1
HotSpots # 3: Eastern Europe
Craig Haseler Group 1
Eastern Europe has faced my new changes and issues this HotSpots session, but I feel that there are two
that are most important and merit the most discussion. These issues are: the continued growth and improvement of
Russia as a whole, including Russia’s relatively newfound power in the form of energy and how it has been
exploited, and the progress made in the EU this session, namely the introduction of two new members, the
restructuring of the constitution, and the new German leadership of the union. Although there are many issues facing
the region, I feel these two are the most important.
Russia has experienced strong growth in recent years, mainly due to the fact that a large portion of Europe
depends on it for energy. This power has recently been abused in Belarus, where Russia actually “turned off the
tap” to Europe for a short period of time due to a tariff Belarus had imposed. Needless to say, the tariff was very
rapidly removed, and the flow restored, but not without some panic by German officials. “The Kremlin’s energy
clout and cash pile spell doom in 2007 for plans to build new pipelines bringing non-Russian gas to Europe… The
EU counts this [new pipelines] as one of its top energy priorities” (Lucas, 2006). Russia’s energy dominance over
Europe may not bode well for the Europeans, but it is a sign of increasing power for the Russians. The growing
powers in Russia also wish to secure other aspects of European commerce. Recently, a ten-year trade agreement
between Russia and the EU ran out. “It signed the present agreement at a time when decision-makers in the Kremlin
were talking of ‘a common European house’, and both sides thought that common values and European norms
could be the basis of their relationship…Many Europeans also want a new agreement, on the ground that it may help
to overcome recent difficulties with Russia”(Charlemagne, December 1 st, 2006). However, Poland is getting
increasingly annoyed at Russia, mainly due to squabbles over energy and meat exports. Poland has the power to
prevent the whole process, which may or may not be a bad idea. Compared to 1997, Russia is in a much better
situation. The country now has trade agreements with its main partners, and will quite likely enter the World Trade
Organization. This would allow it to form other agreements, with no need of help from the EU. There is also the
point that in most cases, a treaty to cover all relations between the EU and Russia is not needed anyway. Individual
agreements will do the job just as well, if not better. Finally, there is the personal opinion of Putin, the leader of
Russia. He believes that the two parties should first come to an agreement on exactly what they want to regulate, and
why it is necessary to draw up a treaty. In any case, these new agreements with Russia are sure to reflect the changes
in status Russia has gone through in the world community in the last several years. Despite all this new power
2
Russia is wielding, there is still work to be done. Partly due to the Litvinenko poisoning incident last HotSpots
session, there is more and more distrust forming of Putin. He is now working on an agreement with Belarus, hoping
to secure a better deal with the gas exports through pipelines in that country. Unfortunately, the impression he has
given the west, at least in the last few months, has been that, “…whoever did it, Mr Putin has been vilified in the
West’s media…. But his [Gaider, a former Russian Prime Minister who was also poisoned with Polonium] plight
can only add to the impression, widely held west of Minsk, that Russia is an increasingly dark place” (“Friends…”,
December 9th, 2006).
The other important issue at hand in Eastern Europe is that of the new events in the EU. To begin with,
Romania and Bulgaria have joined the union, and have brought some potential problems with them. “…the Balkan
pair differ from their predecessors. Bulgaria’s GDP per head in 2005 was only $3,480 and Romania’s $4,490against $9,240 for the eight entrants in 2004, and an EU-wide average of $29,330. And they are backward in many
other ways…”(“The new…”, January 13th, 2006). The two newcomers have a lot of catching up to do before they
are truly accepted as members of the European community. Although the entrance of these two countries has
lowered the statistical averages for things like average wealth and GDP, it has actually raised the EU’s average
growth levels significantly. One of the main reasons the EU is expanding is because Western Europe is generally
stagnating, with production (and even population in some cases) going down. Once the new countries have met
certain requirements (even more rigorous than those for entry) they will be able to join ever more selective ‘clubs’ of
EU members. “The Schengen group allows travel without border checks between 15 countries (“old” EU minus
Britain and Ireland plus non-EU Iceland and Norway). It will probably miss its autumn deadline to expand into
central Europe, citing “technical” reasons. But in 2007 Slovenia will proudly become the first of the EU’s 2004
intake to join what will become the 13 member Euro zone” (“Joining…”, 2006). The Euro is one of the most
exclusive of these ‘clubs’ and represents the most financially secure group of countries in the union. Lithuania aso
planned to join the Euro, but its inflation rate was above the qualifying level due to amazing growth in the country.
Despite this reason, it will still have to wait. Some countries plan to join the Euro at a later date, most likely after
2010, due to the time it will take to restructure the constitution. These countries include Cyprus, and perhaps Malta.
The reform of the constitution is the second major change in the EU this session. Germany has taken control of the
chancellorship of the union, and has pledged to fix the constitution, and to ‘get it right this time’. Some reforms
planned include reexamining the processes by which new members enter the EU, and to “…toughen their existing
3
membership criteria and scrutinize their applicants more carefully. Candidates will no longer be given target dates
for entry, as were Bulgaria and Romania”(“Back…”, December 23 rd, 2006). The last piece of information on the EU
that I have concerns its relations with Russia, which I have already discussed partially above. It concerns the waning
hopes Europeans might have once had about a EU spanning all of what is considered Europe by geographers.
According to the Economist, “Most Europeans do not want to let the partnership agreement go. They have not given
up hope that it could one day be used to lure the Russians into the sweet entanglements of pooled sovereignty and
EU law” (Charlemagne, December 1st, 2006).
In conclusion, I believe we can say that although much has occurred in Eastern Europe this session, most of
it deals with new evidence of changes that are part of a continuous process of change in the region. Between Russian
expansion and growth and the continuos changes in the EU, there is always new clues to this progress. As these
events continue, we will begin to see a new Eastern Europe take shape, fueled (literally) by Russia and guided by the
EU.
Wordcount: 1227