Poland’s experience in the modern eastern European integrational processes

Until recently the leading analysts in the field of geopolitic shave debated whe ther thein landpower is more important than sea power and what region of Eurasia is vital important in terms of the entire continent control. Harold McKinder, one of the most out standing geopoliticians, at the beginning of this century became the  initiator of the discussion resulted in his concept of Eurasian “supporting territory” (which, as insisted, should include the entire Siberia and the most part of Central Asia) and later – conception “of the heart” of Central and Eastern Europe as the vitally important base for dominance over the continent. He popularized his concept of “heartland” by famous aphorism:

Who rules the Eastern Europe, possesses the Heart of land;

Who rules the Heart of land, possesses the World Island (Eurasia); Who rules the World Island, possesses the world [1].

Eastern Europe is a part of Europe characterizing its eastern territories. As a term, Eastern Europe has no strict definition and clear boundaries. At the present day, according to the UN definition, Eastern Europe includes the following states: Belorussia, Bulgaria, Hungary, Moldavia, Poland, Romania, Russia, Slovakia,  Ukraine  and Czech Republic [2].

Obvious presence and great volume of the external factor of influence on countries of Eastern  Europe  definitely determines the specificity of their development; it’s impossible to ignore this external influence upon investigation of political regime transformation mode in these countries. Moreover, the external factor  of  influence is the principal factor in the process of formation and in the process of transformation of political regimes and entire political systems in countries of Eastern Europe.

Initial belonging of countries of this region to the European civilization and European political culture stipulates for availability of such internal factors of transformation which may not exist in countries with other civilizational basis. First of all, this is in detructibility of civil society and its permanent influence on the political process. These are original historical traditions included into the structure of European political culture. This is the special state of mass consciousness affecting the perception of liberal and communist ideologies  in different periods of history of countries of this region, and other factors [3, p.3]

The essence of Eastern Europe was dictated in VIII century by its resistance to geographical localization and description. In 1769, for example, military actions between Russian army and lordly confederates  changed political boundaries of two countries three years prior to the official partition of Poland. In VIII century cartography did note laborate the competent description of Eastern Europe. Concept of the existence of Eastern Europe was as interim region between Europe and Orient [4].

Countries of this region have many common things in historical and social-economic development. After the Second World War they were united by the belonging to socialistic economic system that stipulated for stable economic relations with each other and USSR. Majority of these countries participated in the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance and Political Block of  Warsaw treaty.

In 1988-1990s USSR transited to the policy of “new political thinking” resulted in the denial of interference to the affairs of Eastern Europe and crash of socialism. Augustputsch inMoscow and the consequent change of the state system in USSR in 1991 finally liquidated the possibility to build socialism by the Soviet example. Eastern European region restored geopolitical independence. New period in its history began [5]. Democratic “velvet” revolutions in Hungary, Poland, Czech  Republic, popular revolt  (revolution)  in Romania, unification of  German Democratic Republic and Federal Republic of Germany, dissolution of Yugoslavia. Revolutions in  Eastern Europe were democratic and anti-totalitarian. Except Romania and Yugoslavia, change of authority was peaceful.

During 1990-1992s radical reorganization of political and legal system was in all Eastern European countries. The key objective of constitutional construction was formation of state similar to the most mature, accepted samples of legal democracy. New state system was based on the political pluralism, publicity, multiplicity of parties, separation of powers, strengthening of individual rights. It became clear in 1990 sthatimplementation oftheidea of “return to the bosom of Western civilization” was more difficult than it was supposed. It was understood that interests of Eastern Europe correspond not to its absorption by western economic and military structures, bur real integration to the world society securing its own cultural, economic, geopolitical originality, strengthening of internal relations in the regions. It shall bementioned the interaction of countries of socalled VisegradGroup on which basis Central European Free Trade Zone was established (Slovakia, Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, since 1995 - Slovenia). Eastern European countries areactiveparticipantsofo the rinteg rationassociations – Black Sea Economic Cooperation, Council of States of Baltic Sea, Cooperation of Carpathian regions.

At the present time radical economic transformations happened in these countries resulted in the enlargement  of their relations with developed countries of Western Europe. The principal peculiarities of economic and geographical position of countries of  Eastern Europe are:

1. Seaside position of the majority of
2. Possible access to sea through Danube water way for countries having no access to sea (Hungary, Slovakia).
3. Neighborly position of countries in relation to each
4. Transit position between countries of Western Europe and CIS

All these peculiarities establish good preconditions for the development of integration processes [6].

So, countries of Eastern Europe, considering global security and stability problems as the priority problems  and focusing the irattention on the priority of the development of national economies and financial sector, made a decision to join to general European structures as NATO and EC.

Eastern European countries gave the following block of strategically important objectives in favor of membership in NATO: strengthening of internal situation in the country; strengthening  and  enlargement  of NATO by new approaches based on the existing geopolitical situation; strengthening and acceleration of democratic processes of regional reconstruction and establishment of new European order. All above mentioned objectives constituted the core of new geopolitics in Eastern Europeanregion [7, p.82].

Aspiring to the Euro-Atlantic integration byjoining NATO, from the point of view of Eastern European countries, should assist in strengthening of internal state security, establishment of new security system of United Europe, exclusion of threat of regional conflicts, establishment of military shield around Eastern European countries. From the point of view of many authorities of post-Soviet space, position of Eastern European  and Baltic states was stipulated by the ir unconditional pro-Western orientation and directed to legal, political and military transition of regional states to the zone of geopolitical influence of USA and developed Western  countries. This transition should assist in forced integration of these countries into economic and political structures of westernworld [8, p.35].

At the same time, benefits from the enlargement at the expense of Eastern European countries were obtained  by NATO and it was dictated by geopolitical reality. Slovenia, Romania, Bulgaria and Hungary cover very unstable Balkans. Thus, they serveas ashield against possible distribution of instability of this region to Europe   and NATO. Inversely, they suggest the comfortable bridge in the region to prevent conflicts, regulation of conflicts and elimination of conflicts in this region. At the same time, Romania and Slovakia jointly with NATO members as Hungary and Poland fulfill the same functions of bridge/shield in relation to more instable Moldavia, Ukraine and Belorussia  [9, p.113-114].

The end of “cold war” resulted in reduction of demand for armament and military equipment made in Western countries. Situation of manufacturers of arms was complicated by the increased competition in the traditional markets of arms and financial problems. In such conditions, establishment of new market of arms in Central and Eastern Europe was the perspective activity for western manufacturers of military equipment. That’s why one director of the largest US aerospace corporation “Lockhid-Martin” B.Jonson was the cofounder of NATO enlargement committee; and in the course of the preliminary negotiations on entering of Poland, Hungary and Czech Republic into North Atlantic Treaty Organization, the representatives of White House tried to relate the solution  of  this  problem  to  readiness  of  these  countries  to  allocate  large  overseas  orders  to   new  aviation engineering. Subject to investigations made by this committee, total costs to integration of new members  of alliance constituted initially from 27 to 125 billion dollars during the nearest 10-15 years [10, p.7].

Poland has the experience of joining NATO. In 1994 supporting the program “Partnership for Peace’s Sake”, representatives of Polish Government declared that Poland intends to use possibilities specified in NATO program to prepare defense structures to become members of union. Declaration on active  Polish-NATO  cooperation within Partnership for Peace’s Sake was reflected in annual Individual partnership programs (IPP).  Number  of joint measures fulfilled within Partnership for Peace’s Sake increased in geometrical progression: 1994 – 40,   1995 – 130, 1996 – 240. National interests of Poland was projecting of IPP to direct maximum efforts to preparatory actions to integration into the union system and Polish armed forces – to interaction with NATO forces. Therefore, the attention was paid to preparation of military officer personnel of Polish army for membership in the alliance. Since 1997 Poland became the active participant of joint exercises; 25 joint Polish- NATO military exercises were conducted in 1994-1997. Moreover, joint seminars, conferences, courses and trainings for officers of Polish army were conducted within the program [7, p. 86].

Up on implementation of the program “Partnership for Peace’s Sake”, fulfillment of two stages of two-year PARP cycles – process of planning and assessment of PPS concluded in suitable distribution and use of Polish military contingents was very important. So, at the first PARPstage (1995-1996) Polands entan air borne battalion, regimen to fair cavalry, field movable hospital, search and rescue group and headquarters  of  divisions  and brigades for joint actions. These cond PARPstage (1997-1998) was projected to approximate partner projection to methods and procedures applied in the process of defense planning in the union.

Participation of Poland in operations of international forces on peace maintenance in Balkans was the confirmation of Polish activity in the field of cooperation with union and readiness to share responsibility for security strengthening.

These cond sphere of Polish-NATO contacts concluded negotiations on joining. By the decision of Polish prime-minister, the governmental Negotiations Group was established and consisted from representatives of the Ministry of State Security and Department of State Protection.

Poland under took to keep its military cost sat the previous level, modifyitsarmed forcesperiodically and contribute financia linterestattherate of 2.48% of total union budget in the sphere of financial obligations  according to the principle of cost distribution proportionally to the possibilities of each member state, proportionately to its economic, military and demographic potential [7, p. 86].

Terroristic acts in USA onSeptember 11, 2001 were the reason of radical changes in the system of European and international security, review of security concept. The former minister of foreign affairs of Poland V. Chimoshevich performing at the meeting of Atlantic club emphasized that it’s necessary to transform alliance, enlarge its political and military possibilities due to the cardinal changes of threats. NATO, according to Polish minister, shall be an organization capable to struggle with terrorism beyond the traditional zone of responsibility. Struggle with international terrorism servedas the catalysttoaccelerate entering of the second group of Eastern European states to NATO. Poland was the initiator and “conductor” to NATO for  Slovakia,  Romania  and Bulgaria [7, p. 87].

Somepolitical analyst salsosaythatpreliminarynegativee conomicandpolitical forecastso fopponents of EC and NATO enlargementdidnot come true; European integration processes of Eastern European countries did not cause financial crises in EC, relations with Russia which openly was against the union of NATO and Eastern European countries did not become critical [7, p. 93].

1. Brzezinski, Zbigniew The grand chessboard: American primacy and its geostrategic imperatives / Zbigniew Brzezinski.-1st ed. - Basic Books, 1998. -240 p.
2. Eastern Europehttp://www.evropa.org.ua/data/evropa4.htm.
3. V. Pershina. External factor of transformation of totalitarian regimes (by the example of Eastern European countries): dissertation abstract for competition of scientific degree of Candidate of political Science. – Yekaterinburg, 2007 – 23 p.
4. Larry Wolf inventing eastern Europe. The Map of Civilization on the Mind of the Enlightenment, Stanford university press, Stanford, California, -231p.
5. Contemporary history of European and American countries. XX century: Manual for students of higher education institutions; the 3d part / edited by M. Rodrigez and M.V. Ponomareva – M.: Humanitarian edition VLADOS, 2004 – The 3d part: 1945-2000 – 256 p.
6. General economical and geographical characteristics of Eastern European countries http://geography.kz/strany/obshhaya-ekonomiko-geograficheskaya-xarakteristika-stran-vostochnoj-evropy/
7. S.Suleimenov.Kazakhstan and Eastern European countries: principal directions and perspectives of cooperation: monogram – Astana: State University of the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan, 2008 – 134 p.
8. Chervyakov. Enlargement of NATO and change of power balance in Europe // Theoretical and political magazine “Free Thought”, Moscow, Pressa edition, 1994 - #6 – 27-47 p.
9. Vashu, M. Schmidt. Enlargement of NATO the day before the second round // Cоnnеctions The Quarterly Journal. – 2002. - т.1. - #1. - 95-126 p.
10. Colonel Vaskovskiy. Some integration aspects of Poland, Hungary and Czech Republic into NATO // Moscow edition “Krasnaya Zvezda”, 2000 - #4 (637) – 7-11 p.