Hoffmans Definition of Trust: the World of International Relations - Essay Example

To what extend can there be trust from EU that new member s would conform the required conditions? College: In reference to international relations, trust has many a times been likened with the readiness to take risks on the characteristics, actions and reactions of others. However, for this concept to survive in the world of international relations, both sides will need to take the risk and believe that the other side will always do what is right (Hoffman 2002, p. 375). Hoffman also indentifies that there must be an element of self-interest to accompany the trust. When one entrusts his/her interests to someone else, they do this on the background that their decision to trust their interests on a second party will eventually be of benefit to himself/herself (Hoffman 2002, p.382). This paper aims to look critically at the enlargement process in the European Union towards the former soviet states and how this move will change the relation of the different EU nations in terms of trusting each other. International relations trust as has been defined by Hoffman will require one state to build on its confidence in trusting that the other state will do what is right. After the collapse of the Soviet Union towards the end of the 1980s, nations in this region have gone through a series of change patterns. Some have been integrated in the growing European Union (Lane 2007, p.461). The main theme behind the fall of the Soviet Union is abandoning the communist economy to take up capitalism and this called for a drastic transformation in the international relations and links of the former Soviet States. Many will agree that it is the 1987 the collapse of the Soviet Union, it was believed that Turkey’s application to be part of the European Union brought the realisation that the Soviet States would warm up to the Union. To further enhance this, the EU in the 1980s adopted a policy of seeking to deepen the European Economic Community rather than widen it. It did the trick, since socialists state started to crumble down (Lane 2007, p.461). Scholars and people with interest in the European Union enlargement saw this move as a major change from the norm in the Union. But why is the enlargement process so important to the European Union, one may ask? The EU top brass believed, and still does, that it is the key towards the region’s international relations interests and long-term economic benefits (Moravcsik and Vachudova 2002, p. 2). Between 2004 and 2007, ten of the post-communist nations joined the European Union. After the Soviet Union disintegrated, many hoped for a smooth transition towards developing democratic nations that would be politically stable. How wrong they were. More than 20 years after the Soviet Union fell, transitions by the soviet states have varied, especially in terms of instituting democratic rights (Diamond and Plattner as cited in Cameron 2007, p. 185). Therefore, there is a clear distinction between post communist states that have embraced the spirit of democracy and those that have not put much emphasis in ensuring that democratic processes are installed and upheld. Formation of the European Union After the Second World War, European nations decided to come together for the sake of Europe’s integration and peace. Railroads and bridges bombed, factories destroyed and the livelihoods of many Europeans changed drastically, leaving them to wonder whether their lives would ever go back to being normal (Atatüre 2008, p.18). The first form of unity between European countries was witnessed when the Treaty of Paris was signed in 1951 to endorse the establishment of the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC). The treaty established a common market for the trade of coal and steel for six countries; France, Italy, the Federal Republic of Germany, Netherlands, Luxembourg and Belgium (Fontaine 2006, p.9). Six years later, the founding nations signed the Treaty of Rome that set out the establishment of the European Economic Community (EEC). The first enlargement of the EU was witnessed in 1973 when the United Kingdom, Ireland and Denmark joined the EEC, taking the number of members to nine. It wasn’t until 1975 that the vision to set up a political and economic federation was set gained momentum following elections to the European parliament (Fontaine 2006, p.10). The other three nations to join the Community were Spain, Portugal and Greece between 1981 – 1986. The whole equation of European integration process was thrown into some sort of a spin when the Berlin wall fell in 1989. Two years later, the Soviet Union too crumbled. In 1995, three more countries, Sweden, Austria and Finland, joined the EU. All this time, the EU was spreading towards Eastern and Central Europe. Now with the Soviet Union not in existence, EU embarked on one of its most significant enlargement process in the mid-1980s. Most encouraging was the fact that it is the Baltic nations (Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia), the former soviet bloc nations (the Czech Republic, Poland, Hungary, Bulgaria, Slovakia and Romania), Mediterranean nations (Malta and Cyprus) and Slovenia (a former Yugoslavia republic), that started showing interest in the European Union. Ten out of the 12 nations that had shown interest joined in 2004, while Romania and Bulgaria followed suit in 2007 (Fontaine 2006, p.11). Uneven revolution shown by post-communist states The distinction between communism and capitalism is crystal clear. The post-communist state therefore had to drastically change their economies to fit in the tenets of capitalism. This change was however not uniform neither have the changes been done at the same speeds (Lane 2007, p.468). After the completion of EU accession talks, candidate nations agree to adopt and adhere to the EU acquis. The accession negotiation has 31 chapters that candidate nations have to fulfil before they officially join the EU (Cameron 2007, p.2). However, it is after the approval of membership where the deviation starts. When the new members on their own embark on conforming with the tenets of the Union, the time and processes taken vary. Evident with the post-communist states after joining the EU is the decline in economic activity due to the fall of state socialism (Lane 2007, p.468). The economic activity of the 10 member states that joined in 2004 could not even be compared to be in the levels of the existing members (members from Eastern and Central Europe). The ten represented a meagre less than 5% of the EU GDP (Moravcsik and Vachudova 2002, p.12). The dilemma that the new EU post-communist members faced was having adverse effects on the political scene in these countries. Membership to the EU mandated that members had to promote their economic competitiveness. This meant that they would have to neglect the welfare state of their citizens (Sotiropoulos et al. 2003, p.657). These were economic, social and economic transformations that the member states had not anticipated. This is the case because the people expected that the new regime that had been promised based on the foundation of democracy would improve the living standards, raising hopes for a better life. A case of unfulfilled hope in Romania and Bulgaria Towards the end of 2010, the whole nation was treated to a protest footage of a man who attempted suicide at the same venue the country’s Prime Minister was making a speech in the Romanian parliament. Though he survived, Adrian Sobaro, a 41-year old father to an autistic son was protesting a 25% salary cut for civil servants. Social assistance payments made to parents who had disabled children were also drastically reduced (Vassilev 2011). Sobaro’s financial frustrations were echoed by many Romanians who blamed it all to the injustices and inequities facing the post-communist period. In that year, Romania’s economy had been expected to contract by 2% from the previous year’s contraction of 7.1%. The country was suffering from what most of the post-communist states were facing the in EU; cronyism, corruption and nepotism. A sign that Romania was now moving away from its communist structure into capitalism was evident in that to revive the flailed economy, the administration resorted to hiking the sales tax from 19% to 24%, as opposed to assisting the unemployed and socially weak. EU’s newest member states have largely been the victims of corruption. Bulgaria was particularly on the spot for its mega corruption by the country’s state administration in dealing with disbursed funds from the EU (Vachudova 2009, p.44). Corruption thrived in the post-communist region with collapse of communism. A vacuum had been created and it needed a rewriting of rules to govern the economy and the state. But this was a new political system for the post-communist states; the relevant systems were still dysfunctional. Vachudova (2009) categorises the types of corruption in the post-communist states as low-level corruption that involves administration, taking of government assets by officials and state domination by corrupt networks. Romania’s problem can be traced to the rule of the former communist party that ruled till 1996, still unreformed to the new order and highly corrupt. (Vachudova 2009, p.45). Though the unreformed communist party in Bulgaria did not have an easier time as the one in Romania, they controlled the state and economy up until 1997. In the spirit of trust involved in international relations, the post-communist states were left to ‘do the right thing’. However, since there was no form of guidance from the big brothers who had joined the EU earlier, the post-communist states were not able to conduct a seamless and beneficial transition from communism to capitalism. This concept of trust has self interest embedded deep into its meaning. Though the soviet states had their pre-joining interests, their disillusionment in the expected outcome is evident with how those in authority embezzled public funds to now fulfil their own personal interests. Challenges from post-communist enlargement Can there be trust enough from the EU that new member states would conform to the required conditions? It is not only the post-communists states that may feel something is amiss in the whole enlargement programme. Due to the increased size in territory of the European Union, governance of this Community has undergone quite a number of challenges. Enforcing political action has particularly been made more difficult and the EU citizens are starting to feel some strain from their contributions towards the EU. Post-communist states needed to be brought up to par in development to that of their existing member partners. The EU member states citizens also cite international crime, illegal immigration and unemployment as some of their reasons for growing dislike of the enlargement process (Vachudova 2002, p.14). The costs from the accession of the former Soviet states are not economical but political. Due to the financial crisis in Romania, radical political parties have been established, building a threat for the leftist political reign. The right-wing populism is rising by the day (Vassilev, 2011). Hungary for instance has seen the rise of these right-wing party revolution (Beacháin et al. 2012, p.221). Trust will have to be build if both the existing members and the new members feel that both their interests are being fulfilled. And with such sentiments being echoed by the populace, it is uncertain whether these two group of nations will be able to come to a compromise. Some of these trust issues are present amongst existing members. Most recently, it was expected that the United Kingdom was going to announce its decision to part with the European Union. One of the reasons mooted for the pull out is the case of European Arrest Warrant. Some of the UK legislators say that though the UK is adhering to the terms of the European Arrest Warrant, there are doubts whether British suspects that are extradited abroad would have similar standards of justice as would have been in the UK (Parker 2012). In a survey conducted by Angus Reid, 48 percent of the voters said that Britain should withdraw from the EU, while 59 percent believed that UK has suffered damage since joining the EU (Hill 2011, p.3). The pull-out from the EU justice and crime framework has been singled out as one section of a larger policy to see the complete pull-out by Britain from the Community. The Prime Minister, David Cameron says that once re-elected, he will have to renegotiate the relationship between the UK and the EU, then holding a referendum to decide on the new plan. But the decision by UK to pull-out of the UK comes with its own risks. Business leaders and officials from the US and within the continent will be unsettled by such an action. This will in one way or the other affect British economy. The massive enlargement was always going to be a risk. We are looking at an increased number of member states, more financial strains and a larger area to deal with. Whereas the economies of the EU-15 (old members) developed, there is a gap on how to transfer this development to the economies of the new members that are currently underdeveloped (Beacháin et al. 2012, p.222). The old members are having to transfer money to the underdeveloped new members is not a move that paints the EU project in the right image to the citizens of EU-15 countries. Immigration is also emerging to be a major issue, where controversy has risen from the growing number of immigrants from Muslim states as opposed to having more from the European nations. Negative notions behind this implore that the increased number of immigrants will lead to the cut down of wages and jobs due to the availability of cheap labour (Beacháin et al. 2012, p.222). The accession of former soviet states was done with the aim of revolutionising the way politics was conducted in the region, Instead of achieving this, what has come out strongly is that the achieved result is the consolidation of the politics across the region. Beacháin (2012) argues that the membership has had no impact on the party systems present in the new member states. Post communist states still favour the parliamentary system as opposed to presidential. Conclusion This paper has analysed the circumstances in which the European Union was set, and whether the tenets that led to the formation of the EU are still upheld today. Guided by Hoffman’s definition of trust, we have identified that the differing interests among all the parties in the EU emerge as the main hindrance to the development of the European Union (Grabbe 2001, pp. 63). There are cases of mistrust from the reason that new members have their own interests in the Community as with the old members. Until when a solution can be drafted to benefit the economic growth of the new members, and one that will not put the old members under any financial pressure, trusting each other will still be a problem. Governments will require to have the ability to address challenges like dealing with left wing and right wing partisanship, corruption and cronyism. New members have to understand that accession does not exist only for their own benefit, but in a context of other countries working towards a harmonised region. All in all, issues that will provide the sway vote in the see-saw between old and new members are unemployment, corruption and cronyism (Cameron 2006, p.14). Reference Atatüre, S 2008, ‘The historical roots of European Union: integration, characteristics, and responsibilities for the 21st Century’, European Journal of Social Sciences, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 18-31. Beacháin, D, Sheridan, V & Stan, S 2012, Life in post-communist Eastern Europe after EU membership: happy ever after?, Routledge. Cameron, D 2007, ‘Post-communist democracy: the impact of the European Union’, Post-Soviet Affairs, vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 185-217. Cameron, D 2007, The challenges of EU accession for post-communist Europe, working paper, Yale University. Fontaine, P 2006, Europe in 12 lessons, Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg. Grabbe, H 2001, Profiting from EU enlargement, Centre for European Reform (CER), London. Hill, P 2011, A crusade for freedom, Daily Express, 8 January, p. 3 Hoffman, A 2002, ‘A conceptualization of trust in international relations’, European Journal of International Relations, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 375-401. Lane, D 2007, ‘Post-communist states and the European Union’, Journal of Communist Studies and Transition Politics, vol. 23, no. 4, pp. 461-477. Moravcsik, A, & Vachudova, MA 2002, ‘National interests, state power, and EU enlargement’, East European Politics and Society. Parker, G 2012, UK to pull out of EU policing powers, Financial Times, 14 October, viewed 29 January 2013, http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/6a562c6e-1605-11e2-9a8c-00144feabdc0.html#axzz2JRzF6doq Sotiropoulos, DA, Neamtu, I & Stoyanova, M 2003, ‘The trajectory of post-communist welfare state development: the cases of Bulgaria and Romania’, Social Policy & Administration, vol. 37, no. 6, pp. 656-673. Vachudova, MA 2009, ‘Corruption and compliance in the EU’s post-communist members and candidates’, Journal of Common Market Studies, vol. 47, pp. 43-62. Vassilev, R (Dr) 2011, ‘The tragic failure of “post-communism” in eastern Europe’, Global Research, viewed 29 January 2013 http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-tragic-failure-of-post-communism-in-eastern-europe/23616 Read More