While traveling on an eastbound train from Berlin to Prague I realized the process of European Union (EU) integration would not happen as quickly as one might expect.  It was on this train that our group was first forced to get our passports stamped and our currency changed. Yet problems with the European Union are evident throughout Europe, not just in the accession countries, and involve more than currencies and stamped passports.

In Eastern European nations such as the Czech Republic and Poland, integration into the European Union is slow at best. Indeed, the differences between Eastern and Western Europe run far deeper than geography.  Eastern European states possess an entirely different alphabet from Western Europe, and tend to affiliate much more closely with other Slavic peoples than with Western Europeans.  The economies of the accession countries also tend to prevent them from fully integrating in the European Union as quickly as they would hope.  The financial institutions of these various countries must be strong enough that joining the European Union will not place a burden on other member states.  This requirement so far works better in theory than in practice as the EU’s economy finds itself dragged down currently by the stagnant economies of such countries as Poland and Italy.  The minimal debt requirement, which is forced upon the newly accessioned countries while ignored by the likes of France and Germany, also slows the process of fully integrating countries into the Union once their membership has been approved.

Yet the economically inferior accession countries are not the only ones confronting this problem of integration into the European Union.  Nations such as Great Britain, Austria, and the Netherlands, are all having problems with the forced conformity of this supranational organization.  The problems facing Great Britain, while a result of its own choices and actions, exist as a result of its skepticism at becoming entangled in the Continent’s financial affairs, especially since that relationship has yet to prove lucrative at home.  In the Netherlands, concern over the consequences of EU integration on their particularly liberal positions regarding euthanasia, marijuana, and prostitution has the Dutch Left worried, while the proposed membership of Turkey in the EU has the Dutch Right anxious about increased terrorism after recent incidents in which Islamic extremists attacked and killed a Dutch politician and a filmmaker.  In formerly neutral Austria accepting membership in the European Union meant a mandatory defense payment and eliminating any ability to claim neutrality. For Austria this defense payment has come at what many view as a terrible price.  Prior to entry into the EU, Austria laid claim to one of the most famous and well-funded public arts programs in all of Europe. Yet mandatory defense spending has required the Austrian government to pull funds from their highly prized artistic sector to fulfill their recently acquired commitments to the European Union.

Ultimately, EU integration will come but slowly and at a price.  For some that cost will be small, requiring minimal sacrifices for solid economies and stable governments.  Yet for others the price of joining will be high, forcing the redistribution of funds that previously subsidized social institutions and now must cover military quotas.  Thus, further integration into the European Union is a choice that each country must make, and for some the price may be too high.  As Turkey prepares to enter the EU and flood member states with cheap immigrant labor and an increased opportunity for terrorism, the price might be too high for even nations such as Great Britain, France, and the Netherlands to pay.