Greece, a small country on the tip of the Balkan Peninsula in southeastern Europe, became the 10th member of what is now the European Union in 1981. Since then, both the EU and Greece have changed to a very great extent. Greece’s experience – as the poorest member by far when it joined – may not be indicative of what others will encounter now that the EU comprises 27 members and is undergoing a period of deep introspection. But Greece does show how participation in the union can benefit both sides.
The EU is both a direct development of specific historical events – notably two world wars – and a brilliant experiment which, if ultimately successful, could be the prototype for future civilization. Countries join because they want to and then are obliged to adopt certain principles and practices, ultimately benefiting citizens by improving the state’s own internal governance as well as bringing wealth through improved external relations.
The European Union changed Greece in almost every respect – from infrastructure to agriculture (with huge infusions of funds), to the way we treat our environment. The effect on Greece in these areas has been entirely positive, despite pre-accession concerns that Greek business and Greek culture would be overwhelmed by the sheer magnitude of Europe. Instead, Greece has grown, enjoying unprecedented political stability as a member of a club that can provide assistance while actually helping protect what is unique and good about the country. It’s worth remembering that when Greece became a full member of the European Economic Community (the EU’s predecessor), it had only been seven years since the end of a military dictatorship, yet it was able through the union to achieve this remarkable stability and growth.
The great difference between an EU of 10 members and one of 27, with a population of nearly 500 million, is that small countries can no longer expect to have the impact on the EU that Greece did when it joined. Greece’s 1981 government – a contrarian socialist regime which had opposed EU membership while in opposition – fought for and received increased EU funding for the development of Mediterranean member states. This benefited Spain and Portugal, who joined a few years after.
Greece has long played a decisive role in EU relations with Turkey. For many years, Greek objections determined the relationship with the EU’s largest neighbor and its Muslim population. But lately, major European countries such as Germany and France have had to take on a more active role in deciding the future of EU-Turkey relations. Today it is highly unlikely that a small country can expect to influence the EU to the extent that Greece did, notwithstanding tiny Cyprus’s current (understandable) demands that Turkey recognize it before Ankara’s relationship with the EU can progress.
The EU is looking for a new direction, for a vision that will inspire its people and help end the current mid-life identity crisis. The union needs every member to ratify its constitution (overcoming French and Dutch rejection) in order to move toward a political union to complement the success to date of monetary union.
The European Union is a beacon of democracy and humanism, a product of the Enlightenment. It can boast of all that is best in the collective efforts of human beings to co-exist, and the proof is its success in maintaining peace and prosperity on a continent that, until now, never ceased to be wracked by war. To move forward, though, the EU must draw on the riches of its past, and the ideas of even its smallest members. It needs to remember past successes in order to deal with the challenges of the future. It needs self-confidence and conviction in its principles, continuing to hold itself up as a model for the rest of the world that humankind can solve its problems with consensus, and with basic mutual respect.
Please e-mail PostGlobal if you'd like to receive an email notification when PostGlobal sends out a new question.
