From: tomas_e@LINK.Physchem.KTH.SE (Tomas Eriksson)
Subject: Re: EC (Was: Laughing at americans)
Reply-To: tomas_e@LINK.Physchem.KTH.SE
Organization: Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 14:36:30 GMT

In article <1992Jul22.072047.22178@ugle.unit.no>, jafitv@termo.unit.no (Jan Arne Fagertun) writes:
>In article <1992Jul21.151547.11679@kth.se>, tomas_e@LINK.Physchem.KTH.SE (Tomas Eriksson) writes:
>|> 
>|> EC will probably become more and more synonymous with Europe. If Norway, 
>|> Sweden, Finland, Austria and Switzerland joins EC, then all European 
>|> countries except Iceland west of the former iron curtain will be members 
>|> (as well as ex-DDR). The next step will then possibly be to bring 
>|> Hungary, Poland and the Czech??? republic in, in ten years or so, 
>|> perhaps together with an occasional part of ex-Yugoslavia (at least
>|> Slovenia), provided that some semblance of order and democracy is 
>|> established there.
>|> 
>|> I don't know if EC every will be totally synonymous with the 
>|> geographical Europe, possibly not. But I think it's a grand vision. You 
>|> probably don't
>|> 
>|> Tomas
>--
>
>
>Tomas, and all of you pro-EEC's in Sweden and Norway :
>
>It's no good idea to say that "If Norway, Sweden, ..... join EC, ...."
>as an argument for actually joining EEC.

It wasn't an argument for joining EC. (If you use the term *E*EC, you just 
mean one aspect of the European Community.) It was a discussion about to 
what extent it's reasonable to say "Europe" instead of EC.

>Norway will not join EEC, and if you use norwegian EEC-membership as a
>major argument for Sweden to join EEC, you might get into a problem
>in just a short time.

I could say that it doesn't matter to me if Norway wants to behave in a 
stupid way, but it actually does. It would probably save time and effort 
for both the EC and for the countries involved if all EFTA countries 
joined the EC at the same time. As I see it, if Norway and/or Finland 
joined the EC while Sweden was outside, that could be use as an argument
in favour of Swedish EC membership. But if Norway chooses status quo, 
that isn't really an argument against Swedish EC membership. Our present 
and future economic relationship with the present EC countries is, in my
opinion, enough to justify a Swedish EC membership.

Fortunately, we don't have a previous negative referendum result in our 
"luggage" as Norway has.

>Besides, it looks like Denmark's membership may be questionable, too.
>This may increase your problems. You may have to switch from saying
>"Sweden must join EC because Norway and Denmark ...." to "Sweden must
>join EC in spite of Norway and Denmark ....".

Are you seriously saying that Denmark will *leave* the present EC? I 
don't think that is the case. That's definitely not what they were voting
about!

I would like to ask you a few things: those who are anti-Norweigan EC 
membership, what do you think about Norway's NATO membership? If you 
don't like it, what did you think about it pre-1989, or say, pre-1986? 
How would you view an extended Nordic/Scandinavian cooperation, 
including e.g. common currency and close defense cooperation? What about 
the rumour that some people in Norway don't like EC because that would 
mean some kind of Swedish influence in Norway ?

Tomas
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tomas Eriksson                                          tomas_e@physchem.kth.se
            Surface Force Group, Department of Physical Chemistry,
               Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quotation of the week (30), from "Endymion" by Benjamin Disraeli, Earl of 
Baconsfield:
	"'As for that', said Waldershare, 'sensible men are all of the same
	religion.'
	'And pray, what is that?' inquired the prince.
	'Sensible men never tell.'"
Newsgroups: soc.culture.nordic,soc.culture.europe,rec.games.empire,alt.flame