EUROPEAN INTEGRATION: THE PRESENT STAGE PECULIARITIES

УДК 339.923:061.1ЄС(477)

Ляшенко О.В., студентка 1 року ОС магістр
ХНЕУ ім. С. Кузнеця

European integration still remains the main issue today as it is undergoing another test. The influx of refugees into Europe is a new problem for both the economies of countries and the social system. At the end of August 2015, preliminary data were announced that by the end of the year, more than 800,000 refugees would arrive in Germany alone. To date, we see more significant amounts of refugees and the unwillingness of European migration policy to cope with this problem. At a meeting of the coalition government of Germany, it was decided to allocate another six billion Euros from the state budget for their arrangement. The economic situation of France is far from brilliant, and the additional burden on the budget, both nationwide, and regions will only exacerbate it. According to these data, 56% of the French oppose their admission. Moreover, about the same, or more precisely 55%, do not agree with the easing of the rules for migrants seeking asylum, including those for Syrians.

For the federal states of Germany – this is also a serious test. In Germany, protests against refugees from Africa and the Middle East arriving in the country do not subside. The number of asylum seekers in Germany is growing. The Federal Office for Migration and Refugees (BAMF) does not have time to process the received applications – more than 200 thousand [1] are still in the works. The burden on local authorities is increasing.

The European economy has just begun to show a gradual recovery, helped by low energy prices, favorable financial conditions, and an increase in domestic demand.

The prospect of higher interest rates in the United States and lower economic activity in China exacerbate uncertainty and lead to increased market volatility. Political events only aggravate the situation and create an unfavorable background for optimistic forecasts for the development of the economies of the euro zone countries.

The forecast for the development of the euro zone shows the uneven recovery of the European economy and the complexity of the economic situation of the leading countries of the European Union.

It should also be noted that the difficulties and contradictions of European integration began to manifest as early as the beginning of 2000, when the European Constitution was failed in referendums in the Netherlands and France. Approval of the EU budget for 2007-2013 faced serious difficulties. The accession to the European Union in 2004 and 2007 of new participants, who were significantly lower in terms of their level of economic development to other countries of the community, only increased these problems. The global crisis of 2008–2009, severely affecting the economies of several EU countries (Greece and Ireland were almost on the verge of bankruptcy), demanded urgent measures by the EU and sharply raised the question of the need to change the structure of European integration. Spain and Portugal have experienced and are experiencing significant financial difficulties, which is associated with a huge public debt and budget deficit in these countries. For example, the total public debt of EU countries at the end of the second quarter of 2013 reached 93.4% [2].At the end of the first quarter of 2014, the debt burden of the EU countries was estimated at 92.3% of GDP. In the first quarter of 2015, the total debt of the euro zone countries set a new record – 92.9% of GDP [2].

The highest national debt was loans of 301.53 billion Euros from Greece, although the ratio of public debt to GDP of the country for the year decreased by five points – to 169% of GDP. The highest nominal government debt is in Italy (2.184 trillion Euros), followed by Germany (2.176 trillion Euros). The mark of 100% of GDP also exceeded the debt indicators of Belgium, Cyprus and Portugal. Estonia has the lowest national debt, both nominally and as a percentage of GDP: 2.05 billion Euros and 10.5%.

According to the European Commission for 2015, the national debt of 19 countries in the euro area may increase by 1% to 92.9% of GDP. This is a third higher than the maximum permissible level of 60%, prescribed in the Stability and Growth Pact (the main document of the euro zone).

The public debt of all 28 EU countries, including those that are not part of the euro zone, is growing even faster. Only in January – March 2015, it increased by 2%, to 88.2% of the total GDP of the European Union.

The main reasons for the debt crisis of the EU and the Euro zone, which has been continuing since 2010, are the consequences of the 2008 crisis (the elimination of which are still ongoing), as well as “widespread non-compliance with the Stability and Growth Pact”.

The Spanish national debt indicator reached a record high of 942.8 billion Euros (1.3 trillion dollars), which amounted to about 92.2% of the country’s GDP. The growth of public debt occurred, despite the measures of the government to reduce the main public spending. This turned out to be more than the government debt limit planned by the Spanish government at 91.4%.

The public debt of 17 EU countries in 2012 amounted to 90.6% of GDP compared to 87.3% in 2011 and 85.4% in 2010, and the public debt of all 27 EU countries increased from 82.3% of GDP to 85.1%, while the budget deficit fell from 4.4% of GDP to 3.9% [2].

These figures (not only in the countries listed above, but also in other EU countries), thus, far exceeded the standards recommended in 1997 by the Stability and Growth Pact. The standards set by it, namely, the annual budget deficit should be no more than 3% of GDP, and the national debt should be less than 60% of GDP or approach this value, were designed to ensure the stability of the euro. But the debt of European countries and the balance of their budgets are still substantially above the allowable levels.14 of the 28 EU countries had a national debt of more than 60% of national GDP, their number did not change compared with 2010 and 2011.

The destruction of a monetary union may ultimately lead to the development of an irreversible process of disintegration in the European Union. A debt crisis significantly increases the risk of a collapse of the euro. As international experience shows, when a common single unit of payment is abandoned, very rapid disintegration changes occur.

Strengthening anti-bloc sentiment within many EU countries (primarily in Germany and France, since they have received the bulk of assistance to bankrupt states) is an additional disintegration factor. A consequence of the wide publicity of the next stage of European integration, which is causing more and more discussions among the population of the European Union, as well as increasing contradictions in the process of EU enlargement and deepening integration, was the emergence of a certain European skepticism. Actually support for European integration by the elites significantly more than popular support, which was also shown during the electoral campaign to the European Parliament in spring 2014, when extremely populist parties, such as the Five Stars party, Giuseppe Grillo in Italy, attracted a considerable part of the population. Formed skepticism affects almost everyone, not only right and left, but also states with a liberal economy and countries with significant state participation in the economy.

Already today we can state that a certain fragmentation of the common European space has developed, for example, on the basis of the criterion of presence in the euro area. There are still serious discussions about the participation of small members in solving common issues of the European Union. On the other hand, not all EU countries have signed the Schengen Agreement. In addition, the labor market (12 out of 15 countries of the old EU) [3] was not open for new members of the European Union.

There are serious reasons for concern about the fate of European integration with all the ambiguity of the situation and political instability. As the facts and figures show, integration processes have both positive and negative effects for the economies of the euro zone countries.