretty well out of EFTA.

Likewise.

Re: Poland's fairly brilliant EU negotiating strategy
 

Cant see why we should bother joining the union, and i cant see why they let poor eastblockcountries inn either :|

Re: Poland's fairly brilliant EU negotiating strategy
 

Would it be tasteless of germany to say "Ok, you get your 18% of votes back if we get our 10% aswell"?

Re: Poland's fairly brilliant EU negotiating strategy
 

What has 'cultural differences' got to do with the EU exactly? - or is that some vague euphemism for saying the turks would be all dark, islamic and thieving - which is fine, the eastern europeans are all pale, catholic (bastards!) and thieving.

Personally i say let them in, let them all in; just don't pay them anything from taxes. I realise the two aren't connected, but it seems a tad odd to allow Turkey into the council of europe and thereby allow its judges to adjudicate on matters that affect us but to throw up some 'omg barbarians' type argument when considering the EU.

I don't agree with the type of secular government that France has (too statist), but its worth noting that if Turkey joined it'd be little different in practise. Turkey is already a member of NATO, its hardly like they're the enemy.

Re: Poland's fairly brilliant EU negotiating strategy
 

I swear I'm the only human being on the surface of the planet who's pro-people :(

Re: Poland's fairly brilliant EU negotiating strategy
 

Well, I see it as a measure or incentive for the countries under the influence of this "Europe" to stick to certain rules, e.g. human rights wise (except Britain, it seems), trying to lower corruption. On the other hand it unites countries with the single currency, the free trade zone and Schengen.

I think getting countries closer and tearing down borders is pretty cool. I'd like to see the EU expand beyond Europe's borders, too.

Re: Poland's fairly brilliant EU negotiating strategy
 

Ah, the single current, washing us all down into the sea of European mediocrity.

Re: Poland's fairly brilliant EU negotiating strategy
 

The problem is that France especially sticks to the rules far less than Britain does. Even before BSE, for example, our health and safety measures were far superior to theirs.

I think you have to be careful when alluding to some sort of 'super state'. Most governments have enough problems with their own country, let alone 30-40 odd. The cultural and economic differences are still too different to have anything more than very broad ideals passed down without breaking everything. The UK's economy is still doing better than most of the rest of Europe - hence the strong £ - so why would we want to join the euro to screw it up?

Re: Poland's fairly brilliant EU negotiating strategy
 

Economically speaking, the "poor east block countries" fit better in the European union than a large share of it's current members (let's say Italy here). So, if we put it down to pure economical thinking, letting in "poor east block countries" which already have a large share of their foreign trade (a larger share here than a multitude of EU countries have) with the excisting Eurozone, have steadily rising growth prospects, low budged decifits, and low inflation rates (in compared to their growths, that is), they're all profit for us - it's perhaps them who will have to take a knock or two financially for the initial descision to join the European Union's common market, which is frankly the meaningful part of the EU. The rest of the integration, constitution and so on, and for the meaningful part the integration of financial markets, are just tidbits to support the Eurozone. It's not like Europe was, or unlikely ever will, be integrated into a single "nation" for what it's worth - there are too many too highly nationalistic parties involved, so it'll likely remain as a primarily monetary and legistlative union for the next couple of centuries.

Hell, Poland's better for the European Union than the Uk. What you all should be asking, is who the **** let the inflatory, debt-ridden, mafia-infested maccaroni boys join anyways.

Cultural yes, economic No. The evidence points out that they fit in better than a lot of others. While editing this, I can as well refer to something. (Paul De Grauwe, Economics of Monetary Union, citing European Comission's European Economy as source). Rough estimates dug from a table.

Exports goods/services towards EU-15 as percentage of GDP (2003):

Italy: 11%
UK: Less than 10%
Spain: 13-14%
Netherlands: 32%

Estonia: 43%
Poland: 23%
Slovakia: 53%

The correlation of demand and supply shocks isn't very different for the accession countries. Again, Italy for example represents a total opposite.

Government Budget Decifits (2003):

Italy: 6.5%
France: 4.1%
Spain: 4.5%
Netherlands: 1.8%

Estonia: -3.2%
Slovakia: 3.8%
Poland: 4.1%


Government Debts 1996, as percentage of GDP:

Belgium: 130%
Italy: 122%
Spain: 68%
Netherlands: 67%

Same for the accession countries at 2003:

Estonia: 5%
Poland: 45%
Slovakia: 42%


One more edit, excuse me.

Seriously. Who wants to let those faggots with their cheap (through better resources for the case) agricultural products enter the EU? Bloody hell, whatever you do, don't let them get past the tariffs that protect our dear Finnish pigfarmers!

Re: Poland's fairly brilliant EU negotiating strategy
 

The French. When in doubt, always blame the French.

Re: Poland's fairly brilliant EU negotiating strategy
 

I always thought the point of including countries with lesser economies was to increase the single market, and thus our bargaining power against the US, China and India.

Poland's Prime Minister and President annoy me. Not just because I doubt the wisdom of having brothers in charge of a country, but because of their populist appeal and tactics. I was reading a statement by a Polish liberal MEP. He basically said the EU was formed to take us beyond the old nationalist antagonisms and therefore the "payback for the dead Poles" statement is ridiculous. Basically everyone's pissed off at Poland, even the normally mild mannered Nordic countries. There's even talk of ostracising Poland.

Oh and one of the brothers banned some gay parade in the capital. The gay lobby (made up of quite a few MEPs) is now berating Poland for that very reason. One British MEP was saying that he got into politics to fight Thatcher's anti-gay sentiment, and now he's as active as he once was, but because of the Kacyinski brothers this time.

Re: Poland's fairly brilliant EU negotiating strategy
 

Erm...it's the entire underpinning of the project?

And it's not a euphemism, it's fairly explicit prejudice. Morocco applied to join the EU (admittedly prior to the economic criteria were established) and they were denied because they were not a European country. OK, you could argue that's geographical prejudice, not racial but in this case it amounts to the same results.

Re: Poland's fairly brilliant EU negotiating strategy
 

Really? Can you tell me which EU treaty deals with the 'underpinning' of cultural differences to make the EU 'the same'? Turkey sees itself as European, who am i to tell them different. You were the last person id think would exclude for such petty reasons, presumably when the revolution comes you'll similarly exclude based on 'race'? Because obviously only proles of the right classohsorryimeanrace would be allowed in.


edit

do you think muslims in the uk are english/welsh/scottish/nirish/british? and from that european? Theres really little point in accepting any of your M-L opinions as being sincere if you're willing to prejudice on race for either an individual or a nation. At least yahwe is consistent with his class beliefs (and not racially biased with them afaik), you seem to be saying all the working classes should rise up against the bourgeoise for a better world, but right now (or forever) the racially unfit proletariat aren't welcome in 'the special club'. Its hypocrisy.

Re: Poland's fairly brilliant EU negotiating strategy
 

Don't be dim. I'm not the person who decides which countries are "allowed" in the EU, I'm just trying to explain the reasons why things stand as they are. I don't support the EU's existence in the first place, let alone give a shit who they let into their little club.

My point was merely that trying to pretend that the European Union project generally isn't founded on a basis of shared history, culture, (and a geography obviously) etc is utterly naive.

A fundamental pre-requisite of any movement towards more just international politics would be the abolition of any "special clubs", not simply increasing the membership of the club by the inclusion of Turkey or whichever specific countries are on your love list. As Billy Bragg has put it;
"Freedom is merely privilege extended Unless enjoyed by one and all"

Re: Poland's fairly brilliant EU negotiating strategy
 

I don't think you are asking me, but I'm going to throw in my opinion too. I think the whole nationalism -issue has never caused much more than grief. Generating regionalistic or nationalistic groups has rarely lead to anything else except for racism and xenophobia towards the people outside the group. In some cases, these beliefs are stronger (ie. the urban legend of the first black person in the Finnish countryside being driven off by a local with a tractor for being a troll), in some cases weaker. The same applies to classes. Once you register yourself as a member of given class, you automatically differentiate yourself from other classes - making yourself different, most of the time, "superior" in some aspect. The history is full of bloodshed, torture, and slavery bound to class, race, place of birth, or the surname of your parents. This is all pointless, useless, and has never lead to anything good on grand scale (Granted, I am in a "debt" to the Christian society at large for murdering, raping, stealing, and nearly genociding different "lesser" cultural groups in order to gather wealth to Europe).

While I am by definition European, Atheist, Finnish, White, Male, Lower class, (and a number of other things), and while how my life has been so far obviously creates prejudice to me, and affects what I do, excessive self-generated prejudice is just childish. I bet I'll be soon nailed as a hypocrite or with some other more creative term.

What comes to the expansion of the Union, in principle, I don't really mind much about the political integration - while it has it's benefits, the main part the political integration needs to reach is agreements on market laws. What goes to the reminder, nations should be allowed to join the Eurozone (which is, in my opinion, the main point of the whole Union, taking into account it's history) when the suitable economical criteria are met. If the criteria isn't met, there's little sense for the applicant and the Eurozone at large to do it. In the future, though, as "economic globalization" proceeds, it gets more and more sensible to create free-trade areas and even more/expand existing monetary unions, and it's really of benefit to us all.

The reasons that prevent countries like Morocco and Ukraine from ever, or at least in the near future, becoming members of the Union aren't primarily because they aren't suitable, but because they're seen as a threat. The market zone has it's requirements, and accepting a country like Ukraine would again cause problems to for example the agricultural industry in countries like Finland. While there's, in practise, little sense in continuing agriculture (in form of the mentioned pigfarmers and other), because other countries are by natural resources able to do it more effectively, the political concensus requires some naive form of "self-sustainability" (the same thing that applies to the pathetic thing they call the Finnish Defence Forces, which could easily be replaced and made more credible by investing 5 years worth military budged into nuclear warheads and obsoleting the conscript system at large), which is really the bottom line here.

It's not the economic profits and sustainability. It's the sight that allowing countries like Morocco and Ukraine generates a "security risk", and while they won't directly admit to it, they'd harm certain parts of the economy that are for some reason required to be kept intact. Go figure.

Re: Poland's fairly brilliant EU negotiating strategy
 

I disagree the EU treaties that exist don't seem to support a predominant 'cultural' theme. That said its utter lunacy and a complete bastardisation of history to say Turkey wasn't as involved in 'european' history from the time of the romans infact. If you take into consideration things like the Byzantine/eastern roman empire they've always been 'involved' in what goes on in europe. They've done far more than the likes of latvia.



Not on my love list, its their sense of self. The turks see themselves as European why would i wish to challenge their sense of self? If they want to join the EU let them. French Guiana is 'european' in south america. If Morocco sees itself as European they should be allowed to join, if algerian history had been different it isn't inconceivable that they might want to join, and both countries after all have shared history with europe.

I'm neither seeking to force other nations to join nor to stay away. Its up to them.

Re: Poland's fairly brilliant EU negotiating strategy
 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6245112.stm I like the last paragraph, quite obviously its 1939 all over again :rolleyes:

Re: Poland's fairly brilliant EU negotiating strategy
 

The EU treaties may not (although the Copenhagen treaty does mention the prerequisites for any European country wishing to join). But I'd suggest that it's an assumed - in the same way that the UN charter presumes you're not from Mars, say.

Anyway I was referring to the historical development of the project. This is not a project which was based primarily on economic grounds - France and Germany didn't one day decide they'd achieve greater synergy in their coal and steel markets if they moved to integration - it was a specific response to the conflicts in their recent past and was an attempt to make war impossible. I'd argue that there was a strong element of "shared cultural history" which is taken to be the common values of the European nations. When early speakers mentioned a family of European nations and collective desitnies I'd suggest these terms were not chosen by accident.

You might of course find this a disgusting basis for forming a political union, but that doesn't necessarily change anything.
There's not much of the world that hasn't been involved with European's thanks to the colourful foriegn policies persued by some of our ancestors. I mean, if you include states who speak a European language / were occupied by Europeans / are the descendents of European colonists then I guess China is pretty much the sizeable region you could exclude.

I will repeat, I do not care which countries join the EU, but I would advise those wishing to analyse the situation rationally (especially re : Turkish membership) consider the merest possibility that cultural/racist attitudes contribute beyond the familiar arguments on human rights or economics.

Additionally, I would say that I doubt how Moroccan's (or Turks, or whomever) feel about "being European" has much to do with the desire by some in joining the EU. Certainly from the little I've read, it's much more motivated by economics (which personally I'd prefer as a motivator).

Re: Poland's fairly brilliant EU negotiating strategy
 

I do consider it (rationally), if you think the one of the fundamental reasons for starting the EU project was an end to bigotry between certain nations, its only 'right' to address the same argument when dealing with new applicants. I'm not hiding from the fact bigotry is probably a reason for not wanting the turks in (it was after all the reason i asked if 'cultural differences' was a euphemism).



Oh i agree, and once they join they'll bring up the same 'cultural differences' argument about anyone else that wants to join - just like everyother 'new' EU member has. When that happens ill obviously argue for that 'other nation' joining as well.