Kel Varnsen wrote:
How does the EU and its expansion east fit into this narrative?
The 'narrative' is not one of noble workers and a monolith of evil exploiters. Powers contend to exploit natural resources and human labour.
The EU is a complex project. Firstly, my understanding is it's not considering expanding further at present—not for several years at least.
The initial establishment of the EEC/EU (and importantly NATO) involved both political and economic motives. West Germany joined NATO early on because the then NATO powers realised they couldn't take Russia on in a land war.
Meanwhile the EU's origins are as a free trade zone specifically designed to prevent European nations from warring in contention for natural resources. At the time there was a competing free trade agreement (EFTA), competition with which hastened the initial consolidation of the EEC.
These were changes occurring with World War II as a terrifyingly recent historical backdrop.
When a number of southern Mediterranean nations (Portugal, Spain, Greece) exited dictatorship, it was considered advantageous to stabilise them politically by bringing them into the EEC. For example Greek leaders were convinced they'd fall under Russian influence if they weren't allowed to join. Importantly, membership in the EEC has always been predicated on the establishment of a common foreign and security policy.
As far as current candidate expansions are concerned, my understanding is the geopolitical view continues to be dominated by Russia.
The recent interactions between SYRIZA and the Eurogroup brought some of the underlying dynamics into view.
- Russian–German energy relations
- Rate of return on loans made to EU sovereigns
- Assessed risk on loans made to EU sovereigns
- Capacity to build and control essential infrastructure eg pipelines
When it comes to how the movement of labour fits into this, vested interests shaping migration policy within the EU have diverse needs for labour both locally and internationally. The only global requirement is that they all want the lowest price possible all the time.
Hence the increasingly invigilated sorting of candidate migrants by skill set and economic capacity which accompanies the fearmongering around "bad" migrants and refugees. Consider too the increasingly stringent minimum income standards for foreign workers in the UK.
To compare, it's one of the glaring contradictions of Australian migration policy that as the degree of xenophobia in our asylum and migration policy, and in the public debate around it increases, our overall migration intake is also at historically high levels.
