Intergovernmental Organ izations 237bers pushed for halting arms sales to Rus sia; France opposed the mea sure. Differences
in the countries’ positions tend to reflect economic ties. France has military contracts
with Rus sia. Germany and Italy depend on imports of Rus sian gas and oil; Great Brit-
ain does not. While the rec ord of unity on foreign policy is weak, the EU did negoti-
ate in unity at the Iran nuclear negotiations, with the High Representative for Foreign
Affairs playing a prominent role.
The difficulties in security policy have had repercussions in other arenas as well.
The Amsterdam Treaty elevated the issue of the movement of persons and all border-
management issues, including illegal immigration and asylum. But the 2014–16
refugee crisis, as discussed in Chapter 10, has bitterly divided EU members. The ten
central Eu ro pean members have refused to accept refugee quotas, with Hungary,
Slovakia, and the Czech Republic the most vehemently opposed. Germany and Sweden,
two of the most generous countries toward the influx, want burden sharing, with other
countries taking in a “fair share.” And the terrorist acts committed in Paris in the fall
of 2015 by the Islamic State have made every state more cautious about accepting large
numbers of refugees without close vetting. The difficulty of arriving at an enforceable
consensus on this issue suggests that the other prob lems, including the euro, will not
be easily solved.
Equally problematic are the issues surrounding membership. Should the EU con-
tinue to expand its membership by reaching out to the newly demo cratic states of
eastern Eu rope and the former Soviet Union, or to those in need, such as Iceland?
How rapidly can new members come to adhere to the 80,000 pages of EU law and
regulations currently in effect? How will the special concessions these countries won
affect the functioning of the Union? Although new members such as Croatia, which
joined in 2013, have been given extra time to phase in EU law, they also need to wait
before receiving full benefits that range from agricultural subsidies to free movement
of labor. Can Turkey, the first candidate state with a majority Muslim population,
eventually meet the criteria for membership: stable demo cratic institutions, a func-
tioning market, and a capacity to meet union obligations? Turkey has already made
enormous improvements in its human rights rec ord and minority protection, but its
admission is still undecided. Will candidate member Serbia be accepted more rapidly?
Will the EU governing institutions be able to change?
So far, the debates over the euro, foreign affairs, and membership suggest that
the answers will not come easily. And those issues will be magnified when Great
Britain votes in a referendum on its future relationship with the EU. Great Britain
supports significant restructuring, including giving more power to national parlia-
ments to block EU laws, restructuring social- welfare benefits for mi grants, and
eliminating the EU goal of an “ever closer union.” The British government is carry ing
on two levels of negotiations: one with its own constituency and another with other
member states of the EU.