The Instigator
benko12345678
Con (against)
Tied
2 Points
The Contender
AdamKG
Pro (for)
Tied
2 Points

Do you agree with Croatia joining the EU

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/29/2014 Category: Politics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 788 times Debate No: 53645
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (2)

 

benko12345678

Con

As is a common argument for every country that joins the EU: the currency. Already is the euro on the brink of destruction with Greece's economic collapse, in some cases inflation and in others deficit, in all cases extreme debts...With a country like croatia joining the picture the situation would only shrivel...
AdamKG

Pro

It is true that the euro is not doing particularly well. However, there are signs of improvement and stability in the next few years. The euro is still a valuable currency, if a bit unreliable. Greece, for example, is showing signs of improvement. In fact, many world economists are projecting economic growth by the end of 2014 for Greece. This is excellent news for the eurozone who have been giving massive financial grants to Greece to stimulate their economy. This means that this is actually a good time to welcome a new country into their union for prosperity sake.

Croatia would be a fine addition to the EU to potentially improve their collective economy. They will just have to swap their current kuna for the euro. It is also reasonable to welcome Croatia into the EU seeing that they are already a major trading partner and that Croatia has also been a member of NATO since 2009. Croatia has a very high HDI of .805 and growing which means they have a high standard of living. They are also a high-income nation with a service-based economy which is generally a sign of a very developed economy like the United States. The majority of their economic stats are quite high showing a very developed economy. The only major issue in Croatia's economy, much like the rest of southern Europe, is a rather high unemployment rate ranging from 7-20% depending on where you are at regionally (there is no national count since 2007). Unemployment has been consistently decreasing by around 5% every year since 2007.

The government of Croatia is a Unitary Parliamentary Constitutional Republic and has proven to be quite stable. Their judiciary is similar to the United States federal court system and was probably loosely based on it when they designed their government in 1990. Croatia is a relatively new nation, but that also means they are very modern and has proven to be a valuable country so far.

Sources:
- http://www.theguardian.com...
- http://www.princeton.edu...
- http://en.wikipedia.org...
Debate Round No. 1
benko12345678

Con

Firstly I would just like to point out that NATO is a military organization and has nothing to do with the EU, although I do see your point about the Kuna exchanging for the Euro. But as we can see, the situation in Greece hasn't changed, at least not for the better. If another economically unstable country were to join the EU in what state do you think the euro would be in? Croatia should stay a trading partner, that way it's profitable for the EU and the country itself. Unless Croatia cleans its house before then, another hobbled economy will add its weight to the EU exacerbating the problems that already exist. There will be more debt, more burden on EU taxpayers, more risk of loan defaults and more downward pressure on U.S. markets inextricably linked to European markets.
Since 2003-2004, Croatia and the EU have been preparing for that nation"s membership, delayed in part by Slovenian (I'm from slovenia btw) concerns over border issues, especially the arbitrary agreement in which Croatia received a large part of Slovenia's sea.
Yet one rising star of Croatian politics points to deeper systemic malignancies beyond such familiar concerns over the fiscal problems of a modern welfare state (including a 20% unemployment rate in Croatia). Another problem Croatia suffers from is corruption...
If the many reports are accurate, corruption in Croatia is ruthless and systemic in a way that altogether changes the dialogue from how Croatia should enter the EU, to if Croatia should enter the EU (which it already has). As things purportedly stand now, Croatian membership in the EU would be another liability that we cannot afford to add to our ongoing exposure in Greece. EU membership could prove a disaster for the Croatian people as well.
AdamKG

Pro

"Firstly I would just like to point out that NATO is a military organization and has nothing to do with the EU,"

It is true that NATO is primarily military, however, there has been extensive relations between the two groups. There are strategic relationship agreements between these two international groups including the Berlin Plus Agreement in 2002, the 2010 Lisbon Summit, the European Security and Defense Policy (ESDP), among other formal relations. Many nations that are part of NATO are also part of the EU making them closely related. If you are a European nation that is part of NATO then it makes sense that you should be also be part of the EU and vice-versa; assuming you have a significant military and a reasonable economy. [4] [5]

" But as we can see, the situation in Greece hasn't changed, at least not for the better."

Actually it is improving. As I stated in my previous argument, current projections are showing improvement throughout 2014. Through EU grants, IMF austerity, as well as internal Greek economic stimulus programs Greece is finally projected to make a comeback and things have gotten slightly better for them. You should read my sources from my previous argument. You fail to refute that in your following statements. [9]

"Croatia should stay a trading partner, that way it's profitable for the EU and the country itself."

While this is beneficial to an extent, it is very limiting in opportunities and is relatively stagnant for further development. The benefits that come from a nation joining the EU include: economic development, transport development, social renewal, environment and energy development, regional development, state reform, single currency (pros & cons), further international relations, and more. These benefits could greatly improve Croatia into becoming a greater country for itself and for the international community. [2] [3]

Croatia's economy is actually doing fairly good, despite the global recession that has hit it for a sixth year now. Before the recession its economy was booming growing at 4-5% annually, incomes doubled, and economic and social opportunities drastically improved. Before now Croatia and the EU have to working together for the last few years to prepare Croatia for absorption into the EU with structural funds for their nation to build up its economy so they won't be a detriment. With private investments and greater export capabilities in 2015 is expected to start growing their economy again at a greater rate along with EU support. [1]

"Another problem Croatia suffers from is corruption..."

According to Transparancy.org, business-anti-corruption.com, and anticorruption.org corruption is an issue in Croatia; but it is quickly getting better. The HDZ Verdict last March brings with it a major turning point for increasing transparency in Croatian government which is now becoming a big movement in that country. From what I have gathered from these sources is that Croatian politics, since the process of joining the EU, have been becoming increasingly less corrupt. Additionally, most of the corruption in Croatia most notably happen at the local level of government. Most of the national government corruption comes from their legislature's need to pass laws quickly so it is not corruption intended to be counterproductive for the nation. [6, 7, 8]

"If the many reports are accurate, corruption in Croatia is ruthless and systemic in a way that altogether changes the dialogue from how Croatia should enter the EU,"

What reports? You fail to list sources so I do not know if I can trust these "reports". I cannot find any similar reports on my sources which I know are credible. Therefore, I will not address them and I suggest voters to disregard his statements here.

"As things purportedly stand now, Croatian membership in the EU would be another liability that we cannot afford to add to our ongoing exposure in Greece."

Actually, as economic projections show, Croatia's membership into the EU could prove to be very economically prosperous for both parties. Croatia can be seen as a very "high risk investment" (a basic investment principle tells you that higher the risk the greater the returns) but you know that it will pay out because of the proper management that you have set up. Croatia probably wont pay out immediately (most investments don't), but it will in the long-term by the end of 2015 for sure according to projections. Again, Greece is improving moderately and consistently.

"EU membership could prove a disaster for the Croatian people as well."

I have already addressed this issue earlier in this argument. The benefits that come with joining the EU are numerous for the new member nation that the public can enjoy such as improved transport, social renewal, environment and energy development, regional development, state reform, and the convenience of a single currency shared with its EU neighbors. [2, 3]

Sources:
[1] - http://www.worldbank.org...
[2] - http://europa.eu...
[3] - http://www.mkik.hu...
[4] - http://www.nato.int...
[5] - http://natolibguides.info...
[6] - http://www.transparency.org...
[7] - http://www.business-anti-corruption.com...
[8] - http://www.anticorruption-croatia.org...
[9] - http://www.theguardian.com...
Debate Round No. 2
benko12345678

Con

1.NATO is more closely connected to the UN than the EU, however I see your point in exposing the fact that cooperation has been noted from both sides, especially since NATO was originally founded in Belgium (one of the seats of the EU). That said, many countries in the EU aren't in NATO (Austria, Ireland...) so in retrospect, cooperation with NATO would remain the same whether Croatia joins the EU or not. Croatia would have no closer contact with NATO.

2.I agree that the situation in Greece is improving, thanks to tourism. Last year, Greece eked out a current account surplus of "1.2 billion ($1.7 billion), or just under 1% of its GDP. This was the first annual surplus since official data began in 1948. During the peak of Greece"s financial crisis, its current account deficit grew to around 18% of GDP; a heavy reliance on imports and borrowing from abroad put Greece in a precarious place when the bottom fell out of the European economy. (This is not unlike the turmoil currently seen in similarly imbalanced emerging markets.)
According to a recent assessment of its economy, the creditors overseeing Greece"s "240 billion international bailout were under the impression that it would run a current account deficit through at least 2016 (pdf, p. 16). The faster reversal is thanks to a number of factors, including a modest pickup in exports, weak imports, and the lower interest bill for bonds the government restructured in 2012. Another important factor, the Greek central bank says, is a big influx of tourists, with both arrivals and spending by visitors up by around 15% in 2013. What do we learn from this? That Greece is still unstable and will continue to be so. However, I only brought up Greece's state in the first place to make a comparison with Croatia.

3.Croatia is an economy at risk and a burden on EU and U.S. taxpayers through its high debt and high borrowing as well as its persistently dysfunctional judicial system, the economical develompent you speak of would be barely noticable and in many aspects would only worsen. As for corruption in Croatia, while businesses and officials may fret over the draconian enforcement of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and the threat of the same pursuant to the newly adopted UK Bribery Act, the Croatia 21st Century approach to corruption is well-nigh confiscatory. In addition, the EU has promised an additional 4 billion euros to government institutions apparently mired in rampant corruption. So the vicious circle spirals on. The more we donate to sham reform, the more empowered the regime becomes even as European investors who"ve already sunk significant amounts into Croatian banks, telecoms, and real estate
An answer to your question: ,,where are these reports?' I've provided two links for you

http://www.business-anti-corruption.com...
http://www.transparencyinternational.eu...

4. As I said about Greece, current reports may guarantee an escape from the current catastrophe, but I must point out again that, like Greece (and all other EU countries in the past) the economy changes. The greek economy (and maybe the croatian) could tear down and crumble.

5. (look up argument 3.)
AdamKG

Pro

AdamKG forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by benko12345678 2 years ago
benko12345678
Nuuu! I wanna win XD
Posted by benko12345678 2 years ago
benko12345678
Oh, ok :P
Posted by AdamKG 2 years ago
AdamKG
I apologize for the forfeiture. I became more busy than expected over the weekend and didn't get back to the debate as planned.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Conservative101 2 years ago
Conservative101
benko12345678AdamKGTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:12 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro forfeited the last round so Con gets better conduct. They both used good arguments for most of the debate, and pro used more reliable sources to back up his claims.
Vote Placed by Ajab 2 years ago
Ajab
benko12345678AdamKGTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:10 
Reasons for voting decision: FF