The European Union is ready to swallow the Balkan Peninsula

The European Union is ready to swallow the Balkan PeninsulaThe European Union, despite the crisis that is shaking its ranks, is going to expand its membership at the expense of the republics of the former Yugoslavia. After Slovenia and Croatia, Montenegro may soon become a member of the European Union. Belgrade received the long-awaited status of a candidate country, although Serbia was clearly made to understand that without recognition of Kosovo, the European perspective is not shining to the Serbian people.


It should be noted that in the current Balkans there is a clear line on their absorption by the Western world. It was begun in the time of Charlemagne, continued by Austria and Germany. Now Berlin, the backbone of the EU, has resurrected this course. This process is facilitated by the almost complete ousting of Russia from the Balkan Peninsula and the loss of Turkish positions after the death of the Ottoman Empire. Although in the long term, if the Ottoman Empire - 2 project is developed, Ankara may try to regain its influence in the Balkans, relying on Albanians and Bosniaks.

The eyes of Brussels and Berlin in the direction of the dismembered Yugoslavia were turned in the middle of the 1990s. But then it was only about accepting the most developed of the Yugoslav republics - Словении. All the other republics only came out of the state of war, or new armed conflicts flared up in them every now and then. As a result, Slovenia was admitted to the EU in 2004, and after three years to the euro zone.

Slovenia, until now, did not cause Brussels - the economy is stable, the population is homogeneous (83% of Slovenes). Developed industry and agriculture, mountain and sea resorts. Only now, when the crisis is overwhelming the EU, the Slovak parliament initially refused to support Greece. You can understand the National Council (Parliament) of Slovakia, the GDP per capita in the Slovak state is more than 22 thousand dollars, and in Greece - almost 31 thousand dollars. Slightly higher Slovak GDP and in Portugal, significantly more in Ireland, Spain and Italy, which are also at risk. It turns out that the poorer Slovaks are forced to save a richer neighbor. The national party, which is in opposition, even raised the question of the withdrawal of Slovakia from the European Union. It is clear that it is unlikely that Ljubljana will go for it - not the richest European country without EU funds is difficult to develop the economy, and the Slovak Republic is too closely connected with other EU countries. But to think about the conditions of its membership in the EU, about Slovakia’s beneficial European Union reform, it’s time for the Slovaks

Next in line - Croatia. In civilization terms, this republic is close to Western civilization, the Croats are mainly Catholics. The visa regime was canceled as early as 90. Initially, Croatia was planned to be admitted to the EU back in the 2005 year, but this did not happen because Zagreb had not yet extradited all war criminals. This summer in Brussels, it was decided to accept Croatia into the European Union with 1 July 2013 of the year. The country's economy, though not shining, but stronger than that of Romania, or the countries of the former Soviet Baltic.

In December 2011, a special agreement on entry into the European Union is to be signed. Then the Croatian authorities must introduce a visa regime with Ukraine and Russia - this is a condition for all EU novices, to bring some of their laws in line with European standards and the path will be completely open.

October 12 published a document - a report by Commissioner for Enlargement of the European Union, Stefan Füle, which states that all the former Yugoslav republics are considered as possible EU newbies. Although they will not take them all at once, but according to their degree of readiness.

Closer to all, after Croatia, to the reception in the EU - Montenegro. The European Commission has already made a recommendation to begin negotiations with it on joining the European Union. According to European officials, the only internal obstacle that can prevent the Montenegrins from negotiating with Brussels is the high level of corruption and organized crime in the country. Although the country can be called largely artificial: for example, almost a third of the population consider themselves to be Serbs, and not Montenegrins. The economy is weak. In addition, the country in a civilization plan is quite far from the West - its basis is Orthodoxy.

Serbia also received the status of candidate for membership in the European Union. Apparently, this success is associated with the capture and extradition of Ratko Mladic and Goran Hadzic. But in order for Belgrade to be accepted in the EU, it needs to resolve the Kosovo problem, and this is a real dead end. The Serbian leadership says that it does not recognize the independence of the region even in exchange for a pan-European future. In addition, Brussels has other questions for Belgrade. German Chancellor Angela Merkel, in the summer of 2011, already demanded that the Serbian authorities “respect the rights of minorities”. And there are several of them - Albanians from the Presevo Valley, Slavic Muslims in the Sandzak region, Hungarians from the Vojvodina Autonomous Region and Romanians. Berlin’s demand for “minority rights” is actually the beginning of a new phase in the division of Serbia.

Macedonia, like Serbia, received candidate status, but Skopje cannot join the EU due to a dispute with Greece. Greeks refuse to recognize a country called the Republic of Macedonia, because they have provinces with the same historical the name. In addition, there is a problem of Albanians and claims of Bulgaria. Therefore, Macedonia is still far from EU membership.

Worst of all things with the confederative state - Bosnia and Herzegovina. Muslims are ready to centralize, and the Head of the Republic of Serbian Milorad Dodik and Croats are ready for separation. The Croats, at a minimum, want to create a separate national unit, and a maximum - connections with Croatia. As a result, BiH cannot even apply for EU membership. That is, in Bosnia and Herzegovina, you first need to form a government-level government and conduct a series of reforms aimed at unity with the EU.

In reality, the EU leadership, facing the threat of collapse, is trying to “swallow” new countries, where there are a lot of problems - ethnic, religious, economic, social, etc. Imperial logic pushes Berlin and Brussels to absorb the Balkans.
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

19 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. cyberspace 15 October 2011 09: 04 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Hi Fursenko The author confuses Slovakia and Slovenia. For the rest, the analysis is not bad, but now the admission of new members is limited by finances, someone needs to pay the debts of Greece, Spain, Portugal, Ireland and Italy soon, and not a single Balkan country has money for this.
  2. Andrey2302
    Andrey2302 15 October 2011 09: 05 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    Once again I was convinced that the Euro Union is more a political union, not an economic one, or as it is presented, that the Euro Union is a union of an ode to the family of Europe. And do not care that in the Euro Union itself is now full of problems, and that he generally breathes ate himself and not the fact that he is living out the last days. The main thing is to attach someone else. For strategic reasons or something else. And anyway, there is the economy of 3 countries.
  3. APASUS 15 October 2011 10: 12 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    Quote: Andrey2302
    Berlin's demand for “minority rights” is actually the beginning of a new phase in the division of Serbia.

    Serbia will enter Europe only in the form of two villages! They want to destroy Serbs as a nation, and they’re coming up with new requirements for entry! And traitors like Tadic will help their country disappear ............
  4. Beil88 15 October 2011 14: 13 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    The EU is mortally choking on the swallowed Balkans ...
  5. mitrich
    mitrich 15 October 2011 15: 06 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Can someone explain from respected users why Germany is breathing so unevenly regarding the Balkans? Strange, but this attitude towards East Prussia (Kaliningrad region of the Russian Federation) is not felt (as if reconciled), but with respect to the Balkan Peninsula - definitely, yes. Maybe this is something from the field of the German subconscious?
    1. Beil88 15 October 2011 15: 40 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: mitrich
      Can someone explain from respected users why Germany is breathing so unevenly regarding the Balkans? Strange, but this attitude towards East Prussia (Kaliningrad region of the Russian Federation) is not felt (as if reconciled), but with respect to the Balkan Peninsula - definitely, yes. Maybe this is something from the field of the German subconscious?


      Please. Who owns the Balkans, owns Europe, this is the geopolitical heart of the European continent. Germany is the natural leader of Europe, it strives for hegemony and for this it needs control over the Balkans.
      In general, there are three places like the Balkans in Eurasia: the Balkans, the Caucasus and the Hindu Kush. Under the USSR, we clearly controlled one zone - the Caucasus, the Balkans were less reliable (due to the ambitions of the Yugoslav communists) and had a huge influence in Afghanistan, i.e., the Soviet Union controlled the most important zones of the continent and, in fact, owned Eurasia.
      If Russia were as weakened as fraternal Serbia, then be sure that we would have been presented for East Prussia a long time ago.
      1. mitrich
        mitrich 15 October 2011 15: 48 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Beil88,
        Is logical. The Balkans and the Caucasus geographically look like a gate. Why Hindu Kush? After all, the Great Silk Road has long been in the past. What did we control while in Afghanistan?
        1. Beil88 15 October 2011 16: 10 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          Ginudukush is by analogy - the heart of Asia, its middle. If you have your army there, then you can strike in any direction - to China, to India-Iran, to Russia. Again, through the Hindu Kush (Afghanistan) is the most convenient and shortest trade and economic path between the various parts of Asia.
          Before the invasion of Afghanistan, the USSR enjoyed serious authority there, and after the war we are not always remembered there as occupiers and enemies, but also as allies and friends. Personally, I am not a supporter of the opinion that Soviet Russia lost the war in Afghanistan. Sooner or later, we are destined to return there, but for sure it will be a different visit than in 1979, more peaceful and positively colored.
          The problem is that all these points, the Balkans, the Caucasus, the Hindu Kush, are the faults of cultures and the joints of the influences of various civilizations - Western, Eastern and Northern, which are constantly fighting for the sole possession of these territories.
          1. mitrich
            mitrich 15 October 2011 16: 34 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            Beil88,
            I carefully read your opinion on the Hindu Kush. No, if you poke the card, then you are right - the heart. Only now, in fact, the heart is not even a kidney and not a bladder.
            In the reality:
            - In order to strike India, you also need to conquer Pakistan, and there, too, getting caught is not a problem. China - it is logical if you slide your finger on the map, but how do you imagine the invasion through the 7th peaks and snow passes? USSR dash Central Asia dash Russia - in my opinion, is also a matter of expediency;
            - Afghanistan is beneficial in terms of trans-border trade, but ... the political and military-political situation in the country does not contribute to this. Do you know that after the events of 2009, NATO troops receive 90% of the cargo from the North, i.e. in the same way as OKSVA received them, and not through Pakistan;
            - The Americans understood the trap in Afghanistan, so they are looking for ways out of the situation, and therefore they are courting Uzbeks and Tajiks who are ready to abandon Bagram base even tomorrow;
            - I agree that the SA did not lose the war in Afghanistan. If we exclude cases of pogroms of transport convoys, then during the 9 years of the war, the SA out of 4 clashes with the Mujahideen suffered only ... 200 defeats.
            Thank you.
            1. Beil88 15 October 2011 17: 10 New
              • 3
              • 0
              +3
              Quote: mitrich
              Beil88, I carefully read your opinion on the Hindu Kush. No, if you poke the card, then you are right - the heart. Only here, in fact, the heart is not even a kidney and a bladder. In reality: - in order to strike India, you also need to conquer Pakistan, and there it’s not a problem to get stuck there either. China - it is logical if you slide your finger on the map, but how do you imagine the invasion through the 7th peaks and snow passes? USSR dash Central Asia dash Russia - in my opinion, is also a matter of expediency; - Afghanistan is beneficial in terms of trans-border trade, BUT ... the political and military-political situation in the country does not contribute to this. Do you know that after the events of 2009, NATO troops receive 90% of the cargo from the North, i.e. in the same way as OKSVA received them, and not through Pakistan; - the Americans realized what trap they had in Afghanistan, therefore they are looking for ways out of the situation, therefore they are now courting Uzbeks and Tajiks who are ready to abandon Bagram base at least tomorrow; - I agree that the SA did not lose the war in Afghanistan. If we exclude cases of pogroms of transport convoys, then over the 9 years of the war, the SA out of 4 clashes with the Mujahideen suffered only ... 200 defeats. Thank you.


              India: These two countries border directly.
              China: Fucking on it is also quite realistic - a bit bypassing to the north, through Central Asia, but even without a military invasion, Afghanistan borders on China's very problematic regions - Tibet and Xinjiang.
              Russia: Central Asia is not a hindrance for a strong army targeting Russia. Remember how the annexation of this region to the Russian Empire was going on: we did not wait for England to "digest" Afghanistan, go north, and preempt it so as not to fight with the Basmachi near Orenburg.
              I already wrote about the struggle of various forces for all these territories, in the short periods of peace these lands flourished, taking advantage of their advantageous position.
              To claim that the Americans are trapped, we must first clarify the question - why did they even climbed there?
              - Fight al Qaeda? No, this is nonsense.
              - "Giving" the benefits of democracy to another country on the planet? Also no,
              they are not dad carlo.
              - Fight drugs? After they appear there, the level of production
              heroin rose 90%.
              - Take a strategic foothold for a possible strike to the North? Yes! Then their behavior there becomes clear: they are sitting at their bases, they’re not particularly climbing anywhere, sometimes they will bomb too annoying savages from a neighboring village and then breathe further. They stimulate the cultivation and production of poison and its transportation to the north, into hostile Russia, and they are turning our blood off quietly, fostering all sorts of thugs and oranzhoidy in the Central Asian republics, which we are trying to return to our sphere of influence. Losses? 10 people a month? This is nonsense for such a military machine and such a state.
              1. mitrich
                mitrich 15 October 2011 17: 41 New
                • 1
                • 0
                +1
                Beil88,
                About India - Ueli. I had to see a map. +1 to you.
                However, you must admit that it is ridiculous to invade the army through this scribble into such great states as India and China.
                Central Asia: what should be the army, in its quantitative and qualitative composition, in order to invade the SA?
                Note: NATO contingent is about 120 000, Americans - 85 000, combat units - 32 000 soldiers and officers.
                I repeat again, my colleague, that Afghanistan is valuable for its trans-border transportation, which has been irrelevant for more than 30 years. NOT RELEVANT.
                1. Beil88 16 October 2011 07: 29 New
                  • 1
                  • 0
                  +1
                  Quote: mitrich
                  About India - Ueli. I had to see a map. +1 to you.


                  I didn’t set myself such a task :) It's just nice to talk with you.

                  Quote: mitrich
                  However, you must admit that it is ridiculous to invade the army through this scribble into such great states as India and China.


                  In general, I agree, the strategic scope is very small. Storming directly the mountain peaks for an attack on China is of course absurd, but sending saboteurs and agents of influence into the same Xinjiang Uyghur Auton. the area, as well as in Tibet is very possible. Yes, and the borders between the three countries: Afghanistan, Pakistan and India, are very variable and unsteady, many tribes do not recognize them, there is the problem of the states of Jammu and Kashmir, therefore, strictly looking at the political map it is difficult to argue about the invalidity of Afghanistan as a bridgehead. Afghan is a knot in which the interests of different forces of the region converge, a pain point. No wonder the Pindos climbed there.

                  CA is just the road to us, soft butter for the NATO / Islamic knife. Fighting the armies of the Central Asian states themselves (if they suddenly decide to resist in the event of a hypothetical invasion of the Americans) will require much less troops that the Americans are currently holding in Afghanistan - an incomparable technical level. A more real threat is the Islamists, fed by the same States. There are many of them, they are well armed, they are supported by our enemies. The Central Asian armed forces themselves will not be able to successfully fight with them - we will have to. And the further we meet them from our borders, the better.

                  Quote: mitrich
                  I repeat again, my colleague, that Afghanistan is valuable for its trans-border transportation, which has been irrelevant for more than 30 years. NOT RELEVANT.


                  I totally agree. Here we are now transboundary and they are shooting the gerych on an industrial scale.
      2. cVM
        cVM 15 October 2011 16: 21 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Germany is the natural leader of Europe, it strives for hegemony and for this it needs control over the Balkans

        I remind you that the policy of the Federal Republic of Germany since 1980 has always been neutral, there is no need for hegemony
        1. Beil88 15 October 2011 16: 29 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Quote: cVM
          I remind you that the policy of the Federal Republic of Germany since 1980 has always been neutral, there is no need for hegemony


          The actions of the German leadership, as well as the nature of the relations between our leadership and the German, refute the officially established position. How is this no reason? Any state wants to be stronger, richer and more powerful than it is at the moment. Another thing is that there is not always an opportunity for this.
  6. Mahamont
    Mahamont 15 October 2011 17: 43 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    "Whoever owns the Balkans, he owns Europe, and who owns Europe, he owns the World." Bismarck

    The British geopolitician Halford Mackinder stated at the beginning of the 20th century: "the one who rules Central Asia rules Eurasia, and the one who rules Eurasia rules the world." The security of not only regional players, but also their closest neighbors will depend on how Eurasia develops in the near future.
  7. Kyrgyz 15 October 2011 20: 36 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    the more it shoves, the faster it bursts, and so the essence of the EU what is it? for what? as the common values ​​of the Albanian and Austrian do not fit, it’s how the Uzbeks of the Latvians rallied Russia already turns out
    1. Beil88 16 October 2011 07: 34 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: Kyrgyz
      as the common values ​​of the Albanian and Austrian do not fit, it’s how the Uzbeks of the Latvians rallied Russia already turns out


      Our unity of different peoples was gradual, more natural and logical. The EU is a patchwork "empire."
  8. akimochka
    akimochka 15 October 2011 21: 30 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    let him swallow something else better.
    1. Beil88 16 October 2011 07: 32 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: akimochka
      let him swallow something else better.


      Yeah! In Europe, it is fashionable and tolerant!))