2. Growing inter-imperialist contradictions in the EU
The KKE was right in anticipating the growing inter-imperialist contradictions within the EU. On the contrary, modern right- and left-wing opportunist forces aligned with the bourgeois liberal and socialdemocratic system management forces in motivating the necessity, the cohesiveness and finally the usefulness of the EU as a common one-way road for capital and labour. Growing contradictions as regards the cohesiveness of the EU became recently evident in the following way:
The “Constitutional Treaty” has not been approved by the referenda in France and the Netherlands continuing the tendency of some other negative results in previous referenda on the approval of Treaties (negative result of a referendum in Switzerland and of two referenda in Norway on the accession to the EU, a negative result of the referendum on the ratification of the euro in Sweden and Denmark. Those two countries finally do not belong to the euro zone, as well as Britain. The first referendum in Ireland on the ratification of the Nice Treaty referring to the last enlargement of the EU has been negative too).
Contradictions are growing too as regards EU fiscalities: contradictions on the amounts of the communitary budget (mainly Germany’s negative attitude towards an increase of its percentage on the Gross Product in the EU), on the utilization of communitary money (Britain being the leading country in demanding the decrease of the aid for agricultural production), on the management of fiscal deficits (primary deficit and public debt) etc.
Contradictions are sharpening as well in the preparations of a common European tax policy for enterprise, the tendency being an even greater participation of taxes on merchandise (indirect taxes) being paid by the majority, as well as a reduction of taxes for big capitalists (direct taxes on enterprises or people having large income).
Contradictions are growing as regards the relation between fiscal and monetary policy (known as the “Stability and Development Pact”). Because of the uneven development the same mixture isn’t fit for each member-state of the EU for the same year or the same period of time. Characteristic for this is the fact that the euro brought for some member-states much bigger deficits (e.g. Greece, Portugal, Italy), a much higher cost of living, but as well a worsening of their competitiveness (Greece, Portugal, but Italy as well) based on the criteria and the indicators of capitalist production.
Growing contradictions, because of the member-states’ common obligation to accelerate the liberation of energy markets, transport markets etc. This “liberation” takes place under circumstances of tough competition, of political manoeuvres aiming at exceptions or privileged relations, which would help strong state monopolies, like the EDF of France, to obtain or to keep shares. The reduction of state subsidies in sectors of strategic importance, like air transport increases contradictions too (for instance in Greece).
The last “enlargement” of the EU made internal contradictions more uneven and acute. EU’s hard core aimed at the accession of new members, mainly in Central and Eastern Europe (some of them, e.g. Poland and the Tschech Republic reinforce Germany’s alliances). At the same time the aggravation of contradictions as regards the monetary stability, the mobility of labour force, the level of unemployment and the management of competition in agricultural production is growing faster.
The perspective of a coming enlargement of the EU intensifies its internal contradictions. Right in the middle of these contradictions stands the beginning of the accession procedure of Turkey.
The eternal conflict between the American-British alliance with France and off and on with the French-German alliance as well, is reflected in this question. The line followed by the British presidency and the declarations of the representative of the State Department, that the USA had gained a reliable ally within the EU are quite characteristic in this respect.
Turkey is a rising capitalist power with internal preconditions for this kind of development (big population), but external as well (strategic position on the cross-road of three continents, very suitable for the building of European roads and energy networks, transport etc.). Because of its strategic position it has created a military-political alliance with the USA of lasting importance for the control of the Middle East, the borders of Russia, the Black Sea zone, the connection with other rising capitalist powers, like India etc. The continuous upgrading of its military forces (recently of its forces at sea too), its relative backwardness and especially its uneven domestic capitalist development, its traditional stream of migrants towards Germany, its significant staying behind as regards the assimilation of the Kurdish population, the fact too that the Turkish state remains behind in modernizing itself according to the modern structures and functions of a developed capitalist European state, all these factors together worsen its relations with the majority of the EU member-states (mainly with Germany, Austria, France etc.).
There is no doubt that the relations of Turkey with the EU will not be just positive, in spite of the fact that the accession procedure has started. On the contrary, a new phase of sharpened contradictions will be fed by them.
In the enlargement perspective of the EU through the participation of Bulgaria and Rumania there is an element of compensation of certain consequences of Turkey’s accession. It bears the feature of a more direct expansion of the EU’s hard core influence on the Balkans towards the Turkish borders, towards states with mineral wealth, like Rumania. This enlargement perspective is part of the EU’s plans to connect itself more favourably with the markets of Russia, Belarus, Moldavia, the Ukraine etc.
The “Constitutional Treaty” has not been approved by the referenda in France and the Netherlands continuing the tendency of some other negative results in previous referenda on the approval of Treaties (negative result of a referendum in Switzerland and of two referenda in Norway on the accession to the EU, a negative result of the referendum on the ratification of the euro in Sweden and Denmark. Those two countries finally do not belong to the euro zone, as well as Britain. The first referendum in Ireland on the ratification of the Nice Treaty referring to the last enlargement of the EU has been negative too).
Contradictions are growing too as regards EU fiscalities: contradictions on the amounts of the communitary budget (mainly Germany’s negative attitude towards an increase of its percentage on the Gross Product in the EU), on the utilization of communitary money (Britain being the leading country in demanding the decrease of the aid for agricultural production), on the management of fiscal deficits (primary deficit and public debt) etc.
Contradictions are sharpening as well in the preparations of a common European tax policy for enterprise, the tendency being an even greater participation of taxes on merchandise (indirect taxes) being paid by the majority, as well as a reduction of taxes for big capitalists (direct taxes on enterprises or people having large income).
Contradictions are growing as regards the relation between fiscal and monetary policy (known as the “Stability and Development Pact”). Because of the uneven development the same mixture isn’t fit for each member-state of the EU for the same year or the same period of time. Characteristic for this is the fact that the euro brought for some member-states much bigger deficits (e.g. Greece, Portugal, Italy), a much higher cost of living, but as well a worsening of their competitiveness (Greece, Portugal, but Italy as well) based on the criteria and the indicators of capitalist production.
Growing contradictions, because of the member-states’ common obligation to accelerate the liberation of energy markets, transport markets etc. This “liberation” takes place under circumstances of tough competition, of political manoeuvres aiming at exceptions or privileged relations, which would help strong state monopolies, like the EDF of France, to obtain or to keep shares. The reduction of state subsidies in sectors of strategic importance, like air transport increases contradictions too (for instance in Greece).
The last “enlargement” of the EU made internal contradictions more uneven and acute. EU’s hard core aimed at the accession of new members, mainly in Central and Eastern Europe (some of them, e.g. Poland and the Tschech Republic reinforce Germany’s alliances). At the same time the aggravation of contradictions as regards the monetary stability, the mobility of labour force, the level of unemployment and the management of competition in agricultural production is growing faster.
The perspective of a coming enlargement of the EU intensifies its internal contradictions. Right in the middle of these contradictions stands the beginning of the accession procedure of Turkey.
The eternal conflict between the American-British alliance with France and off and on with the French-German alliance as well, is reflected in this question. The line followed by the British presidency and the declarations of the representative of the State Department, that the USA had gained a reliable ally within the EU are quite characteristic in this respect.
Turkey is a rising capitalist power with internal preconditions for this kind of development (big population), but external as well (strategic position on the cross-road of three continents, very suitable for the building of European roads and energy networks, transport etc.). Because of its strategic position it has created a military-political alliance with the USA of lasting importance for the control of the Middle East, the borders of Russia, the Black Sea zone, the connection with other rising capitalist powers, like India etc. The continuous upgrading of its military forces (recently of its forces at sea too), its relative backwardness and especially its uneven domestic capitalist development, its traditional stream of migrants towards Germany, its significant staying behind as regards the assimilation of the Kurdish population, the fact too that the Turkish state remains behind in modernizing itself according to the modern structures and functions of a developed capitalist European state, all these factors together worsen its relations with the majority of the EU member-states (mainly with Germany, Austria, France etc.).
There is no doubt that the relations of Turkey with the EU will not be just positive, in spite of the fact that the accession procedure has started. On the contrary, a new phase of sharpened contradictions will be fed by them.
In the enlargement perspective of the EU through the participation of Bulgaria and Rumania there is an element of compensation of certain consequences of Turkey’s accession. It bears the feature of a more direct expansion of the EU’s hard core influence on the Balkans towards the Turkish borders, towards states with mineral wealth, like Rumania. This enlargement perspective is part of the EU’s plans to connect itself more favourably with the markets of Russia, Belarus, Moldavia, the Ukraine etc.
e-mail:cpg@int.kke.gr