In his own desire to expand to the East all fled her favorites Edge of Reason
Bulgaria stated that refuses to join the euro area. Romania also has doubts. Poland declares that it will come only when that will solve all their problems … In general, the process of European integration has slowed down obviously. Does forever — time will show.
In the behavior of the aforementioned states entirely possible to see a kind of "syndrome of betrayal." When the west of Europe everything was fine — they moved there from the Russian bloc. Now they go there, honestly saying that now is not behold the benefits of being in the euro area: there will need to participate in solving the problems. And they love to solve common problems. They love to make a strong and rich prepyadstviya solved them. And betray, when behold the that the latter appear prepyadstviya. But in fact hitch more extensive than parasitic complexes evroprovintsy (provinces not only geographically, politically and economically, and in the historical and civilizational sense.)
In a sense, the whole history of Europe — is an attempt to integrate it. As an example such (specific naturally) can be integrated if desired, see, for example, even Roman era. When it comes the time of fragmentation, similar to the idea of integration on those or other permanent basis vorachivalis, the benefit of all the preconditions for this are obvious: is not very big, historical and cultural in comparison with other regions, relatively homogeneous, and of civilization relatively uniform.
In almost all cases, the sample space integration of the euro is having a bad as some reasonable crossed the border and invaded zone is not prepared for such integration or do not need it.
One of the more successful attempts to integrate — Napoleonic era. If Napoleon halted its expansion in about 1808-10 years. — It is possible that he made the union and the government could survive. "Robespierre on horseback," as it was then called, won first no weapon: he won because the idea of a new century, which he carried with him from revolutionary France, based on its own was presentable and went on more or less prepared for their soil. As Engels wrote: "Napoleon broke the ice feudalism throughout Europe."
The brakes as in 1808 or a bit later meant the brakes on the borders of what was then Russia. Entry of Napoleon in the war with Russia (by the way, the views SMSoloviev, knowingly and intentionally provoked by the policy of Alexander I) of the totality of circumstances had no chance of ultimate success in the case of a large-scale transformation in its war on the Russian countryside. Russian territory As for its own could be integrated into a single Europe, namely as civilization and it was different. Yes, she was also Europe, but "other Europe", in other words, another embodiment of European civilization.
Crossing the limit, going beyond the area at that time with respect to ready-to-integrate, Napoleon lost and in fact justified integration. In a sense, he transformed the intra-civilization war for the union in the inter-civilizational war on civilizational destruction.
Today's non-stop expansion of the zone of European civilization is faced with the same discrepancy. When, in 1951, France, Italy, Belgium, Germany, Luxembourg and the Netherlands started the process of creating a Euro Coal and Steel Community, which in 1993 resulted in the creation of the Euro society, they began to produce the integration area, which has historically had a precise boundaries, those or other of these countries at the time or another were part of the adjacent. And it started on the matter on which the union was required purely economically, in other words they are formally integrated the fact that almost everything was built in essentially itself. Integration was quite successful, and the result turned out to be attractive to the neighbors: a step-by-step cut in it those who turned out to be fairly prepared for this, in other words, was built in a natural area Western civilization.
And, of course, began to appear wish to obtain similar advantages of integration, having for her impartial premises. Union relatively equal so Makarov was converted into a union of unequal; union of those who stood on the same impartially same type and level of development — in association with those who, on the one hand, yet it was necessary to extend this level, and on the other — who differ the type of the current organization.
If at first it was a question about the design of practical integration of the existing historic core of Europe, then we are talking about is the inclusion of the so-called unification of Europe's periphery. What is France, Italy, Belgium, Germany, Luxembourg and the Netherlands? This is actually the territory of the empire of Charlemagne who're actually Western Europe as a unified civilization. What is Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria and the Republic of the terrain dismembered Yugoslavia? At various times it or the periphery of the European empires, or barrier, buffer area, separating the Western European civilization from the real or imaginary danger from the east. This is the area for centuries passed from hand to hand, until the twentieth century, almost did not have statehood.
Yes, each of these states were moments of historical take-off: Czech Republic at one time extended to the southern seas, including today's Croatia, Poland pushes the boundaries east of the Dnieper … But it was a very long time, and in almost all cases — and short-lived. They could claim to be the peripheral colonies of Western European empire, if it was created as a colonial empire. But, on the one hand, it was created as a union association of equal — equal first on the type and style of life, and later have — rights. On the other hand, the Eastern European countries, ran across from the socialist camp, and claimed not claim to be the "junior partner", and equal participants in this association. They never realized that they were junior partners in the Eastern Bloc not because they discredit anyone, but because they constantly had to help and pull up their development, with tightened so that their standard of living was higher than the life of one who they pulled up. But being on the development of "junior", they had become accustomed to the role of constantly tightened, and so gravitated to the EU, we believed that they would be there, too, "pull", and even with all this, give equal rights in political matters.
Ancient Europe at first did not think about it: she had got used to that younger development sits relaxed and vote for something that will solve seniors, and to the fact that in the history of all the shares on the real power, not by formal rules. It was she who was conceived by integrating them into its own structure, to strengthen their capacity to compete with other global centers, namely, with Russia and the United States, but it turned out that it shall at its own expense to build the capacity of foreign language own new "brothers" to solve their problems and maintain their phobias.
In the face of Bulgaria, Romania, Poland, the Czech Republic, etc. Europe beheld Russian outposts of civilization, is unacceptably close to its borders, in other words, the zone of confrontation. It turned out that by defeating the Soviet Union and annexing these
areas, it is, in the 1-x, replaced in order to gain power over them, perched on additional responsibilities on their content and "protection." In-2, has made the newest area of confrontation with Russia, which had to overcome the disaster of 90th and show how their capitalist "market" and civilizational rights to these areas. B-3, the Europeans got inside his own area of the obvious effects of combining the 1st of their own rivals — the U.S..
Well, can not say France or Germany with Poland as an equal! France has always been her protector, her distant outpost in the confrontation with the German states and the Protestant influence — but specifically ward outpost, not an equal ally. There were cases when the French princes became Polish kings, but they threw that throne, as it was part of vnutrifrantsuzskih interests. Poland has always been fascinating for her only the second time, as the periphery. For Germany, Poland, and has always been quite a degree or another irritant and a troubled neighbor in the middle of the rest of the claim her views.
The same, in fact, can be said about the perception of other countries in Eastern Europe an old Europe. The limit of integration has made her even more problems than allowed to decide how much more that in almost all cases, and their different interests and different psychological vision of the world. Namely, for an old Europe Our homeland, with all occurring anti-Russian complexes — faster economic partner and ally, and sometimes even invisible in competition with the United States. For many countries in Eastern Europe as our home, on the one hand, a possible opponent, on the other — a tool foment European systems in order to increase the outreach of its price and value of a foreign confrontation of. An old Europe in relations with Russia in almost all necessary cooperation, "new" — the confrontation to highlight its role as "guardian of Europe" and receive a respective compensation.
Plus, the EU faces the problem of claims for a role in the integration of countries formed the Soviet Union on the ground, in other words turn into a zone of their own efforts and responsibilities, not counting its periphery of the barrier that separated the "West" and the "East", besides the periphery of this of the "East" — the historical part of another Russian-European civilization. Now, it is wobbly and Kiev and Tbilisi usurpers must be the object of attention, emotions, and an old migraine Europe. And as all this still remains an area of historical, civilizational and national interests of the Russian Federation, then take them to yourself means to be doomed to constant confrontation with her.
The biggest mistake an old favorite of Europe lay in the fact that they did not appreciate the configuration of the situation, could not fit the brakes — just like Napoleon once — and fled justifiable limit of integration. And instead of the creation of the Eastern European countries demilitarized zone with the status of "eternally neutral and non-aligned", which at that time would not have caused the resistance of, they are, in fact, reconstituted in a new state of the quality of the outpost confrontation zone of conflicting interests. Those receiving area of migraine, which, by virtue of special zeal "new European" countries to get reinforcements inside the EU itself has a certain craving for expansion.
In all principled measure. Stalin in 1945, took into account the experience of Napoleon and fit braked, did not go to the English Channel, although suspend him then was not able to none. But he freed himself from the problems that have risen to a reorganization of the Western European states in the criteria when needed the power to restore their country.
Favorites of Western Europe have not considered any errors Napoleon, or the right decisions Stalin. Because they now suffer in the choice of how to suspend, and better — to push back his cuff integration movement to the East, or to expect the moment when the "spring stories" toss them back. It is not only toss with those lines on which they will be able to move forward, and call into question the integrity of the fact the Western European core.