ABSTRACT
What geographical areas, then, are the peripheries of this emerging Eu rope? Although it is difficult to predict its future boundaries, there is little doubt that the EU and its members are actively concerned about the Central and Eastern European countries (CEEC), the Newly Independent States of the former Soviet Union (NIS) and the Mediterranean countries.3 The European core’s concern over its peripheries is not only directed to
their progress in market integration, but also to the condition of their democracy and rule of law. Nor is the concern limited to the scope of the formal enlargement of the European Union, as is indicated by the broad coverage of the PHARE program for CEEC and the TACIS program for NIS. This study examines the political cooperation between the core and peripheries of Europe toward the aim of bolstering civil society, a process that tends to depend on a common repertoire similar to that used for conventional development assistance in developing countries. Consequently, the former is experiencing contradictions and difficulties similar to those that the latter has faced. At the beginning of the transition in Eastern and Central Europe, the
European Community had no concrete pan-European policy other than trade agreements of an anti-dumping character.4 Nevertheless, the
European Commission readily accepted the role of coordinator of Western assistance, as endowed by G24. The PHARE program of the EC-later the European Union-became the largest instrument of grant assistance from the West to CEEC. Although the greater part of this program was allocated to such areas as infrastructure and enterprise support, the program eventually attached increased emphasis to the building of “substantial” democracies and civil societies.5 Under the auspices of PHARE, the PHARE Partnership Programme was
launched in 1993, focusing upon relatively large organizations such as trade unions, professional and trade associations, chambers of commerce as well as education/training and environmental NGOs. The Democracy Programme was launched in 1992 with the aim of promoting parliamentary practice, non-governmental activities and the rule of law. The NGO and LIEN programs, initiated in 1993 and 1994 respectively, dealt mainly with social aspects and smaller, grassroots-level NGOs. The PHARE Democracy Programme emphasized what are regarded as the distinctive features of a ‘civil society,’ highlighted in the following segments of its program description: “The programme will focus on issues where governments are not or should not be active.... Projects of a partisan nature or involving single political parties will be ineligible.” There was good reason to emphasize the building of civil societies in
post-Communist countries. First, it was the intellectual and social movements that originally challenged the police-state regimes characterized by passive subordination, and that became hallmarks of newly-achieved democracy. Second, the transition from socialist welfare institutions to market economies left behind a vacuum of social services. Third, in some of the post-transition societies that suffered from ethnic division and xenophobia, the building of social trust (or “social capital”) was considered crucial.
