Painful Integration or Not So Splendid Isolation? Downsides of European Integration in the Context of Romania’s Double Transformation Annette Freyberg-Inan and Otto Holman 1 “All is for the best in the best of all possible worlds” Dr. Pangloss ”Everyone must cultivate their own garden” Candide 1. Introduction Six months after the big bang enlargement in May 2004, the member states of the European Union (EU) agreed on a next widening round towards Bulgaria, Romania, Turkey and Croatia. As for the latter two countries, the Brussels European Council concluded that accession negotiations with Croatia could be opened on 17 March 2005 and with Turkey on 3 October 2005, provided that Croatia would fully cooperate with the Yugoslavia Tribunal and Turkey would bring into force a number of specific pieces of legislation that were identified by the European Commission (such as the new Penal Code). 2 Anticipating the successful completion by Bulgaria and Romania of the preparations for accession, the European Council called for the finalization of the Accession Treaty with these two countries. 3 The European Parliament gave its assent on April 13 th and the Treaty was signed on April 25 th 2005. A safeguard clause makes it possible to delay accession by one year, should progress in a number of specific areas singled out by the Commission be deemed insufficient In this paper we will look at the special case of Romania which, according to the same European Council conclusions, would be able “to assume all the obligations of membership at the envisaged time of its accession [i.e. January 1 st 2007], provided that it continues its efforts to that end and completes in a successful and timely way all necessary reforms and commitments undertaken in all areas of the acquis.” It will be argued that the post-communist governments of this country have been faced with a fundamental dilemma, i.e. a choice between two unsatisfactory alternatives. On the one hand, the country’s ambition to become full member of the EU on the first of January 2007 forced its successive governments to implement policies that were in line with EU conditionality. A ‘functioning free market economy’ was among the top priorities in this respect. Though full membership of the EU was (and is) officially presented (and legitimized) as ‘the best of all possible worlds’, Romania’s efforts to meet the so-called Copenhagen criteria – and its economic transformation from command economy to free market economy in general – have not yet resulted in better living conditions for a majority of the Romanian people, to put it mildly. On the other hand, the alternative of staying outside, if considered at all, would not result in better economic and social performance either, but would most likely lead to further decline. Thus, 1 Annette Freyberg-Inan and Otto Holman both work at the Department of Political Science, Faculty of Social and Behavioral Sciences, of the University of Amsterdam. An earlier version of this paper was presented at the Fifth Pan European International Relations Conference, The Hague, 9-11 September 2004. The authors would like to thank the editors of the RJSP and an anonymous reviewer for their helpful comments. 2 Croatia still awaits the opening of negotiations at the time of writing, as it was deemed to have failed to comply with the demands. Turkey is on track at the time of writing. However, the likely failure of the Constitutional Treaty calls smooth progress towards its accession into question. 3 See Council of the European Union, Brussels European Council 16/17 December 2004. Presidency Conclusions, Brussels, 17 December 2004 (16238/04).