The second river of European integration

Erhard Busek called the Danube the second river of European integration. After the German-French reconciliation along the Rhine, the Danube was to become a scene of peaceful coexistence of people along the river. For almost 27 years, as chairman of the Institute for the Danube Region and Central Europe (IDM), he tried to make this a reality. He had recognised earlier than many that the region was on the move. When we speak of the events at the end of the 1980s, there is often talk of walls, curtains and fences. We thought to have cut holes, lifted, and teared them down. However, they have returned, physically, virtually, in our minds. So, before the Danube can become the second river of European integration, many steps of reconciliation still have to be taken. Both in the Western Balkans and in the Danube Delta, states are stirring up old resentments instead of overcoming them – resulting in the construction of new borders. 

In the years since the fall of communism, more than 10,000 kilometres of new borders have been created, most of them on the territory of the former Soviet Union. While Vladimir Putin has been trying for years to move these by force, other countries want integration into the EU – with the aim of dismantling borders. But as a prerequisite for dismantling internal borders, the effective protection of external borders is necessary, which in itself can have unfortunate consequences: the Una River, for example, divides the town of Kostajnica into two parts. Since Croatia joined the Schengen Agreement on 1 January 2023, the Una became an external EU border, making exchange between the two parts of the city more difficult. And this will continue until Bosnia and Herzegovina also becomes a member. Borders in Europe are not primarily being dismantled, but only shifted, therefore European integration paradoxically also creates exclusion on the continent. Stating that we want other countries to join might be a grand gesture, but this is not enough; bold deeds must follow. For the EU member states, this means that they must be more honest with candidate countries on the issue of enlargement. For the (potential) candidates, it means that they must also take serious steps towards accession instead of just pretending to do so. The extension and deepening of areas of competence on the supranational level must finally go hand in hand with enlargement again, as was last the case in 2004. 

At the beginning of European integration, the focus was on economic cooperation. In the majority of accessions, however, the primary goal was to stabilise young democracies. Starting in 1981 with Greece, then Portugal and Spain in 1986, Bulgaria and Romania in 2007, and finally, more than ten years ago, Croatia. However, democratic developments are never linear and certainly not irreversible, which is why we need real security mechanisms at the EU level that must be institutionalised. We should not be afraid of far-reaching changes. For only in this way can the Danube really become the second river of European integration.

Perhaps it will then be followed by the Bosporus, the Volga, and maybe even the Thames again. But until then, quite a bit of water is likely to flow from the Black Forest to the Black Sea.