External Role of EU and NATO in State-Building of Baltic Countries - Essay Example

?Prologue From their independence from the former Soviet Union in 1991 to becoming members of the European Union and the North Atlantic Treaty organisation in 2004, the Baltic States – Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania --have gone through a long journey. During this period, these states transformed from authoritarian rule to liberal democracy, from closed economies to free markets and from former Soviet republics to militarily and economically secure sovereign states. For a period of time, the three economies grew at a rate that stunned the world. They had some of the highest growth rates in Europe. For example, Estonian economy grew by 7.2 per cent in 2005 and Latvia by 8.3 per cent. Although this growth rate was immensely impeded by the 2008 recession, there are great future prospects for these economies, as we will elaborate in lines ahead. Of course, the will and commitment of the people of these states was the main force behind this transformation, the important role of international organisations cannot be ignored in nation-building and state-building in the region. Since their independence, the Baltic States have joined the United Nations, the Council of Europe, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe and a number of other international institutions. However, their membership in NATO and the European Union (EU) has been instrumental in the nation-building process of the Baltics. In this study, we will analyse the influence and role of mainly EU and NATO in the state-building and nation building process in the Baltic countries. Historical context Located in the geographical centre of Europe, the Baltic States had been for centuries an arena of confrontation between East and West, as well as between North and East” (Van Ham, 1995, p.10) . From the end of the 18th century, after these countries were merged into the Russian empire, all the three lands were subjected to cultural and political suppression. The Tsarist Russia left no stone unturned to culturally and politically assimilate the Baltics into mainstream Russia. These states regained independence after the World War I, but only to lose it again to Soviet Union in 1940. Soviet leader Joseph Stalin reoccupied the Baltic countries in 1940 under the pretext of Molotov-Ribbentrop pact which provided room for Soviet influence in the region. After invading the three countries, he ruthlessly suppressed the nationalist feelings in the region and, following the path of the Tsarist Russian, he arbitrarily tried to assimilate the Baltics into mainstream Russia. However, as soon as Stalin died, the people of Baltics had set an example of rebellion for the rest of the USSR to follow. When the rest of Soviet Union was in peace in 1988, the people of these three countries were resisting the Soviet rule. Thousands of youths formed a human chain stretching the entire length of the three republics on August 24, 1989, on the 50th anniversary of Soviet rule. They were not far away from their independence. They eventually regained sovereignty in 1991 with the fall of Soviet Union. Three fragile new states However, it was not the end of their struggle. They were three fragile states with looming threats from their once superpower neighbour Russia. Without any state structure and a closed economy inherited from Soviet Union, the leadership and people of these states were in a state of paranoia, fearing for losing their sovereignty again. They had to go through the process of nation- and state-building in order to sustain their independence. Lack of strategic depth, open borders and their proximity to Russia and “limited economic resources to devote to developing viable military forces, especially since they have inherited little from the Soviet Army and were subject to a Western arms embargo until 1993” (Van Ham, 1995, p.4), put them in a vulnerable position as far as their security and viability was concerned. Domestic and global dynamics and policy options After independence, the decision makers in the Baltic States had to choose between a wide range of policy options vis-a-vis their international partners and cooperative arrangements that would suit their national interests. Like any new state, the major interest of these new states was to sustain their sovereignty and guard themselves from any external threat that was mainly coming from Russia that had opposed the membership of the Baltic countries in North Atlantic Treaty Organisations (NATO). In the beginning of 1990s, when the Baltic States had newly gained independence, politics in Europe was being dominated by a number of giant international institutions. Hoffman (1993, p. 381) argues that how the governments reacted to the end of the Cold War was profoundly conditioned by the existence of international institutions. North Atlantic Treaty Organisation and Baltic States For the security of the state and sustainable economic growth, Baltic leaders knew that participation in international and regional organisations was instrumental. Security was the top most priority. The Baltic policy makers suggested a number of ideas to achieve security for the newly sovereign states. Initially, some put forward the idea of neutrality (Haab, cited in, B., Heurlin, B. 2003, p. 3) as they believed taking any sides against Russia, that still had the capacity of making 22,000 nuclear bombs, may provoke their mighty neighbour and former boss. However, the concept of neutrality was not widely accepted, mainly because the world had just witnessed the collapse of the bi-polar international system with the fall of Soviet Union. For sustainable growth and security, they had to take sides; and joining NATO was perhaps the most appropriate option available to them. This fact could be gauged by the statement of an official of the Lithuanian Ministry of Foreign Affairs who argued: “Lithuania should make it understood that it does not regard itself as neutral, but that its priority is to become a full member of NATO and the EU” (Van Ham, 1995, p. 25). Some policy makers had also suggested a trilateral Baltic defence alliance (Jundzis, 1998, p. 377-388). This resulted in the formation of a special Baltic peacekeeping battalion (BALTBAT) and the Baltic Council. However, as all the three states were still in an embryonic stage, even with a combined effort they were not in a position to defend themselves against any external security threat. In this context, a majority of people believed that the security of the Baltic States could only be beefed up by joining the NATO. The leaders of the Baltic States came to an understanding that “participation in the EU and NATO are the surest guarantees of the independence of the three states” (Jundzis, 1998, p. 130). Article 5 of NATO was the only ray of hope left for security of the Baltic States. It states: “The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all” (North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, 2008). Thus, the Baltic rulers viewed “NATO as the main security guarantor in Europe”, and membership in it as a crucial assurance against the potential threat from Russia (Vilpisauskas, 2000, p.9). The Baltic States have so far successfully used international organisation, mainly NATO and European Union, to deal with Russia. For example, Estonia, with this tactic, has tackled its prolonged border dispute with Russia (Vilpisauskas, 2000, p.9). Interestingly, the whistle-blowing site WikiLeaks recently revealed that the US and NATO had drawn up plans to defend Baltic States against Russia (BBC, 2010). The first official relations between the NATO and the three states began in 1991 after the security alliance invited Central and Eastern European countries to create a joint institution – the North Atlantic Cooperation Council. The Baltic countries joined the Council in December 1992. However, it was not enough for the Baltic countries; they wanted NATO membership. In January 1994, Lithuania officially applied for NATO membership. Latvia and Estonia followed the path later in the same year. As a step ahead, they signed the Partnership for Peace (PfP) framework documents with NATO, thus institutionalising their relations with the organisation. The common wish of the leaders of three countries to join NATO was confirmed in a joint communique in the middle of February 1994. In this process, when the Baltic countries were trying to achieve NATO membership, they tried their level best to achieve the standards to be illegible for its membership. This helped to a great extent to the military and security growth of these states. They wanted to prove that they were not just “free riders” and could contribute to the cause of the NATO. Therefore, the Baltic states’ forces participated as a part of the Nordic Brigade in the Bosnia Implementation Force (Vilpisauskas, 1999, p.20). The succeeded in persuading the NATO and US leadership that they were eligible for the organisation’s membership. F. Stephen Larrabee (2003, p.1), a member of the RAND Corporation, testified before the United States Senate Committee on Foreign Relations that he believed that the membership of the Baltic states in NATO was very much in US interest and would significantly contribute to enhancing overall security in Europe. According to him, the Baltic States had made significant progress in meeting the economic, political and military requirements for NATO membership since achieving their independence in 1991. “All three states have functioning democratic systems and viable market economies. Indeed, growth rates in the Baltic states are among the highest in Europe,” he had said. “The prospect of NATO membership has played a similar role in encouraging the trilateral Baltic cooperation in the military field as the prospect of EU membership and its support played for economic cooperation and liberalisation of trade among the three states” (Vilpisauskas, 1999, p.9). European Union and Baltic States The EU has not only been instrumental for political solidarity and economic interdependence of the Baltic states, but its recognition of the Baltic countries in August 27, 1991, also augmented social stability and sense of security in these countries. Later, becoming its member in 2004 provided these states solid security guarantees. Like NATO, the Baltic States, from the very beginning have considered the European Union the key to their survival. For this purpose, they joined a number of international and regional institutions which had a security or economic role in Europe. In September 1991, they joined the Conference of Security and Cooperation in Europe. Later, in March 1992, they became members of the Council of the Baltic Sea States. Almost a year later, in May 1993, Estonia and Lithuania joined the Council of Europe which Latvia joined in 1995. The purpose of joining these institutions was to establish contacts with Western stakeholders for the security and sustainable growth of Baltic countries. As the then Danish foreign minister has acknowledged, “closer cooperation [through the enlargement of the EU] will contribute to ensuring stability and security of Europe” and “the enlargement of the EU is extremely important for the security of the Baltic states” (Petersen, 1996, p. 93, 95). The EU’s role in the state-building of Baltic State has been crucial. It recognised their independence in August 27, 1991. In a meeting between EU representatives and Baltic foreign ministers, the three countries were included into the Phare programme; thus paving the way for trade and cooperation agreements with these states which played a vital role in their economic growth. The first trade pacts were agreed and signed in May 1992. “They upgraded the trading status of the Baltic States in the general pyramid of preferences of the EU by extending Most Favorite Nation status and Generalized System of Preferences as well as abolishing specific import restrictions previously applied to the state-trading economies” (Vilpisauskas, 1999, p.14). However, the Baltic officials were far more ambitious. During these trade negotiations, they expressed their desire to join the European Union. The then foreign minister of Estonian J. Manitski termed the trade agreements “our first step back to Europe”, hoping that it would lead to full EU membership soon (The Baltic Independent, 1992, p. 4). The Baltic officials were finally sent an invitation to attend a conference in Copenhagen in April 1993 where matter relating to integration of European integration was to be discussed and the aim of these countries to join the association was acknowledged. The Baltic States became associate partners of the Western European Union (WEU) in June 1994; thus achieving the right to participate in the meetings of the WEU Permanent Council and other WEU working groups. At the same time, the bilateral negotiations of the free trade agreements between the EU and the Baltic States took place. The three agreements were signed in July 18, 1994. By this point of time, as the Baltic States had been actively engaged with the EU, which declared that the Baltic region was a “major focus” of its external policy (The Baltic Independent., 1994, p.2). In August 1994, the European Union started negotiating the Europe Agreements with the three states and the agreements were all signed on June 12, 1995, opening a new path to the integration of these states into EU and consolidating their economic and political credibility in the region. As the review of the official relations between the Baltic states and NATO and the EU/WEU illustrates, the status of the Baltic countries has radically changed during the last decade. From being completely isolated from the Euro-Atlantic institutions, constituting the basis for cooperation between their member states, the Baltic countries have gradually become part to the increasingly deeper forms of institutional arrangements. They finally joined the association in 2004, though separately. Lithuania was the first state to ratify the EU Constitution in November 2004, Estonia ratified it on 9 May 2006 with Latvia following the course. Now, these states have integrated into the EU in almost every aspect. BBC had reported the signing of an agreement between Lithuania and Poland in 2006 to link their power grids, saying that it will deepen the EU-Baltic integration (Sheeter, 2006). The fruits of NATO-EU membership After becoming part of the Euro-Atlantic security community, the Baltic States have grown from isolated former Soviet republics to sustainable economies with remarkable growth rates (although these economies were later badly hit by the 2008 recession). Before the recession, the Baltic States had some of the highest growth rates in Europe. For example, Estonian economy grew by 7.2 per cent in 2005, Latvia by 8.3 per cent and Lithuania by 6.7 per cent. However, the European Economic Advisory Group (EEAG) has forecasts that only Poland will have a faster economic growth in Europe than Estonia in 2011 (Tere, Tallinn, 2011). In the transition of the Baltic States, when they were transforming to free-market economies following the path of rest of the Western Europe, inflows of foreign direct investment (FDI) played a prominent role in this process. Although in the early 1990s “FDI inflows into the Baltics were attracted by relatively cheap local (e.g. labour) resources and the privatisation process”, later the close association of these countries with NATO and EU encouraged more investments (Grigonyte, 2010, p.1). Bibliography BBC News (2010) [Online]. Available from: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-11933089 [Accessed: 19 March 2011] Baltics sign trade deals with EC (1992) The Baltic Independent, 15 May. Grigonyte, D. (2010) FDI and structural reforms in the Baltic States ECFIN Country Focus. Directorate for the Economies of the Member States. Vol 7, Issue 5 Hoffman, S. (1993) After the Cold War: International Institutions and State Strategies in Europe -- 1989-1991. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press Hansen, B., Heurlin, B. (1998). The Baltic States in World Politics, Richmond Surrey: Curzon Press. Jundzis, T. (ed.) (1998) The Baltic States at Historical Crossroads, Riga: Academy of Sciences of Latvia Larrabee, F. S. (2003) The Baltic States and NATO Membership [Testimony before United States Senate Committee on Foreign Relations].RAND Petersen, N.H. (1996) The Baltic Dimension of European Integration, Riga, August [Presentation]. North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (2008) NATO OTAN [Online]. Available from: http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/official_texts_17120.htm [Accessed: 19 March 2011] Sheeter, Laura (2006) BBC News [Online]. Available from: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6220572.stm [Accessed: 19 March 2011] Summit pledges European ties (1992) The Baltic Independent, 27 May. Tere, Juhan, Tallinn, BC, (2011) Estonia’s GDP growth will be among Europe’s fastest in 2011. The Baltic Course. 19th March [Online]. Available from: http://www.baltic-course.com/eng/analytics/?doc=38660 [Accessed: 19 March 2011] Van Ham, P. (1995) The Baltic States: Security and Defence after Independence, Paris: Institute for Security Studies, Chaillot Paper 19. Vilpisauskas, R. (1999) Regional Integration in Europe: Analyzing Intra-Baltic Economic Cooperation in the Context of European Integration, Florence: EUI, RSC Working paper draft. Vilpisauskas, R (2000) Baltic States Membership in the WEU and NATO: Links, Problems and Perspectives, Vilnius, Institute of International Relations and Political Science [Final Report] Read More