RisksandchallengesoftheEUexpansion演讲范本 本文关键词：演讲，RisksandchallengesoftheEUexpansion，范本
RisksandchallengesoftheEUexpansion演讲范本 本文简介：RisksandchallengesoftheEUexpansion演讲范本i.introductionforseveralyearsnowtheeuropeanunionisdiscussingapossibleenlargement,becauseseveraleuropeancountries
RisksandchallengesoftheEUexpansion演讲范本 本文内容：
Risks
and
challenges
of
the
EU
expansion演讲范本
i.
introduction
for
several
years
now
the
european
union
is
discussing
a
possible
enlargement,because
several
european
countries
have
applied
for
membership
in
the
eu.
these
are
especially
the
former
socialist
countries
in
eastern
europe,that
have
clearly
turned
towards
the
west
since
the
collapse
of
the
iron
curtain.
these
countries
are
bulgaria,the
baltic
countries
latvia,lithuania
and
estonia,poland,romania,the
slovak
republic,the
czech
republic,slovenia
and
hungary.
in
addition
turkey,cyprus
and
malta
are
trying
for
quite
some
time
already
to
join
the
eu.
these
application
are
not
to
be
accepted
without
any
further
deliberation
because
they
do
bring
along
some
risks
and
the
consequences
are
hard
to
distinguish
therefore
these
countries
are
not
very
expected
joining
the
european
union
in
the
near
future
and
will
therefore
not
be
included
in
the
following
evaluation.
ii.
risks
and
challenges
if
we
wants
to
evaluate
the
risks
and
challenges
of
an
upcoming
enlargement
of
the
eu,we
should
first
take
into
account
experiences
gained
during
previous
expansion
which
were
to
some
extent
comparable.
here
the
southern
expansion
from
1986
should
be
mentioned
where
two
economically
pathetic
countries
sought
admission
to
the
then
european
community.
the
admission
procedure
of
these
two
candidates,being
spain
and
portugal,were
lengthy
and
considered
very
problem
bearing.
especially
the
amount
of
produce
that
would
add
to
the
already
existing
agricultural
over-production
of
the
community
was
seen
to
be
a
problem
since
it
would
increase
the
load
on
the
european
budget.
but
seen
from
a
global
economical
perspective
the
joining
of
spain
and
portugal
was
overall
positive
for
the
ec
and
the
two
countries,although
spain
struggled
with
a
further
rise
of
unemployment
and
disparities
within
the
community
were
further
amplified.
the
disparities
within
the
union
will
most
certainly
increase
when
it
comes
to
an
eastern
expansion,but
the
agricultural
problem
will
not
be
an
issue,because
the
candidates
have
not
got
their
focus
on
agriculture,already
because
of
their
communist
heritage
which
focused
on
industry
rather
than
on
agriculture
or
the
tertiary
sector.
in
case
of
the
approaching
expansion
towards
eastern
europe
the
union
will
have
to
resolve
several
problems,the
most
severe
being
without
any
doubt
the
financial
one
that
will
go
along
with
the
extension,estimated
to
be
?5
-
?6
billion
annually,just
for
the
technologically
underdeveloped
agriculture
in
the
new
member
states.
the
financial
problem
will
also
lead
to
a
temporary
discontent
among
the
population
of
the
existing
members,since
the
financial
load
on
the
countries
will
cause
budget
cuts
because
the
new
members
will
undoubtedly
belong
to
the
payees
rather
than
the
payers.
especially
the
mediterranean
members,for
instance
italy,spain
etc.
fear
cuts
in
their
subsidies
particularly
the
agricultural
ones,and
agriculture
is
already
making
up
the
biggest
part
of
the
eu′s
budget.
of
course
it
is
also
to
be
questioned
whether
with
the
joining
of
economically
weak
countries
the
economies
of
the
“richer“members
are
not
weakened.
what
should
be
taken
into
consideration
as
well
is
the
impact
the
joining
will
have
on
the
population
of
the
candidates,especially
considering
the
rights
they
will
gain
when
they
are
citizens
of
the
european
community.
they
do
then
have
the
right
to
settle
and
work
anywhere
within
the
community,this
could
lead
to
a
large
amount
of
people
pouring
into
the
old
member
countries
trying
to
seek
work
there
and
make
their
living.
and
since
most
of
the
european
countries
are
already
struggling
with
high
unemployment
the
high
rates
could
be
pushed
up
further
and
the
discontent
among
the
population
could
worsen,especially
against
the
background
of
neo-nazis
in
germany
and
other
countries
such
as
britain
or
italy.
off
course
this
would
only
be
a
temporary
problem,which
would
solve
itself
over
time
as
the
new
members
develop
economically,but
still
this
could
prove
to
be
a
major
issue.
of
course
their
comes
also
a
minor
problem
along
with
the
expansion,this
problem
being
even
more
languages
than
the
twelve,already
being
used,in
which
eu
communications
would
have
to
be
carried
out
adding
to
the
already
huge
administrative
body
of
the
european
union
and
also
causing
further
costs
of
the
eu.
but
because
the
expansion
represents
a
political
necessity
one
should
also
take
into
account
the
positive
aspects
caused
by
such
a
historic
event.
with
the
expansion
the
continent
would
take
a
huge
step
towards
the
ethnic
integration
within
europe,different
cultures
would
be
facing
each
other
and
could
also
profit
from
each
other.
also
the
global
competitiveness
of
the
eu
against
the
usa
and
asia
would
improve
and
another
step
towards
global
peace
would
be
undertaken.
iii.
changes
in
administration
it
is
obvious
that
an
expansion
potentially
including
ten
countries
would
not
be
feasible
without
fundamental
institutional
reforms.
for
instance
with
the
existing
structure
of
the
union
which
allocates
most
of
the
power
to
the
european
council,where
each
member
state
has
one
vote,it
would
be
imaginable
that
smaller
members
would
have
a
majority
over
the
larger
members.
except
for
poland,which
is
by
population
comparable
to
spain
and
would
consequently
be
a
large
member,all
other
candidates
are
relatively
small
in
size
an
population.
another
point
is
that
with
more
than
twenty
members
the
decision
finding
and
making
process
needs
to
be
completely
reconsidered,so
it
represents
the
actual
size
of
the
member
countries
in
terms
of
population
rather
than
giving
each
member
a
veto
and
especially
one
single
vote.
the
existing
voting
and
weighting
system
is
also
already
making
the
decision
finding
process
a
painfully
and
lengthy
one,another
ten
different
opinions
added
to
this
would
make
it
virtually
impossible
to
come
to
an
agreement
that
at
least
partially
satisfies
all
members
and
is
therefore
being
supported
and
not
vetoed
against.
a
changed
“legislature“would
also
keep
the
democratic
thought
that
the
entire
eu
is
based
on
alive
and
not
vanish
it
like
the
existing
system.
what
should
also
be
pointed
out
is
the
fact
that
an
increase
in
members
could
lead
to
new
coalitions
within
the
union
and
also
increase
competition
among
the
individual
countries.
there
are
even
critics
that
fear
that
an
eastern
expansion
could
lead
to
a
shift
in
power
towards
the
reunified
germany,since
the
potential
new
members
are
already
heavily
bound
and
leaning
towards
germany.
what
should
also
be
considered
is
a
change
in
european
agricultural
policy,which
should
actually
be
reformed
already.
the
system
of
milk
quotas,subsidies
etc.
which
subsidises
an
over-production
in
many
areas,just
not
to
infuriate
the
farmers,because
smaller
farms
would
not
be
able
to
survive
without
the
subsidies
and
the
entire
face
of
the
european
primary
sector
would
change
is
completely
outdated.
this
system
could
definitely
no
longer
be
kept
up
with
even
more
farmers
to
support.
iv.
successful
without
absorbing
the
new
members?
it
is
obvious
that
this
question
needs
to
be
answered
with
a
clear
no.
the
existing
members
of
the
eu
are
already
being
absorbed
by
it
and
they
have
all
chosen
this
faith.
the
goals
of
the
european
union
do
state
the
loss
of
sovereignty
in
the
areas
of
economic
and
currency
politics,the
latter
one
already
realized,also
in
the
political
areas
of
social
politics,education,research,consumer
protection,health
and
also
environmental
issues.
now
one
could
argue
how
many
of
these
goals
need
to
be
realized
in
order
for
the
eu
to
be
successful,from
the
british
point
of
view
for
example
the
cooperation
in
economic
issues
and
the
creation
of
the
single
market
have
already
been
enough,considering
their
opinion
towards
the
maastricht
treaty.
if
one
would
see
it
from
the
british
point
of
view
the
eu
could
be
successful
without
absorbing
the
new
members,but
since
most
other
countries
would
like
to
see
the
above
mentioned
goals
implied
and
would
like
to
realize
the
dream
of
de
gaulle,adenauer
and
others
of
“the
united
states
of
europe“,the
new
members
would
surrender
a
huge
part
of
their
sovereignty
and
consequently
would
be
absorbed
by
the
eu,especially
considering
that
they
will
join
in
a
couple
of
years
at
the
earliest
when
european
integration
will
hopefully
have
advanced
beyond
the
point
it
is
today.
another
point
one
could
consider
is
what
would
happen
if
the
european
integration
would
further
advance
up
to
the
point
of
the
united
states
of
europe
without
any
new
countries
joining.
this
would
create
another
superpower
alongside
the
usa
and
the
then
non-members
would
live
in
the
shadow
of
the
eu
or
whatever
its
name
would
be
by
that
time
and
also
be
absorbed
by
the
enormous
power,in
any
terms,of
their
big
neighbour
just
like
the
caribbean,canada
and
mexico,even
the
entire
americas
are
by
the
usa.
so
the
conclusion
drawn
by
this
could
be
that
the
central
and
eastern
european
countries
would
be
better
off
in
any
case
if
they
joined
the
eu
even
if
they
had
to
surrender
much
of
their
sovereignty.
sources:
(1)
europa.eu.int/
(march
17th,XX)
(2)
idw.tu-clausthal.de/public/zeige_pm.html?pmid=26445
(april
5th,XX)
(3)
informationen
zur
politischen
bildung:
europische
union
(bpb,1995)
(4)
microsoft
encarta
98
(5)
mittel-
und
osteuropa
auf
dem
weg
in
die
europische
union
(werner
weidenfeld,verlag
bertelsmann
stiftung,1996)
(6)
e-politik.de/beitrag.cfm?beitrag_id=559
(april
1st,XX)
risks
and
challenges
of
the
eu
expansion
RisksandchallengesoftheEUexpansion演讲范本 来源：网络整理
免责声明：本文仅限学习分享，如产生版权问题，请联系我们及时删除。