Andrzej Lepper, leader of the peasant organization "Self-Defense", is something between Vladimir Zhirinovsky and French anti-globalist farmer José Bové, writes the magazine Europa. And although the Warsaw establishment, campaigning for entry into the European Union, cannot stand the peasant tribune, it is impossible to brush aside the politically incorrect agrarian. Up to half of Polish peasants sympathize with Andrzej Lepper's escapades. In the arsenal of Eurosceptics there is a powerful argument: at the first stage of integration, agricultural producers from new member states will receive only a quarter of the subsidies guaranteed to their Western European competitors.
The ghost of the formidable "Self-Defense" loomed behind the heads of the Polish delegation leaders when, at the Copenhagen summit in December last year, they fought like lions for increased subsidies for the national agricultural sector. The extra billion euros wrested literally with their teeth is a trump card for the authorities, who now, persuading fellow citizens to give the go-ahead to joining a united Europe, can rightly say: we did everything we could. Opinion polls show that the officials did not fight in vain - more than 20% of voters believe that the Polish delegation achieved even better conditions from the EU than could be expected.
In 40-million Poland, the largest of the "applicants", the referendum on joining the European Union will be held on June 8. And exactly three months before that, on March 8, tiny Malta (population - less than 400 thousand people) was the first of the candidate countries to go to the polls. No surprises were expected here, although the opposition Labour Party at one time even threatened to disrupt the plebiscite. Nevertheless, according to polls, more than half of the population believe that the island has no other path but EU membership.
Another Mediterranean candidate, Cyprus, has other concerns for now: overcoming the nearly 30-year division into Greek and Turkish parts. In recent months, the UN, encouraged by the Americans and the European Union, has stepped up peacemaking efforts by proposing a new unification plan. If politicians on both sides of the "green line" agree to the UN initiatives, first the islanders will vote on them in a referendum (presumably on March 30), and then - all together - for the entry of a united Cyprus into the EU. However, if the unification vote does not take place, only Greek Cypriots will take part in the plebiscite, and there is no doubt that they will overwhelmingly vote in favor of the EU.
Slovenes will express their attitude toward a united Europe on March 23. The only one of the fragments of the former Yugoslavia that managed to avoid the major wars and devastation of the 1990s, Slovenia is considered the most successful of all candidates. By some indicators, it even surpasses current EU members - Portugal and Greece. Oddly enough, this is precisely what troubles some residents of the Balkan country: they say we managed without Brussels, why should we take on extra obligations. Moreover, if economic growth in Slovenia continues, it will soon lose the right to very favorable regional subsidies allocated to EU countries where per capita income is less than 75% of the European average (currently Slovenian incomes account for about 70% of the EU average). In general, the republic shows no particular enthusiasm, though there is no serious opposition either - almost everyone agrees that a small country in the very center of the Old World simply has nowhere to go.
Central Europe will take up the baton from Slovenia: on April 12, four days before the EU summit in Athens, at which the accession treaties of 10 countries will be signed, a referendum will be held in Hungary, on May 16-17 - Slovakia's turn, and a week after Poland, on June 15-16 - the Czech Republic.
In Hungary, according to the latest polls, pro-EU sentiment is still quite widespread, but the rather sharp decline in the number of Euro-enthusiasts in recent months is alarming. If in May 2002, 72% of citizens were in favor of membership, then in January 2003 there were only 58%. About a fifth of voters were undecided. Budapest began experiments with market reforms earlier than neighboring capitals, back in the early 1980s, so by the time of the "velvet revolutions" Hungary turned out to be the leader of economic transformation. Since then, however, the pace has slowed somewhat; in any case, the country is not among the top students, lagging in per capita income not only behind Slovenia, but also, for example, behind the Czech Republic. The most prominent figure of the anti-European campaign is the leader of ultranationalists István Csurka, who calls for resisting those forces that are trying to deprive the Magyars of their national identity. Despite the trend toward an increase in the number of Eurosceptics, the referendum results do not cause concern for the government.
Residents of Slovakia perceive the European Union with great enthusiasm - more than 70% intend to vote "for". Bratislava already has experience of missing the integration train - though not the European one, but the Atlantic one. In 1997, under nationalist Prime Minister Vladimír Mečiar, a referendum on joining NATO failed in Slovakia due to low turnout; as a result, the country did not make it into the first wave of alliance enlargement, falling behind the Czech Republic, Poland, and Hungary. The right-wingers who replaced Mečiar promised to prevent Slovakia from again being left out of important European processes. Bratislava's main problem is 20 percent unemployment, one of the highest in Europe. Skeptics fear that opening the market after EU accession could exacerbate this situation. However, no influential opponents of the EU are visible - Vladimír Mečiar, unpopular in Europe, supports accession because Slovakia has no other choice.
More than half of Czechs (55%) intend to say "yes" in the referendum, and the number of integration supporters is gradually growing. However, the latest public opinion polls have become a cause for concern for the government: more than 37% of voters believe that Prague achieved significantly less in the EU accession negotiations than it could have. As in Poland, the most dissatisfied are among farmers - they regularly hold noisy protests against the unequal terms of accession. Reproaching their politicians, they appeal to Warsaw's negotiating achievements - after all, its representatives managed to get an addition in Copenhagen, while the Czechs did not.
In Poland itself, 62.5% support Europe, though sociologists note significant fluctuations. Besides farmers, there is another influential group of Eurosceptics - the conservative League of Polish Families, close to church circles (it considers integration a threat to the traditional foundations of Polish society), and the Catholic Church itself. True, the Primate of Poland, Cardinal Józef Glemp, is in principle not against the EU, but insists on compliance with certain conditions of accession. The Church demands that the accession treaty specifically stipulate Poland's right to maintain extremely strict legislation on abortion, which contradicts the liberal rules in force in most European countries. The clergy refer to the experience of Catholic Ireland, which achieved a special status on this issue, as well as fellow candidate Malta.
Finally, the last group of candidate countries is the Baltics: Lithuania votes on May 11, and Estonia and Latvia on September 14 and 20, respectively.
The haste of the Lithuanian parliament, which scheduled the referendum for spring, is criticized in the country - many fear that the government will not have time to launch a campaign in support of accession. Moreover, as former Prime Minister Kazimira Prunskienė, representing the Peasant Party, stated, the rural population, firstly, is not ready to make a choice, and secondly, may not show up at the polling stations at all, because May is the sowing season. The authorities are worried not so much about the outcome of the referendum (according to polls, 68% support Europe) as about the turnout - the constitution requires 50% participation.
Farmers and fishermen of all three Baltic countries are dissatisfied with the conditions under which Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia are joining the European Union. Most of all, they are outraged by the quotas for agricultural products and fish allocated by the European Commission - the newcomers are sure that they are being discriminated against in order to create better competition conditions for farmers from the veteran countries.
Lithuania has another problem. Under strong pressure from the European Commission, Vilnius agreed in June 2002 to close the Ignalina Nuclear Power Plant by 2009. Europe is not satisfied with the fact that Ignalina has reactors of the same type as those in Chernobyl. But the plant produces 70% of all electricity, and the prospects for Lithuania's energy supply after the reactors are closed are unclear. The new president, Rolandas Paksas, intends to seek from Brussels funding for the construction of a new, more reliable type of reactor.
Estonia was always cited as an example of a leader in economic reforms among the candidate countries, but skeptical sentiments are widespread there too. According to polls by Estonian sociological services, 57% of citizens intend to vote in favor of joining the EU. A poll conducted by the European Commission gives significantly less optimistic figures - 32% "for" and 42% undecided. According to commentators in Estonia itself, the weak position on Europe is the flip side of those very rapid and successful reforms for which Tallinn was praised. Estonia implemented the harshest form of liberal "shock therapy"; the population simply did not have time to adapt. Many have not yet recovered from the changes that took place, and now new changes are coming. It is notable that pro-European sentiments among non-Estonians are stronger than among indigenous citizens. The same is true in Latvia - the Russian-speaking population hopes that the EU's liberal legislation will give them more rights than the fairly strict rules adopted in the Baltic countries after independence.
Latvia, where ethnic tensions were most serious during the 1990s, ranks last among the ten acceding countries in per capita income - 37% of the average European level. Riga barely met the Copenhagen criteria necessary for EU accession. The outcome of the referendum is most likely predetermined - in the European Union they see another guarantee of protection from Russia, which the Latvian elite still perceives as a potential threat. However, as Latvian experts and officials admit, membership in the European Union itself will not solve the country's numerous problems.
Overall, no surprises are expected this year, like those that Norway twice - in 1972 and 1994 - presented to the European Union, voting against the EU after completing full cycles of accession negotiations. Although, when dealing with mysterious Slavic souls or thoughtful Baltic guys, one should not relax.