European Union’s Unity: Disadvantages

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Introduction
Positive Effects of the EU
Negative Effects of the EU
Summary
References

“Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely.” – Lord Acton.

Introduction

As its name signifies, the European Union is a union of 27 European countries. After World War II the European countries became very poor. They realized that fighting with each other will never make any European countries to be super power again. The concept of unifying economical and social forces became very appealing. Therefore three countries came up with a great idea which to be a union in the Europe. France, Luxemburg and Holland decided to get together to establish a small union, it was the first root of the European Union. After a few years in 1957, the Council of Europe was decided to advance political and social union in Europe. So on January 01, 1991, eleven countries signed an agreement to establish the European Union. There were England, Germany, France, Holland, Denmark, Italy, Spain, Portugal, Luxemburg, Austria and Belgium (European Commission).

The Union has been growing in the Europe day by day. This union has brought many advantages to its members such as, the introduction of a single trade market, free movement of citizens, protection of environment, great equality and social inclusion, more jobs, a single currency system, a louder international voice, and great protection for worker, and equal tariff rates. It is the unification of these countries to create a “political and economic community throughout Europe.” The leaders wanted to join their countries to achieve political, economic, and social stability. They also wanted to promote the idea of a “free trade economy,” which became the area of attention during the 1990s. Recently, EU and its member countries have introduced numerous other programs and agendas to go beyond their initial targets and create a much better “European World” for generations to come. Apart from free trade, the EU has decided to work on “free travel, single European Currency, safer food, greener environment, joint actions on crime and terror, academic opportunities, and improving standards of living.”

Positive Effects of the EU

The Single Market of the EU has meant that companies going about their business in EU member states have been forced to lower the prices of their products to become more competitive. The single market benefits companies by making it easier and cheaper to do business in other EU countries. No customs tax is charged on goods that are sold or transported between member states. The EU also tries to make each market as similar as possible to ensure fair competition across national borders. Other countries have to compete with price difference between countries to countries. The single market system provides to control to internal market by the treat of European Union. It protects all consumers and producers to trade within European Union without concerning tax rate and quotes for goods and services. It is all under signed by European council to establish every company where they want to go for business in the European Union borders. The main principle is freedom of movement which provides equal rights in the single market. (European Commission)

Single market guarantees that freedom of internal market for its members’ export and import goods. This advantage is not owned by many countries such as The USA, China, India, Turkey so on… when they have a trade with the European Union, they have to go for limitations, these limitations are good for own European Union producers, because their importance comes first in the single market. Their products must be sold in the internal market first, if their products are not enough for customers, and then the union allows import for those products from non European Union countries. The producers are more secure than other countries. It is not like the European Union producers can produce how they want. The rules protect the consumers as well. They have rights to receive the best service and goods with minimum prize. It is double sided advantage for consumers and producers of the European Union.

Free movement of citizens is one of the fundamental freedoms guaranteed by Community law. It is perhaps the most important right under Community law for individuals, and an essential element of European citizenship which is key point to make being the European Union Citizen pleasant. Every citizen has basic rights which were under guaranteed by the Founder of European Community. It is laid down in article 39 of the EC Treaty and it entails: a European Union citizen has the right of looking for a job and working in other member state. The citizen can also stay in other member state without visa and reside for any purposes such as holiday, working, or visiting. Moreover the citizen must be treated equal in respect of access to employment and working conditions for all other member state citizens. (European Commission) Their life has no barriers like non European Union citizens. For instance; I am from Turkey who is the one of who faces these struggles the most. Whenever I want to travel to the European countries or the USA, I have to go for visa process such as proving with documents that I will come back my country for sure. Sometimes being rich is not enough to get a visa from The European countries or the USA. I do not even mention how hard to get a work permit to work in the Europe. It is almost miracle for non European Union citizens. If you are out of this circle, you would not obtain these advantages. The European Union citizens are lucky to be in a great union, so they have all great opportunities for themselves.

Protection of environment is very important issue for every society in the world nowadays. All water, air and soil population of all around the world are increasing day by day. Every country has an own way to protect their environment, but is it enough to work alone to protect for the environment? This question’s answer would be simple “No”, because many countries cooperate with each other to protect the environment such as Kyoto protocol, Greenpeace. However they are not enough organized or have no strict laws to protect the environment unlike the European Union. The EU has really authoritarian laws to protect the environment in the Europe. The overall direction of EU environment policy is laid out in the latest action program–“Environment 2010: Our Future, Our Choice.”

It focuses for important issues which are climate change, environment, health and natural resources and waste. It concentrates on 4 priority areas: climate change; nature and biodiversity; environment and health; and natural resources and waste. Also, an Environment and Health Action Plan for 2004-2010 promotes a close relationship between health, environment and research policy. (Europe) The European Union with this program became a great leader in global efforts to protect environment. These protocols are important to save the environment of European Union. For example, building of the nuclear power station in Germany was denied by European Union council, because it is a serious risk for the natural environment of the Europe, so the company could not build the power station in Germany. The restrict rules for environment are to protect nature in the Europe.

Everyone has a dream of great equality like this young European Union citizens, like one of the five authors of “Europe no borders no inequality? “ he thinks every social laws of European is nearly great comparable to every citizen of its members that interest him most because it makes him to feel to be unsure. On the other hand it is so very desirable – it would, of course, be a fine thing if we all had the same opportunities in all around the world. However it is just a dream for us as French author Jerome Lambert has published a number of books for children and young people. His latest novel – “Finn Prescott” – came out earlier this year. He mentions: “People who talk about great equality in Europe are liars. People who talk about equality in the world are dreamers.” (young.Euro.connect.com)Even there is no great equality in the Europe, but European Union citizens have greater equality than other nations in the world. European Union is still working to provide a great equality. Every basic human right is protected by European Union council which gives secure environment for European Union citizens to live with equal human rights with other citizens as well. The members of the European council have been decided to pass the act of fighting against social exclusion and the eradication of poverty on October 17 2000 in Lisbon. The laws were about to protect citizens from to facilitate participation in employment equally and access by all to the resources, rights, goods and services and to prevent the risks of exclusion (Europa).

If we look at USA, we can see capitalism which causes a huge gap between poor and rich people. Europe has a welfare system which eliminates most of inequalities between poor and rich people. According to article “Is the Europe welfare system a model for the 21^st century?” Katrin Bennhold, journalist of International Herald Tribune, she talks about president Obama how he has been studying for European welfare system to adapt this system to the States. She also compares the USA, the European Union countries and China. The capitalism and communism are having serious struggles in this Century. They both can’t satisfy citizens of those countries who are under either communism or capitalism.

President Obama is taking the model of welfare system to integrate to the States. Dutch and Swiss healthcare system is under observed by president Obama’s economists to understand to this system well to adapt it to in the States. One of President Obama’s speeches he called new healthcare system “watchful eye” to make health care to every American citizen. Nearly 850 billion dollars were assured by the government to give free healthcare for American citizens. It is one way to resemble to welfare system in the European Union. The 21^st century just needs the European Union’s system which is welfare system to bring greater equality to the States. The European Union has had this system since they established. The citizens of European Union have been using this advantage for many years.

A Trade is the exchange of goods and services among the countries. It has also significant part of GDP (gross domestic product). Trading has existed for centuries. It became more advanced than it was before. New rules, regulations have changed the way of trading. It has been limited and taxed by government which we call tariff. Tariff is any tax or fee collected by government. Some tariff rates are sometimes very high and very low. A tariff rate is based on government, quality of goods, and its kind. The European Union has the largest internal market in the world where all domestic goods and services are exchanged through European Union countries without tariff rates. Tariff is an extra cost for producers and traders. They are most likely to avoid paying tariff rate, because it is an additional charge from the governments.

The European Union decided to apply tariff rates for non European Union countries’ products and services to protect their own producers. For instance, the Europe Union and USA are the biggest producers of tomatoes in the world. The Union’s tomatoes producers produce 9.3 million ton tomatoes for per a year. However, European countries need more tomatoes from outside the Union. A tomato costs nearly 27 cents in Euro which is produced by European Union farmers, but one American tomato costs 13 cents, when it imports to the European Union, its price becomes 35 cents with tariff rate, which is more than a produced tomato in the Europe, so customers prefer to buy cheaper domestic tomatoes. Californian farmers’ union request a lower tariff rate for tomatoes but it was denied by European Union commission because they have to protect rights of domestic producers. (Agricultural Issues center, University of California.) If the United States were in the European Union, Californian farmers would take advantage of non tariff rate for tomatoes. Tariff is a one way of defending union’s member states which has been protecting its producers since European Union established.

The Euro is a single currency which is used by more than 300 millions people in the Europe. The members of the European Union devote to exchange common money called the “Euro.” The Euro currency was approved as currency in participating nations. European Union (EU) countries that participate in the use of the Euro are Belgium, Germany, Greece, Spain, France, Ireland, Italy, Luxemburg, Austria, Portugal, Slovenia, Finland, and the Netherlands. (European Commission) The Euro has been changed the economical face of the states. One dollar bill used to be equivalent to 1.56 Marks (German ex-currency). Germany is using the single monetary system which is Euro as well, so if we look at the exchange rates between the Euro and dollar, we would see one Euro is equivalent to 1.26 dollars (economagic.com).

The Euro is making everything much easier than different old currency system. For example, the euro has eliminated the trouble with money exchange when traveling to another country for Europeans in the Europe which is appreciated by European Union citizens as well. There are four countries that I know which are most visited such as, Italy, France, Spain and Austria. Renting a car, staying at hotel and spending money for museums and attractions are always cost a lot for tourists. Especially, when a person travels a foreign country, there is a huge unification the transparency of the price on hotels, renting cars. Because the exchange rates of money are not certain, they are changeable for daily basis, since these rates always go up and down in the financial market.

A traveler would lose a big amount of money while exchanging currencies. However, European Union citizens have no problem of losing money, because they are using a single currency system in 16 countries. It is a plus for Europeans; they do not worry about the exchange rates when they are traveling. For instance, when a German buys an item from Italy, he would use the euro for his transaction, and he would not lose money for exchanging money. There is no risk in single currency system; while paying money to the travel agency or store the value of the money could change, so the agency would have to charge customers more. So customers have to give more money to same things that they enjoyed before less. The euro makes pay less and enjoy more whatever u do in the European Union borders.

The euro is also likely to lead to lower interest rates for European Union states. Before the union, there was an additional interest was charged to cover the danger of exchange rate vacillation. When the Euro was started to use, the risk of interest rate fluctuation was gone. It also brought reductions in interest rates. A lower interest rate would cause paying less interest on any loans and debts in the business. It brought increase of profits and encouragement of new investments and expansion plans in the business and industry. The European Union citizens also take advantage of spending less money for goods and services, so it causes increasing consumer standards of living in the Europe, and businesses benefits by increasing their profits. The single euro gives advantages both consumers and producers in the Europe.

The numbers can speak louder than word, so there are some statistics from European commission and IMF (international monetary funds) that I wanted to highlight; GDP for European Union is 11.9 trillions euros but USA’s GDP is 11.2 trillions euros, and Japan’s GDP is 3.5 trillions euros. The share of World GDP is 21 percent by European Union which indicates the European Union is the leader of purchasing power parity. The USA comes second with 19.7 GDP. The statistics show that a single currency system leads the European Union as a leader of economical powerhouse in the World.

As I mentioned before, the European Union is the biggest Union in the World, so they have a big role in the United Nations and NATO. All the EU member states work together as one nation on international stage to guarantee their own concern are heard and taken more significantly. The EU represents more than 300 million people and it will be more than 500 million people after enlargement of the European Union. This is more like combination of United States and Japan. As a voice of Turkey in international stage is weak, it is just about almost 80 million people. Is it enough to be heard and taken more serious in the global World? Unfortunately it is not enough, economically and socially Turkey is not enough to have a stronger international voice than the EU. It is not just about Turkey, it also applies some countries such as, Serbia, Bosnia, Brazil, Mexico, and South Africa…

The European Union has always been recognized by other countries, and its orders and requests have been accepted by non European countries. For example, Hillary Clinton, the US secretary of states, stated that the USA is proposed for “energise the transatlantic relationship” with the European Union, she called the EU as a crucial and necessary a partner for the USA in solving the global problems such as danger of climate change, security of nations and energy security in the Middle East and East Asia (Europeanvoice.com). It shows that The USA can not decide anything about the Middle East or East Asian countries by themselves. The US needs to take serious the observations and requests about those areas by the European Union. it just indicates every global decision consists of a big part of EU’s surveillance and demand. This strong international power comes from representing of more than 15 percent of the world’s national gross product. A single European country is never able to reach this power to be a strong voice in the global stage.

The USA needs a strong partner like the European Union in the international stage to happen its own commands to Middle East and Afghanistan. As president Obama said The EU is an essential partner to promote The USA foreign policy to be real and strong and effective in the international stage. As he describes the European Union as “the EU is a union of friend’s allies” even he knows a strong union with well-built connections causes a powerful role in the global world. The European Union countries derive strength from each others with The USA. (EuropeanVoice.com) to be a strong in current world, all countries have to be somehow to be united with themselves to be strong as much as the European Union. if the EU did not exist, Can Germany or France to be have a same strong position in the global area ? it would be a big no, because those countries gain their power by the union, they sometimes act on a behalf of the union, so it does not mean they just trust their own economical power, they represent the union of 300 million people in the Europe, so they still seek the EU’s own benefits. Their effectiveness does not come from their own supremacy; their supremacy is a being representative of the EU, so they trust the union as like other members states. Every member feels secure because they know that they have a strong voice in international stage.

Negative Effects of the EU

It is rather true that the European Union focuses on the betterment of the nations of Europe. The leaders and the bodies of the Union have successfully devised policies and rules to achieve a peace and uniformed environment throughout Europe. The concern comes out to be the effects of the unity on the members as well as the non-members of the Union. How good is it? Is the voice of every member country heard? What about the minorities? Do non-members suffer from the Union’s policy? Is European Union turning into a big giant that is going to administer complete and absolute power over the continent of Europe?

The issue which is of highest importance is the merging of different and unique cultures and languages. How do people who communicate in varying language forms communicate in a single language? Does every nation have to adopt the language of the “European Union?” What is the language of the Union, if any? Do the leaders spell out the cultural norms and values for the members? What about the traditional values?

The European Union, as mentioned above, consists of 27 members and surprisingly 22 different languages. However, on April 15, 1958, the Council adopted a regulation which spelled out the languages that could be used by the “European Economic Community. According to the Regulations Article 1: “official languages and the working languages of the institutions of the Community shall be Dutch, French, German and Italian.” The regulation only supported the use of 4 languages, the rest of the 18 were denied or ‘not included’ as the official languages. However, with the expansion of the members of the European Union it has become imperative to include various other languages to enable a healthy way of communication. According to Kinnock, this increase in members and diversity has led to the importance of determining the “cost” of translation of every document, speech, policy, agreement or conference.

A few leaders, economists and critics have based there arguments upon the “cost of translation and interpretation,” which they consider as a “waste of EU resources.” At times, the disadvantages posed by the diversity in language and culture, become a barrier to “free movement within EU,” as the citizens of the member nations are hesitant to work, live, study, or spend time in other states whose language and cultural norms and values are not similar to their mother country. The social aspect of the member state was not the main reason of forming the European Union; instead it was political and social stability and integration which made the nations come together. According to Bozoki, the cultural norms and values were never considered as the “core of European integration,” and at the time of its foundation “Europe seems to have forgotten about the culture.” The leaders of the European Union need to understand that cultural and linguistic differences can cause much more trouble due to hampering of the platform of communication.

The above mentioned problem gives rise to what Vankin referred to as “nationalists vs. Europeans,” or in another words nationalism vs. regionalism. At the time of crisis, the citizens of a nation, be it leaders of civilians, will automatically start pursuing the path which leads to the betterment of their own nation. Naturally, the members of EU fail to “share common interests” and due to this “logic of diversity” the EU is unable to develop “making of common foreign policies.” It is a common human response to feel obligated towards people who share their way of life and thinking. Hence, the real reason to join forces and integrate the cultural and linguistic platforms is to avoid the division of member states during the time of need. Also, the voices of even members of minority should be heard; their interests and views should be regarded as vital for the healthy development of the Union.

As mentioned earlier, the basis of forming the European Union was to achieve an integrated platform for economies of member states. To achieve this, a common currency ‘Euro’ was introduced and was meant to be adopted by all member nations. This led to the birth of two major economical disadvantages: firstly the “cost of adjustment” and secondly the unavailability of “national monetary policy” to enable the members to regulate their economies at the time of financial or economical crisis. The first problem is a one-time cost as after the implementation of the “common currency” the firms of financial and non-financial sector will have to adjust all of their business related data according to Euro. The second disadvantage is also referred to as “asymmetric shock,” which is a varying degree of effect on different nations due to economic slowdown. In simple words, country B’s economy or financial position can (or may) stay stable even if country A’s economy collapses or slows down. The negative effects of Euro will not end at this, a loss over the ‘sovereignty’ of developing an “economic policy” and “fiscal policy” are yet another threats or Euro. All members will apply the same interest rate, which will be determined by the European economic commission. Every nation will be at a different stage of its “business cycle”, hence hindering the control of inflation rates. Finally, as per the requirements of “growth and stability pact,” each nation will “borrow 3% of GDP” which will force the members to follow the economic growth of others.

The ending of national boundaries, introduction of common currency and free trade market come at a cost. Citizens of one member nation will be able to freely study, work, and live in other member states. This might lead to a migration by workers who can find high paying jobs, better educational institutes, and enhanced development environment in other member nations. This might increase the unemployment rate and population of the nation that is being migrated to, where as both of the figures will drop from the immigrant’s country of origin. The firms would need to develop new packages and plans to hold onto their employees, and governments might be challenges to place quotas on the number of immigrants.

The trade in free market was once considered an advantage, but now every member nation has to deal with increased competition by others. Due to similarity in currency and the ending of national borders, it has become impossible to avoid local as well as competition forced by the imports. The businesses of one member state face competition from the businesses of other member nations. The EU’s main purpose was to promote a free trade economy throughout Europe, however, it has become impossible to let go off the threat it poses to individual nations. The leaders and representatives of members have developed a view about the free trade regulation of the EU. They believe the economic commission is “too zealous about enforcing Euro-rules on free competition.” Due to the increase in globalization of business, every nation is facing threat from international competitors. Globalization enables producers and manufacturers to take advantage of low cost production and timely deliveries. It is harder for member states of European Union because they face three forms of competition, local, international and the threat by free trade economy. Thus, the economic experts and leaders are trying to mischievously overcome the threat by the free trade economy promoted by the EU economic commission.

Yet another form of disadvantage is the cost of being a member of the European Union. The membership of the EU will cost members countries a varying amount. It can be said that the membership is according to the population of the state, and it charges “every man, woman, and child”. The countries are facing this challenge of determining whether or not being a member of the EU is worth it. They need to decide not only if they can “afford to leave” but if they can “afford to stay in.” The amount of money borrowing has been limited according to the GDP of a country, but the membership cost is determined by the population. Restricting GDP growth while taking account of increasing population for funds will inevitably create a situation of borrowing less and paying more.

A research was conducted by Zaidi and Zolyomi which determined the effect of academic and work-related backgrounds through the generations. They wanted to determine the “transmission” of the same backgrounds from parents to their children. Research was conducted in every member state. The conclusion was shocking and depressing, the educational level and the type of work were “inherited” by the children. This meant that the households belonging to the “low socio-economic” background will continue to belong to that social class through their generations. Parents with low educational levels have a higher probability of not educating their children.

Less educated people usually perform clerical or some skilled labor. Therefore, leaders of these countries need to determine the real cause of the low educational backgrounds. Is it due to the national budget allocation to educational fields, or mentality of parents, or unavailability of schools or teachers? If a country fails to educate its younger generations, a resentment or rivalry will emerge between the member states. The EU would require representatives who possess high educational backgrounds. Therefore, the representation of more educated nation would increase, hence, the resentment will also continue through generations.

Another challenge faced by the members of EU is regarding the interpretation of various codes spelled out by the commission. Each state has the authority to make the final decision of its choice but it does have to abide to the supreme law. In this case, the policies of the European Union. As mentioned earlier, nationalism begins to play its role when situations arise. Therefore, the interpretation of all codes is, at times, assumed to be in favor of an individual state. The leaders or representatives of that nation take steps which are best in their interest. The countries are obligated to present their case at EU conferences to justify their actions. This leads to the leaking out of governmental secrets in front of other governments.

The inability to take decisions on individual levels leads to a loss in sovereignty, be it political, social or economical nature. Political, because the EU is responsible to spell out the military, warfare, governmental and all forms of political codes. Social, as the educational system, laws, and social classifications are also determined by the European Union. Economical loss of sovereignty occurs due to the emergence of free trade market, common currency, trade laws, and even restriction of GDP growth. Finally, the allocation of national budgets also requires to be approved by the commission.

Another loss is in form of the loss of individual nation’s culture as it has been mixed with the cultural norms and values of other nations and state. Globalization, as mentioned earlier, has already played its role in mixing individual nations. Therefore, the new generation already faces a cultural identity crisis, which is worsened by the presence of citizens of different countries.

An example of such loss is mentioned on the blog of Bruno, a proud Romanian. Romanians are grateful for the financial help provided by the EU, but adaptation of the “European” culture has ruined the social and political life of its citizens. Particularly, resentment of two new concepts has disturbed the nation of Romania, namely capitalism and the changes in the department of “food.”

The loss of the process of decision making and the transparency of the process has already been mentioned. The primary concern now becomes the “abusing of absolute power,” which has been witnessed throughout the world history. All the disadvantages mentioned above support that the ‘EU has more power than the local governments or individual states.’ Who then determines the optimal level of European Union’s power? World history, especially European history, provides us with numerous examples of abuse of power. History is there to understand and avoid the mistakes which ruined the generation of our forefathers. Individual states need to stay on their toes to prevent such circumstances to repeat themselves. European Union plays an imperative role in today’s world, however, maintaining and limiting its power is imperative to continue the freedoms achieved over the years.

Every union, local or international, plays its role by meeting the objectives for which it was created. At the time of origin, European Union’s leadership was needed by the countries of Europe. The basis of its foundation led to a better economical and political situation that Europe lacked after the Second Great War. Once the states were able to gain their financial and political standings the Union started to pose problems. The main one being of the diversity, as it was never considered an obstacle at the beginning of the “unification.”

Also, the interest of non-members to join led to the problem of expansion, increasing the levels of diversity further. Even though the members were able to gain financial standings, the economic conditions were not at the same level throughout the member nations. However, the economic commission “forced” its nations to restrict GPD growth and budget allocations, causing yet another disadvantage. The paper also points out other negatives such as a loss of sovereignty, threat of “asymmetric shocks,” and new forms of competition.

It is rather childish to simply conclude that the European Union has nothing to offer to its members. European Union had, and will, continue to perform for the betterment of the continent of Europe. The responsibility is on the shoulders of the present and future leaders to limit its exercising power, devising policies to overcome the disadvantages, and deal with obstacles when they appear. It is only then that Europe will continue to prosper and reap results of its “unification.”

Summary

In conclusion, The European Union has been a big benefit for its members for many years. There is a no country complains about any advantages of the European Union such as, single market, protection of environment, great equality than non European Union countries, social inclusion, more employments, the “Euro,” a stronger international voice and equal tariff rate.

The Union is enlarging with new members, recently Poland joined the union now, and polish people are enjoying the advantages that I mentioned above. There are some others countries are dying to join the EU, such Turkey, Bosnia, Serbia, Croatia, and Iceland. As a short everyone’s eye on the Union to became part of it.

References

Anonymous, “Multilingualism in EU,” Interview with Neil Kinnock, John Benjamin’s Publishing Company, 2004.

Bozoki, Andras. “Cultural Policy and Politics in European Union,” Speech by Andras Bozoki, Minister of Culture Hungary, 2005-06.

Briney, Amanda. “The European Union: A History and Overview.” About.com: Geography, (2008).

Bruno, “Food and Capitalism,” Us Europeans. Web.

Charlemagne. “Beware of breaking the single market.” The Economist Newspaper. 2009.

EUROPA, “Panorama of EU,” EU at a glance, Web.

Johnston, Philip. “EU membership to cost us £837 each next year.” Home Affairs, 2006.

Pszczolka, Ireneusz. “Advantages and Disadvantages of Introducing the Euro.” The Dilemmas of Regional Economic Integrations, 215-222.

Pettinger, Tejvan R. “Cost of Joining the Euro,” Cherwell College Oxford: Economics Help, 2009. Web.

Pettinger, Tejvan R. “Disadvantages of EU membership for Eastern European Countries,” Cherwell College Oxford: Economics Help, Web.

Smith, Karen E. “The European Union: A Distinctive Actor in International Relationship.” The Brown Journal of World Affairs, Volume IX, Issue 2 (2003), 103-113.

Wilson, Barry. Crossing Barriers and Bridging Cultures. Edited by Aruturo Tosi, Great Britain: Cormwell Press Limited, 2003.

Vaknin, Sam (2003). The Belgium Curtain: Europe after Communism. Edited by Lidija Rangelovska, Narcissus Publications Imprint, Skopje.

Zaidi, Asghar. and Ester Zolyomi. “Intergenerational Transmission of Disadvantages in EU Member States.” European Center: Policy Brief, (2007), 1-16.

Gabriel, J Matthew. “Interest and Integration: Market Liberalization, Public Opinion, and European Union. Michigan: the University of Michigan 1999.

Bradley J. Rickard, 2006. Web.

Ripple.Barbara, 1999. “The Banana Battle Consumers. Research Magazine.12:2 cl 1999.

Toby Vogel, march-2009, Clinton calls EU an ‘essential partner’. Web.

“The European Union overview”, The European Union Commission, Web.

“The Freedom, Security and Justice” “The Europa, Web.

Click Here To Order Now!