Docstoc

Impact of Schengen on Slovakia _report 3_

Document Sample
Impact of Schengen on Slovakia _report 3_ Powered By Docstoc
					2002 OSI LGI Research Project Impact of EU Enlargement and Implementation of Schengen in the CEE Region

Slovakia in "Schengenland": Political and Governance Issues
Martin Sirák Center for Economic Development Bratislava, Slovakia

1.

The Challenge of "Post-Amsterdam Schengen"

Some contradictions are currently occurring on the West-East border: deepening of the EU integration and the implementation of the post-Amsterdam Schengen agenda makes current and future external EU borders less permeable, quite contrary to the free movement ideals and the spirit of crossborder co-operation in Europe. Unsurprisingly, this leads to growing concerns among Easterners, that a new Iron Curtain will be erected - this time by the West - as if to underline an existing economic gap that - on the other side - has led to fears among the Westerners of a flood of cheap labour from the East, dragging down the wages and social standards of the West. Surprisingly, both sides - the CEE governments and the European Commission - agree that the hot issue of free movement of labour is largely political and symbolic. Nevertheless, the applicant countries fear that a refusal to grant immediate rights of free movement sends a signal that they will be "second-class members" of the club. The Commission, on the other hand, believes it is indeed politically essential to assuage fears in the West, particularly in Germany and Austria1, about an influx of cheap labour from the East. Eurocrats know that Jörg Haider, the leader of Austria 's far-right Freedom Party, has played upon fears of immigrants in his political campaigns. And they also think that Germans in particular are pretty cool about the EU's expansion. Recent opinion polls show that only about 36% of Germans actually support it.2 Although the EU will probably easily absorb—and indeed benefit from—an inflow of migrants from the East, particular social groups (e.g. unskilled workers in the west) and geographical areas (e.g. gateway and border regions) may find it hard to adjust. In any case, as emphasised also by Straubhaar (2001), 'fears about migration exist, and politicians have to take them seriously, regardless of whether they are justified or not.' Governments of Europe are now increasingly faced with a challenge: to balance the need for security and public perceptions of security with the ideal of freedom of movement and the need to respect international commitments to human rights (Watson, 2001). The aim of this paper is to report on the latest policy developments, and subsequently to establish those political and governance issues, which in our view constitute the essential context for any policy discussion about the Schengen agenda in the pre- and post-accession Slovakia. Section 2 provides an overview of Slovakia's priorities and policies aimed to implement the Schengen rules. "Inclusive" and "exclusive" effects of the Schengen system for its members can materialise, first, in the bilateral relations with their neighbouring countries and, second, in the role they effectively play within the EU policy-making, including international migration issues. The former is the subject of section 3, while the latter is dealt with in section 4. It is based on a relevant literature review, supplemented with 'soft' information from case studies, all attempted to complement the socio-economic impact assessment made elsewhere 3. The assessment presented here is based on the scenario of a simultaneous formal accession of the V4 countries into the EU.

1

According to the Second Cohesion Report (European Commission, 2001), in the first years after complete freedom of movement was established, around 335,000 Central Europeans are estimated to move west-wards each year. Over the course of a decade some 2.9 million people would move—of whom roughly 65% would end up in Germany, 12% in Austria. Within 30 years around 2.5% of the population of Germany would be of Central European origin. 2 Economist, 'Will Western Europe receive the great unwashed - one day?' April 21, 2001. 3 Sirak, M. (2002) 'Impacts of the EU Enlargement and the Implementation of Schengen on Slovakia: SocioEconomic Perspectives,' Center for Economic Development, Bratislava, mimeo.

2002 OSI LGI Research Project Impact of EU Enlargement and Implementation of Schengen in the CEE Region

2.

Schengen Agenda in Slovakia: Overview of Policies

By the end of June 2001, Slovakia managed to provisionally conclude all negotiating chapters on the "four freedoms", which are considered the cornerstones of the EU internal market4, and of the Schengen integration project as well. Perhaps the most difficult "Schengen" chapter - "Judicial and Home Affairs" (JHA) - was opened shortly afterwards. Today, JHA acquis is still in a process of negotiation. This means that the genuine implementation process of the Schengen rules has started only recently, and it is thus too early to look for some comprehensive impact assessments of its policy outcomes. Therefore, in this section we report on the steps taken and planned at the policy development level, i.e. under the National Programme for the Adoption of the Acquis.

2.1

Internal Security Agenda: Justice and Home Affairs

'The Slovak Republic accepts the JHA acquis and is prepared to fully implement it by 1 January 2004, being set as the reference date of its accession to the EU. The Slovak Republic requests no derogation or transitional periods for the implementation of legislation required under this chapter [24]. Slovakia is prepared to adopt the acquis of the Union by the date of its accession, so as to be able to become part of the area of freedom, security and justice where free movement of persons is ensured while controls are performed on the external borders, with co-operation in the fields of asylum, immigration, crime prevention and suppression, as provided for in Article 2 of the Treaty on the European Union. Legal harmonisation and institutional strengthening of administrative capacities have the objective of attaining the standard, which is comparable with that of the member states of the European Union, in conformity with the provisions of the Amsterdam Treaty and the conclusions of the Tampere summit.'5 Visa Policy The Slovak Republic is gradually aligning its visa policy with that of the EU member states in conformity with Council Regulation No. 574/1999 determining the third countries whose nationals must be in possession of visas when crossing the external borders of the Member States (OJ L 72 12.3.1999). By the Resolution No. 140/2000 of 15 March 2000, the Government of the Slovak Republic approved the Concept of Alignment of the Visa Policy of the Slovak Republic with the European Union and the calendar of denouncement of the agreements on visa-free regime. Based on this document, the Agreement between the Government of the Czechoslovak Socialist Republic and the Government of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics on the Conditions of Reciprocal Travel of Their Citizens of 17 December 1981 and the Protocol to the Agreement relating to Ukraine of 17 December 1981 were terminated with effect from 28 June 2000. The Agreement between the Government of the Slovak Republic and the Government of the Republic of Belarus on Reciprocal Visa-Free Regime of 20 September 1995 and the Agreement between the Government of the Slovak Republic and the Government of the Russian Federation on the Visa-Free Regime of 13 February 1995 were terminated as from 1 January 2001. No later than six months before its accession to the European Union, Slovakia will terminate the Agreement of 3 April 1992 between the Government of the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic and the Government of the Republic of Cuba on Exempting the Holders of Valid Travel Documents from the Visa Requirement. With the implementation of these measures the Slovak Republic will secure harmonisation of its visa policy with that of the European Union and with the above Council

4

The review of a candidate's ability to assume the obligations of membership, included in the Commission's regular reports is structured in accordance with the list of 29 negotiating chapters. It traditionally begins with the review of progress related to the so-called "four freedoms": free movement of goods, free movement of persons (incl. workers), free movement of services and free movement of capital. 5 Ministry of the Interior, Negotiating Position of the Slovak Republic: Chapter 24 (Co-operation in Justice and Home Affairs), Government of the Slovak Republic, Bratislava, December 6, 2000.

2002 OSI LGI Research Project Impact of EU Enlargement and Implementation of Schengen in the CEE Region

Regulation as regards the list of countries whose nationals are required to be in posse ssion of visas when entering the Slovak Republic. Visa application procedure is currently defined in Act No. 73/1995 Coll. on the Stay of Aliens in the Territory of the Slovak Republic as amended by subsequent regulations and in the internal regulations of the Ministry of the Interior. The existing legislation is partly compatible with the EU legislation; the Slovak Republic currently goes through a transitional period and has already modified the form of the issuance of Slovak visas when it introduced visa stickers on 1 January 2000 (Government Resolution No. 1090 of 8 December 1999); there is a continuing process of gradually introducing visa stickers for visas issued by diplomatic representations of the Slovak Republic, implementing Council Regulation No. 1683/95 laying down a uniform format for visas. The transitional period ended on 31 December 2000 and from that date the legal provisions concerning the form of visas are compatible with the legislation and practice of the EU member states. Based on the above Government Resolution, the types and kinds of visa (airport visa, transit visa, short-stay visa or long-term visa), their form, security features of visa stickers, conditions and requirements for visa applications and their registration for the needs of building the National Schengen Information System have been unified. The verification of the data supplied by the applicants for Slovak visas is gradually improving by way of linking all consular offices of the Slovak Republic with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and subsequently with the Ministry of the Interior, through a data transmission system (on-line) that will be fully completed by the end of 2001. The issuance of visas at the border crossings has been restricted through the Police Force President's Order No. 9/2000. As from 1 January 2000 tourist or service visas are no longer issued at the border crossings. In 2001, the Slovak Republic published the list of countries whose nationals are required to be in possession of airport visas. The Slovak Republic will meet the requirements following from the principles laid down in the Common Consular Manual, including representation of the country concerned for the purposes of the decision on granting a visa, by the time it enters the Union. External Border Controls The legal framework for the protection of the state borders is provided by Act No. 73/1995 Coll. on the Stay of Aliens in the territory of the Slovak Republic as amended by subsequent regulations, Act No. 171/1993 Coll. on the Police Force as amended by the subsequent regulations, and Act No. 381/1997 Coll. on Travel Documents. The conditions necessary for increasing legal and physical protection of external borders in conformity with the acquis will be significantly strengthened with the adoption of new acts on the Police Force (in 2002) and on the stay of aliens in the territory of the Slovak Republic (in 2002). They will, among others, implement Recommendation of 28 May 1998 on the provision of forgery detection equipment at ports of entry to the European Union. The Slovak Republic gives great importance to an effective protection of the state borders and specially emphases the protection of its state border with Ukraine, i.e. the future external border of the European Union. The protection of the state border will be rendered more effective as a result of the implementation of the tasks set out in the following Government-approved documents: "Concept of Border and Alien Police Services in the Perspective of Accession of the Slovak Republic to the Schengen Agreement - Protection of the External Border of the European Union", "Concept of Alignment of the Slovak Republic's Visa Policy with the European Union's Visa Policy", "Denouncement of the Agreements on Visa-Free Regime with the Republic of Belarus, the Republic of Cuba, the Russian Federation and Ukraine" and "The Change in the Form of Issuing the Slovak Republic's Visas Using Visa Stickers" from 1 January 2000". Other possibilities have been opened in this area with the implementation of bilateral agreements on border co-operation. The Slovak Republic has signed such agreements with all its neighbouring countries except for Ukraine - as regards the latter, a process has started of revising the existing treaty base in the light of the new geopolitical situation. After the denouncement of the agreement on visa-free regime between the Slovak Republic and Ukraine and the protocol thereto, and the termination of the agreement between the two countries on simplified border-crossing procedures for nationals with permanent residence in border municipalities effective from 1 January 2001, the treaty base with Ukraine is now seen to correspond to the new geopolitical situation.

2002 OSI LGI Research Project Impact of EU Enlargement and Implementation of Schengen in the CEE Region

In addition to the above, the state border protection will be strengthened also through the assistance provided by the EU for the implementation of the Comprehensive Strategy for Ensuring Administration of the State Borders of the Slovak Republic adopted in May 1999. The first step towards fulfilling the tasks resulting from this strategy was the material and technical support for border police units on the state borders with Ukraine and Hungary in the form of vehicles, information, IT equipment financed from the state budget. The next stage of strengthening the state borders will take place, with the assistance of the European Union, was undertaken in 2001 in such areas as the competencies of the border police, customs service, veterinary and phytosanitary inspection, having the form of new IT and special equipment, and the completion of technical infrastructure. The fulfilment of technical requirements of the Decision of the Executive Committee SCH/Com-ex (94) 17 rev-22.12.1994 "Introduction and Application of the Schengen System at the 1 st and 2nd Category Airports" calls for the introduction of the control system in accordance with the Schengen Agreement. Seven airports currently hold the status of public (international) airports, although in some of them the status of international airport will have to be reconsidered. Relevant measures will be taken by the date of entry to the European Union. Personal checks are performed at the border crossings for all the persons crossing the border, using technical devices for the verification of document validity; the data on all counterfeited documents are kept on record at the Institute of Criminology and Expertise of the Police Force, which holds a collection of falsified and altered documents, partly implementing the Joint Action concerning the setting up of a European Image Archiving System FADO (OJ L 333 9.12.1998). Migration Policy Admission The legal framework is currently represented by Act No. 73/1995 Coll. on the Stay of Aliens in the Territory of the Slovak Republic as amended by subsequent regulations, Act No. 387/1996 Coll. on Employment as amended by subsequent regulations, Act No. 513/1991 Coll. Commercial Code as amended by subsequent regulations and Act No. 455/1991 Coll. on Sole Traders as amended by subsequent regulations, Labour Code and Act No. 379/1997 Coll. on Private Security Services. These laws and inter-governmental agreements on reciprocal employment of citizens reflect Slovakia's commitment to fulfil obligations relating to the protection of the labour market of the EU states in relation to third-country citizens. At present, Act No. 73/1995 Coll. on the Stay of Aliens in the Territory of the Slovak Republic is only partly compatible with the relevant employment acquis as regards the granting of long-term residence permits for employment purposes, even after is amendment by Act No. 69/2000 Coll. The EU requirements in this field, which the Slovak Republic is able to fulfil and apply even before its accession to the European Union, will be fulfilled in the new law on the stay of aliens in the territory of the Slovak Republic, to be adopted in 2002. The new law will contain provisions on preventing illegal immigration and employment, on reviewing the labour force situation prior to issuing work permits to third-country citizens, on the reunification of families and on the termination of stay, thus securing the implementation of the Resolution of 30 November 1994 relating to the limitations on the admission of third-country nationals to the territory of the Member States for the purpose of pursuing activities as self-employed persons, Resolution of 30 November 1994 on the admission for study purposes, Resolution of 1 June 1993 on harmonisation of family reunification, Resolution of 4 December 1997 on the marriages of convenience, Joint Action of 16 December 1996 concerning a uniform format for residence permits, Resolution of 4 March 1996 on the status of thirdcountry nationals residing on a long-term basis in the territory of the Member States and others. The Slovak Republic participates in the work of the CIREFI group in the form of the exchange of information on illegal migration, and through adapting individual categories of data it implemented the Common Principles for Data Exchange in CIREFI (Doc 9987/98 CIREFI 48) and Council Conclusions of 30 November 1994 on CIREFI organisation and development (OJ C 274). Readmission The Slovak Republic concluded 13 readmission agreements: with Ukraine, the Czech Republic, the Republic of Hungary, the Republic of Poland, the Republic of Austria, the Republic of Bulgaria, the Republic of Croatia, the Republic of Slovenia, the Republic of Macedonia, Romania, the French Republic, the Kingdom of Spain and the Republic of Italy. Six of these

2002 OSI LGI Research Project Impact of EU Enlargement and Implementation of Schengen in the CEE Region

agreements, signed after 1995, were concluded in conformity with Council Recommendation of 30 November 1994 concerning the model type bilateral readmission agreement between a Member State and a third country and Council Recommendation on the guiding principles to be followed in drawing up protocols on the implementation of readmission agreements (OJ C 274 of 19.9.1996). In conformity with the above Recommendations, the Slovak Republic is currently preparing the readmission agreements to be concluded with effect from the following dates: with Belarus (2003), the People's Republic of China (2005), the Russian Federation (2005), the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (2004), the Socialist Republic of Vietnam (2005) and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (2003). Negotiations on a readmission agreement with India are at an early stage. The existing readmission agreements which do not meet the requirements set out in the Recommendations are being revised and redrafted. This applies to the preparation of new readmission agreements with the Republic of Hungary and the Republic of Austria which propose also readmission by air. The conclusion of a readmission agreement with the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia is problematic because Yugoslavia makes its signature conditional on a reciprocal abolition of the visa requirement. Expulsion In the Slovak Republic, expulsion is provided for in Act No. 73/1995 Coll. on the Stay of Aliens in the Territory of the Slovak Republic as amended by the subsequent regulations, and in the Decree of the Ministry of Justice No. 135/1994 Coll. on the Expulsion of Persons Who Received an Expulsion Sentence. The Slovak Republic, being aware of the need to improve readmission and expulsion practices, strengthened the police powers in the process of expulsion by the amendment No. 69/2000 on the Stay of Aliens in the Territory of the Slovak Republic which provides for a wider range of grounds for expulsion of aliens with a view to implement Recommendation of 30 November 1992 regarding practices followed by Member States on expulsion. The new legislation already mentioned, which regards the stay of aliens, will also implement other acquis applying to this area, such as Recommendation of 30 November 1992 concerning transit for the purposes of expulsion, Recommendation of 1 June 1993 concerning checks on and expulsion of third country nationals residing or working without an official permit. Asylum Policy The Slovak Republic is a party to the Convention relating to the Status of Refugees (United Nations, Geneva, 1951) and the Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees (United Nations, New York, 1967). Asylum issues are also covered by Act No. 283/1995 Coll. on Refugees as amended by the subsequent regulations. The Refugee Act is only partially compatible with asylum requirements of the European Union. These requirements are being fulfilled gradually in a planned manner in three steps:  Amendment to the Refugee Act adopted by the Parliament on 19 September 2000 under No. 309/2000 Coll. (with effect from 1 November 2000) implements Resolution of 30 November 1992 on manifestly unfounded applications for asylum, Joint Position of 4 March 1996 on the harmonised application of the definition of the term "refugee" in Article 1 of the Geneva Convention, Resolution of 20 June 1995 on minimum guarantees for asylum procedures. The changes introduced by the amendment include the unlimited access of aliens to asylum procedure (abolition of the 24-hour time limit), transposition of manifestly unfounded reasons for asylum directly into the law, the right to family reunification, and the obligation to inform the applicants on the decisions made in asylum proceedings in the language they understand. In practice, however, these measures (such as informing applicants about the decisions taken in asylum proceedings in the language they understand) started to be already implemented from 1 August 1999 under an internal management act - instruction No. 16/1999 issued by the Director of the Migration Office. Through Ordinance No. 168 of 17 May 2000 modifying and amending Government Ordinance No. 67/1996 Coll. the Government published a list of safe third countries and safe countries of origin with a view to implement Conclusions adopted on 30 November 1992 concerning countries in which there is generally no serious risk of persecution. The Government Ordinance took effect on 1 July 2000.

2002 OSI LGI Research Project Impact of EU Enlargement and Implementation of Schengen in the CEE Region





The adoption of a new refugee or asylum law (expected before the end of 2002), which will meet the requirements of the European Union, including the setting up of an independent appeal instance for asylum seekers who are denied refugee status; that competence will be vested with a judicial authority to be set up under the envisaged reform of administrative judiciary which has already been launched by Government Resolution No. 675/2000 (full implementation of Resolution of 20 June 1995 on minimum guarantees for asylum procedures). Accession of the Slovak Republic to the Convention determining the State responsible for examining applications for asylum lodged in one of the Member States of the European Communities - Dublin Convention (Dublin, 1990) by the time of accession of the Slovak Republic to the European Union.

At present, the section of immigration officers (i.e. decision-makers) at the Migration Office is being strengthened; a new unit on documentation and analysis of the countries of origin of migration will be set up within the Office in 2001. The Slovak Republic takes an active part in the activities of the CIREA working group in compliance with the provisions of the Decision of 11 June 1992 setting up the CIREA and Guidelines of 20 June 1994 adopted by Council for joint reports on third countries. Schengen Information System In conformity with the principles laid down in the Schengen Agreement, the tasks for Slovakia under this chapter include the setting up of an independent database, a National Schengen Information System (SIS), and of a technical auxiliary unit for automated data transmission helping to trace persons and things and providing information, especially for the needs of border protection. An establishment of the national SIRENE office is also envisaged. Its role will be to provide institutional support for the activities to be carried out under the Schengen Agreement. Because of the high costs involved, these institutions will be built by the time of accession to the European Union. A number of information systems which are relevant for the SIS operate under the competence of the Ministry of the Interior and of the Police Force. The structure of items in these information systems is partly compatible with the data categorisation principles of the Schengen information system and will be fully harmonised by the time of accession of the Slovak Republic to the European Union. Since 1999, a French pre-accession advisor has been providing twinning technical assistance in implementing the SIS in Slovakia. At the moment, selected police information systems are being transformed into an integrated Automated Police Information System, which provides comprehensive information support to the police. In the perspective, the Automated Police Information System will secure electronic communication and transmission of information that is relevant from the perspective of the SIS. Slovakia's Schengen Action Plan To fulfil the above-mentioned integration commitments and ambitions in the JHA, the Slovak Government worked out its detailed Schengen Action Plan.6 It is a joint outcome of the special interministerial working group on the implementation of the Schengen acquis, established with the opening of the Chapter 24 in June 2001 and headed by the President of the Slovak Police Force. This working group consists of 15 specific sub-groups composed of representatives of different ministries and other official bodies, each dealing with specific pieces of the Schengen acquis. Slovakia's Schengen Action Plan lays down the priorities for the implementation of the EU's rules. These focus on capacitybuilding for effective police co-operation, efficient border management, adequate harmonisation of visa policy and a well-developed information system.

6

The Schengen Action Plan was prepared by the Slovak Interior Ministry and adopted by the Government of the Slovak Republic on 5 September 2001.

2002 OSI LGI Research Project Impact of EU Enlargement and Implementation of Schengen in the CEE Region

2.2

Internal Market Agenda: Free Movement of Persons

This issue seems to attract most policy and public attention, and have caused a great deal of friction between the EU and the CEE candidate countries. However, a recent analysis of international migration flows in Slovakia by Jurcova (2002) shows that the fears concerning the potential of mass labour migration from this country to the EU are indeed exaggerated. Following accession negotiations and regular progress reports, most of the public administrative effort in Slovakia is now focused on the establishment of a general system framework for the recognition of foreign professional qualifications and on the mechanisms of co-ordination for the social security interface between Slovakia and the EU.

3.

Neighbourhood Relations and Public Perceptions "Schengenland": New Fears or Old Resentments?

in

the

'EU pressure to tighten up border controls in line with the Schengen system has caused substantial economic losses to Poland and its eastern neighbours. Similar difficulties arise between other "first wave" accession countries and their neighbours. A more flexible and productive approach has to be found.' (Amato and Batt, 1999:48)

3.1 Slovakia and Ukraine
Perhaps the most debated is the impact of the Slovak visa policy changes on Ukraine. Concerning Slovak-Ukrainian relations, the fairly positive public opinion towards migrants before and during the 1990s (e.g. recall the Cernobyl catastrophy) and the "winds of change" in the former Ostbloc has recently switched to restrictive regulations for all groups of foreigners crossing Slovakia's eastern border. In 2000, this amounted to the introduction by Slovakia of the visa regime with Ukraine and other CIS countries. It is worth noting that this was done without any previous economic and political impact assessment, with the government's official position been defended inter alia on the following grounds: visa policy co-ordination with the Czech Republic, the prospective accession of Slovakia to the EU, and the fight against organised cross-border crime coming from Ukraine and Russia. The "security" argument in particular is becoming all the more important, given the recent developments at the eastern border: public opinion in Slovakia was shocked by the "Petrovce tragedy" in which a Ukrainian national, most likely a member of an organised gang of smugglers, "legally" entered Slovakia, and murdered two border policemen when asked by them to produce appropriate travel documents.7 The Slovak Republic attaches requisite attention to an effective protection of its state borders, with special emphasis on building a Schengen-type state border with Ukraine, the future external border of the European Union.8 On the one hand, as Ukraine's EU membership seems many years off, the continued imposition of a visa-regime for Ukrainian citizens to Slovakia and later to the EU, as well as Slovakia's adoption of the Schengen acquis, have already resulted in some members of both the Slovak and the Ukrainian minorities in border regions facing unprecedented obstacles in moving between the two sides of the boundary, which hitherto has been relatively simple for them. On the other hand, some "compensatory" mechanisms have been put in place, or are now being introduced through which a more flexible balance between cross-border economic development interests and EU accession commitments can be established. These take the form of specific foreign or cultural9 policy initiatives. First, to mitigate the adverse effects of the 2000 visa policy changes on
7 8

Pravda Daily, March 20, 2002, p. 1. Negotiating Position of the Slovak Republic: Chapter 24 (Co-operation in Justice and Home Affairs) was prepared by the Slovak Interior Ministry and adopted by the Government of the Slovak Republic on 6 December 2000. 9 For example, through "the House of External Slovaks" [Dom zahranicnych Slovakov] operated by the Slovak Ministry of Culture.

2002 OSI LGI Research Project Impact of EU Enlargement and Implementation of Schengen in the CEE Region

cross-border activity, the governments of Slovakia and Ukraine have managed to conclude the "Agreement on the Liberalisation of the Visa Regime," effective as of March 1, 2001. The key measures include: abolition of the requirement of producing an official invitation letter to supplement the visa application, free-of-charge visa to children aged 16 or less, multi-entry free-of-charge visa to certain categories of applicants who often cross the border for professional reasons (members of the air, river and sea-faring crew, railway employees, international coach drivers, etc.), then to citizens living in selected border areas, those with ethnic kinship across the border, students, war veterans, and also 50% off the visa fee for those travelling on the basis of bilateral agreements in the field of culture, arts, sports and games, or religious co-operation, etc. Second, already 5 years ago, the Slovak government made a special provision for the so-called "external Slovaks". Anyone recognised as a "Slovak" can acquire from the Slovak Foreign Ministry an "External Slovak Card", on presentation of which the holder is not only exempt from the need for a visa and official invitation (where applicable), but also enjoys certain special rights when in the Slovak Republic (including the right to apply for admission to any Slovak educational institution; to be exempt from permits for long term residence and work in Slovakia; to receive a pension; to buy real estate; as well as smaller concessions such as reduced fares on Slovak public transport for pensioners, etc.). The law was passed by the Slovak parliament in 1997, under the Meciar government (see Zakon 70, 1997), and the regulations for obtaining this status are set out by the Slovak Ministry of Foreign Affairs10. Given the new visa regime, interest in obtaining such a document intensified sharply in 2000. Visas are rather costly and quite inconvenient for some to obtain, even though a new Slovak Consulate has opened in Uzhorod (so that it is not necessary for Transcarpathian "countrymen" to travel to distant capital of Kiev). An "External Slovak" card, on the contrary, is free of charge, with unlimited validity, and is quite easy to obtain for many people. Slovaks living as minorities outside Slovakia are typically quite flexible and undogmatic about their identity. A key marker of Slovak identity is adherence to the Roman-Catholic Church, and Slovaks have readily associated and intermarried with local German "Schwabs" and Hungarians of the same confession. But they also mix freely with Rusyns on account of the closeness of the two languages. Consequently, there are very many people in Transcarpathia who can claim some Slovak ancestry, and even more who are descendants of former Czechoslovak citizens. By the end of 2000, the Slovak Embassy in Ukraine reported that only about 1,000 had applied for and been granted "External Slovak" cards.

3.2 Slovakia and Hungary
In the meantime, the Hungarian government has been wrestling with a similar possibility for "Hungarians Beyond the Borders", long advocated (in light of the obstacles to dual citizenship as a solution) by the Hungarian minorities and Budapest-based organisations concerned with their fate. According to Batt (2001:23), 'the difficulties lie in the web of conflicting priorities. Hungarians are torn between an emotional sense of responsibility (also enshrined the constitution) for kinsfolk cut off by Treaty of Trianon; their sense of the need to avoid antagonising the neighbouring "successor" countries of the former Hungarian Kingdom, ever alert to Hungarian "revisionist" designs; and their concern not to introduce anything that might impede the progress of their EU accession, in this case, by contradicting the acquis on border control and migration.'11 At the same time, and on the other side of the border, some of the members of the Hungarian minority in Slovakia - fearing of the return of Meciar to power after 2002 autumn parliament elections
10 11

See also the official website: URL: www.foreign.gov.sk/page_slovaks.htm. A well-informed comparative analysis of the application of the concept of "fuzzy citizenship" in the CEE region can be found in Fowler, B., 'Hungary's Neighbourhood Policies and Western Integration: Complementary or at odds?,' "One Europe or Several?" Briefing Note No. 2/01, February 2001, and more recently in Fowler, B., 'Fuzzing citizenship, nationalising political space: A framework for interpreting the Hungarian "status law" as a new form of kin-state policy in Central and Eastern Europe,' "One Europe or Several?" Working Paper W40/02, January 2002. The highly debated law is discussed here mainly against the background of two different concepts of citizenship as currently contested in the CEE region: "post-modern" (defended by Hungarian government) versus "modern" (defended by the Slovak and Romanian governments).

2002 OSI LGI Research Project Impact of EU Enlargement and Implementation of Schengen in the CEE Region

- simply do not want to be excluded from the benefits of the earlier Hungary's accession to the EU, which appears to be less problematic compared to Slovakia's prospects. In general, creating a special status for ethnic Hungarians that is compatible with both the Hungarian constitution and European legal norms will be tricky, even though the Hungarian "status law" was - after several years of preparation - successfully passed in June 2001, with its enforcement bilaterally agreed upon with all Hungary's neighbours but Slovakia. Uniquely, this controversial law has united both the government coalition as well as the opposition political parties in Slovakia, and have led to several initiatives to prevent its enforcement on the sovereign territory of the Slovak Republic. Both the Slovak policy response as well as the general question of whether the law will last beyond Hungary's accession to the EU or even the upcoming 2002 parliamentary elections remain open12. Luckily, the Slovak Prime Minister Dzurinda has recently been assured by top-level Brussels officials (Mr. Prodi and Mr. Verheugen) that the Hungarian "status law" and the other sensitive question of "Benes Decrees" (put forward mainly by Mr. Orban in Hungary and Mr. Stroeber in Germany) will not be an obstacle to the conclusion of accession negotiations with Slovakia. Worth mentioning here is the suggestion made by the "Reflection Group", that 'the Slovak "problem" [with Hungarians] could be eased quite rapidly by accelerating accession negotiations so that Slovakia can join at the same time as Hungary.' (Amato and Batt, 1999: 40). Of course, such political solution has lost much of its power and validity, but this does not apply to the EU context to which it refers. When putting aside the old resentments in the Slovak-Hungarian ethnic relations as well as the election campaign rhetoric on both sides of the border, the current heated political fights with their substantial media coverage have an unused potential to develop a wider public debate, which is now under way in the more "mature" Schengen members of the EU - that of the principles of future European citizenship.

3.3 Slovakia and Poland
Some Slovak media13 have recently informed about the Polish opposition - mainly from the Žywieck region - to the newly reformed Law on the Stay of Aliens on the Territory of the Slovak Republic, effective as of April 1, 2002. The regional representatives officially criticise that the Polish citizens are now required to produce the Slovak officers with a valid travel insurance policy, as well as to hold sufficient cash (about 50 USD per day of the stay) when entering this country through any of the 47 Slovak-Polish border crossings. They say that the new legal provisions will have a negative impact on the cross-border tourism and traffic. It is worth mentioning here that no other neighbouring country expressed an official disagreement with the new Slovak law. The Slovak authorities say the new law is inter alia to prevent the very unpleasant practice of those numerous Polish tourists, who used to go to ski to Slovak mountains, and - in case of serious injury - have very often left this country without bearing the costs of the hospital treatment provided.

4.

Schengen and the Practice of "Closer Co-operation14"

'The scale and complexity of the task of managing integration of such a diverse range of [CEE] economies with the EU inescapably points to the evolution of a multi-tier Europe of "variable geometry", making use in new and unanticipated ways of the Amsterdam provisions for "flexibility".' (Amato and Batt, 1999:47)
12

An official document has recently been published by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Slovak Republic (no date) 'Comparison of Act of the Republic of Hungary on Hungarians Living in Neighbouring Countries with Act No. 70 on Foreign Slovaks' (abbreviated as Slovak MOFA Comparison), which provides the legal and institutional analysis of the issue from the Slovak perspective. 13 See e.g. Pravda Daily, March 27, 2002, p. 9. 14 Without reference to the exact legal wording, 1997 Amsterdam Treaty strengthened the legal foundations of "closer co-operation" among the EU member states in order to promote with more flexibility the simultaneous process of "widening", "broadening" and "deepening" of European integration.

2002 OSI LGI Research Project Impact of EU Enlargement and Implementation of Schengen in the CEE Region

The most substantial case of post-Amsterdam "flexibility" is clearly that of the incorporation of the Schengen system into the EU framework. As Monar (2000:7) put it, 'Schengen—one should not be mistaken about that—has led in all but name to the establishment of a common internal security zone of the participating Member States. Originally focused on the abolition of internal border controls most of its structures and acquis are now dealing with questions of control, law enforcement and restriction of access to this internal security zone which has been nicknamed— rather poetically— "Schengenland"'. Since the original aim of the abolition of internal border controls was largely achieved in 1995 (at least among the fully participating members), the main emphasis is now on what were formerly the "compensatory measures", i.e. measures which should only offset any internal security risks actually or potentially arising from the abolition of controls at internal borders. As also emphasised by the influential "Reflection Group Report" (see Amato and Batt, 1999), the evolution of Schengen is being co-determined by two powerful forces: first, free movement ideals of the Single European Market Act and, second, public perception of security threats (i.e. the increasing role of "public order" in JHA agenda setting). Moreover, it must also be stressed, that for the current EU members "Schengenland" represents sort of a "last frontier", while for Slovakia or any other CEE candidates it is the "first frontier" on the way towards a "United Nations of Europe". Such a "variable geometry" was perceived and practised within the EU itself, when most of the EU members "outside" the Schengen system became not only worried about being excluded from the political dynamic of the "core" which Schengen claimed to be, but also about becoming a sort of buffer zone for unwanted aliens and criminal activities outside of the new "security wall" (Monar, 2000) erected by the Schengen members. There is both a recent experience and a strong perception in Slovakia, that the above two forces will most certainly be at work in the case of the upcoming Eastern enlargement, too. As a candidate state for the EU membership and a country undergoing the implementation of Schengen rules Slovakia has already experienced a certain degree of exclusion from current member states when in the past some Schengen countries (Denmark, Finland and Belgium) had repeatedly imposed visa requirements for Slovak citizens as an immediate response to the influx of Slovak Roma asylum seekers in 2000. Although these requirements have later been lifted, Slovak concerns over such an exclusion and a disproportionate burden-sharing in the post-accession period are still relevant.

5.

Schengen and the Practice of "Cross-Border Co-operation"

'Cross-border regional co-operation will play a pivotal role in economic development across Europe. This serves to accelerate integration of the first wave new member states by promoting growth, particularly in their poorer eastern regions; and contributes to averting the danger of new barriers, and therefore new economic and political tensions between the Central and East European associates, and between them and their neighbours to the East and Southeast.' (Amato and Batt, 1999: 48) In Western Europe, after the WWII, cross-border co-operation (CBC) has always been and still is linked to the European integration process. Not until the seventies, however, this linkage had been formulated in the sense that CBC is a necessity for the successful functioning of an integrated Europe.15 Today, CBC is also seen by some CEE opinion-formers as one of the possible mechanisms of adjustment to the less favourable effects of Schengen. Two different approaches to structuring regional CBC can be identified in Slovakia, which are relevant for the present paper: "top-down" and "bottom-up". The latter is based on the "Euro-region" concept, drawing mainly on pioneering experiences of Regio Basliensis, which includes one non-EU (Switzerland) and two EU countries (Germany and France). In Slovakia, such venture has been started in the Carpathian Euroregion (CE), which includes five countries of Hungary, Poland, Ukraine,
15

The reference is made to the influential report to the Council of Europe on border problems, which was published as a book by Malchus, Viktor Freiherr von (1975) Partnerschaft an europäischen Grenzen: Integration durch grenzűberschreitende Zusammenarbeit, Bonn: Europa-Union Verlag. (Partnership at European Borders: Integration Through Cross-Border Co-operation)

2002 OSI LGI Research Project Impact of EU Enlargement and Implementation of Schengen in the CEE Region

Romania and the Slovak Republic16, and quite recently in the Tatra Euroregion (Slovak and Polish border regions). However, we will not deal with the impact of Schengen on the future prospects of the CE, because this is the subject of a recent report produced by an influential Slovak think-tank in cooperation with its Ukrainian counterpart17. Nonetheless, we will briefly summarise the recent experience with the CE later on, when the two approaches are compared. More attention will be devoted here to the top-down regional co-operation promoted by e.g. the Slovak-Austrian PHARE CBC programme.

8.1

"Top-Down" Regional Approach: Slovak-Austrian PHARE CBC Programme

In the beginning of 1990s, the Slovak-Austrian border offered an ideal chance to change the former zone of military and ideological confrontation between two implacable blocks into a zone of thriving political, cultural, economic, scientific and technical co-operation between the East and the West, in the middle of the "New Europe". Slovak policy makers and planners were not blind to this chance and the development of Vienna-Bratislava(-Gyor) "co-operative region" has been considered a matter of strategic importance for the regional development in Slovakia since 1990s (see Bucek, 1992:9; Balaz, 1995:361; OECD, 1996:76; Smith, 1998:280). However, the real chance to develop such a co-operation appeared only with Austria's accession to the EU in 1995, when the SlovakAustrian border became eligible for the PHARE CBC funding. PHARE CBC is a programme of the European Union which aims to support CEE regions on its external borders. It is seen as one of possible means of overcoming the legacy of the Iron Curtain and promoting the West-East European integration. The case of the Slovak-Austrian border shows how big the gap between good intentions and reality can be, with the Slovak-Austrian PHARE CBC18 providing a good example of how the realisation of "integration" programme can be problematic. The potential for cross-border economic development on the Slovak-Austrian border was discussed in Sirak (2002). Based on a case study material, the "specific" problems that have undermined the achievement of expected goals are now discussed, and lessons learned from Slovakia's experience are addressed in the light of the Schengen agenda19. Programme-related Factors Simply put, the management of the programme was much more complicated than originally expected. The PHARE programme in general is a rather complex administrative and financial mechanism. There are strict procedures of planning, endorsing, contracting and spending money, supervising implementation and monitoring. Money goes through several cycles of approval by the EU before being allocated and eventually made ready for spending. Some procedures are quite complicated and time-consuming and delays in endorsement proved that not only authorities in CEECs but also Brussels itself sometimes finds their accurate and timely application difficult. PHARE CBC programme is a further complicated case. By definition, the
16

Started in 1992 by a non-governmental facilitator, the then Institute for East-West Studies (IEWS), the initiative was launched in February 1993, when the ministers of foreign affairs signed the founding documents. The Carpathian Foundation, which now serves - through grants and technical assistance to NGOs and local governments - 14 million citizens living in the ethnically mixed and culturally diverse Carpathian Euroregion, was established in 1994 with substantive support from the Charles Stewart Mott Foundation. The legal foundations for the CE are a statute and an agreement. The bottom-up initiative is run by a council, a secretarygeneral and a secretariat that rotates among the member countries. For more information see http://www.carpathianfoundation.org. 17 Bilcik, V. and Mitryayeva, S. (eds.) Role of the Carpathian Euroregion in Mitigating Possible Negative Effects of Schengen. International Workshop organised jointly by the Research Center of the Slovak Foreign Policy Association and Strategies Studies Foundation, October 12, 2001, Prešov, Slovakia (workshop proceedings). Downloadable from http://www.sfpa.sk. 18 In 1995, the European Commission approved the budget of ECU 20 million for the Slovak-Austrian CrossBorder Co-operation Programme for the period of five years (1995 to 1999). Fifty-six per cent of the total budget was allocated to infrastructure measures, 19 % to economic development and tourism, 15 % to environmental measures and 10 % to small projects fund and management of the programme. It was expected, that money will be allocated through five consecutive annual Financial Memoranda, each amounting ECU 4 million. 19 The main source of information for this case study is the personal notes and a research paper by Sokol (1999), who actively worked for the PHARE CBC Programme and for the EU-Slovak negotiation team (regional policy section) during 1996-1998. His invaluable inputs to this country study are gratefully acknowledged.

2002 OSI LGI Research Project Impact of EU Enlargement and Implementation of Schengen in the CEE Region

programme is a multi-sectoral initiative, involves both "soft" (non-investment) projects and "hard" (investment) projects, it requires good co-ordination of partners at national and sub-national levels (ministries, local and regional authorities, associations and private sector) as well as excellent cooperation on an international level (with authorities in the partner country). A complementarity with the INTERREG II programme that operates on the other (EU) side of the border is sought. From this perspective, the first Slovak CBC Programme was perhaps too ambitious in terms of both the number of projects involved and their variety. It included relatively too many too small projects, most of them had to be further divided into sub-projects. Each project or sub-project had its "own life" and its particular problems, it had to be treated individually and required the same amount of administrative and management work, regardless of its financial value. Needless to say, the programme consisted of a great variety of types of projects, and, of course, a great variety of procedures to follow, too. In addition, PHARE rules themselves kept changing. In order to increase the effectiveness of PHARE, European Commission has been introducing new rules and guidelines. These were supposed to simplify and accelerate the implementation of all PHARE programmes. However, some of them did not take full account of the specifics of a CBC programme, while the sudden introduction of others in the course of implementing of the programme often caused bureaucratic confusion and other unnecessary complications. Administrative (In)capacity Clearly, successfully managing the programme was a challenging task, which required a stable, effective, flexible and experienced operational force, with sound negotiation and co-ordination capacity. Instead, mirroring a general turmoil in the Slovak public administration, the CBC programme experienced changes of the responsible body, chaos in organisational arrangements and high personnel turnover combined with staffing problems. Much of the required functions were expected to be fulfilled by a Programme Management Unit (PMU) - the administrative, financial, programming and co-ordination core of the programme - that should have operated under the relevant ministry or governmental body. Unfortunately, the establishment of the PMU and maintaining its operability was problematic. Institutional Differences Of all the Member States, Austria is the one with the most relevance to the Bratislava region. Austria has no constitutional or legal objectives in relation to regional development policy. Nevertheless, accession to the EU and the consequent availability of Structural Funds has meant that regional policy is now on the agenda in Austria at both the federal level and at the level of the individual Länder. Given the federal nature of the country, each Land also prepares its own regional development plan aimed at economic development in its own territory. These plans do not focus on regional (income and unemployment) disparities between Länder and should not therefore be considered to be part of a "regional policy". This has implications for Bratislava and other neighbouring Slovak regions in that if the Länder are not required to attempt to address regional disparities within Austria, then there is likely to be very little enthusiasm at the level of Länder for seeking to address disparities between Austria and Slovakia, in particular the Bratislava region. The lack of any formal involvement of the Austrian authorities, which would have enabled the project to be a genuine "cross-border" project, has meant that many of our conclusions have had to be made on the basis of best estimates of likely Austrian developments based upon informal discussions with nongovernmental Austrian contacts. Political Sensitivity In the late 1990s, Slovakia had been missed out from the first wave of EU enlargement negotiations and this had multiple unpleasant consequences for the country, including CBC activities. With Slovakia's vanishing prospects for early EU accession, the optimism regarding development of meaningful regional co-operation on Slovak-Austrian border had been disappearing, and nobody could blame Austria if it instead concentrated more on its first-wave neighbours - the Czech Republic, Hungary and Slovenia. However, the more influential and direct impact on all PHARE programmes in Slovakia came from Brussels. Clearly, the more the political relations between Bratislava and Brussels were cooling down, the more was the European Commission inclined to "freeze" PHARE funding channels. Misunderstandings that developed in the high-level political EU-Slovakia relations had repercussions in the PHARE-Slovakia programme itself. In 1996, the unhappy Slovak attempt to make the PHARE programme more "effective" resulted in deadlock and disagreement with the Commission on the further direction of the Slovak PHARE programme. As the result, no new annual national PHARE budget was approved for the country by the European Commission (see European Commission, 1997). The situation persisted through 1997 when EC made

2002 OSI LGI Research Project Impact of EU Enlargement and Implementation of Schengen in the CEE Region

it clear, that had Slovakia not fulfil the required political criteria, the PHARE aid would have been ended all together (see European Commission, 1998). Lessons Learned and Future Prospects First and foremost, PHARE is not a miracle tool that can change things and solve problems immediately and easily. Rather, PHARE itself requires a great deal of attention and effort before any advantages can materialise. Moreover, the effort will not be successful until political and institutional pre-requisites are satisfied. There are some positive signals, too. In 1996, the basis for a trilateral Austrian-Slovak-Hungarian cross-border co-operation was created. The programme was named 'Partnership 2000 - Vision and Consensus for the 21st Century' and policymakers hope, that it will open new opportunities of co-operation in the regional triangle Vienna-Bratislava-Gyor. Indeed, Partnership 2000 was the only PHARE-type programme in Slovakia that received a funding from the European Commission in the problematic years of 1996 and 1997! Since 1998, the bilateral and trilateral EU-aided CBC on the western and south-western Slovak border has been intensified.20

8.2

"Bottom-Up" Regional Approach: Carpathian Euroregion

Undoubtedly, the demise of the Iron Curtain more than ten years ago offered an opportunity to unite a divided continent and created a whole set of new regional potentials in Europe. The CE was the first Euroregion in East-Central Europe, modelled on hundreds similar examples found mainly in western Europe. It shares the same wide ranging goals of promoting cross-border trade and cooperation, cultural contacts, mutual understanding and historical reconciliation between peoples divided by international frontiers. The author subscribes to the opinion expressed by many recent commentators - both local activists and recognised academics - including Batt (2001), that the CE has not so far lived up to its ambitions. The reasons identified are three, at least. First, the very fact that the initiative came from outside, from the New York-based IEWS, suggested that the CE would find it difficult to operate unaided. It very rapidly became clear that it was too big, and did not rest on adequate interest and existing contacts "from below". Further to the point, IEWS has moved on to other projects, leaving behind the small Carpathian Foundation, CE's main financial backer, whose resources can support only very small cross-border initiatives under the CE (about $3mn was disbursed in the period 199599, of which $500,000 was allocated to about 70 projects in Transcarpathia). Second, the transport and communications infrastructure is woefully inadequate for the purposes of regional integration. Third, the over-extension of the project was partly a result of political factors. In the case of the Polish and Hungarian partners, there was an irrepressible urge on the part of regions even quite distant from the frontiers to clamber on board; also, the Polish and Hungarian governments took up the CE with some degree of commitment at first, but the project fell rapidly down their list of priorities once the prospect of securing EU accession firmed up. On the other hand, the wariness of the Slovak and Romanian governments (up to 1997-98) about the CE as a vehicle for Hungarian ambitions in the Carpathian basin led them at first actively to obstruct the formation of the CE, and later severely constrained the participation of their respective regions (Corrigan et al., 1997). Generally speaking, the rigid implementation of Schengen may in the short-term add security and bring in a clearer and a more effective set of rules for dealing with border issues and migration, in the medium to long-term the CE may face a serious challenge in dealing with its new internal dividing lines and rising social, economic and also legal discrepancies between its various parts.21
20

The year of 2001 has seen the completion of the reconstruction of Sturovo-Esztergom Bridge and the substantial modernisation of the customs facilities on the Slovak-Hungarian border. PHARE provided an overall allocation of € 10 million - € 5 million each for Slovakia and Hungary - for the reconstruction of the 328-metre long steel-structure bridge which was destroyed during the WWII, which is planned to improve local transport facilities, and to give new impetus to the local economy, at the same time enhancing bilateral relations. Moreover, under the 2001 PHARE Programme some € 12 million has been allocated in Slovakia to its CBC programmes, notably with Austria (€ 6 million), Poland (€ 4 million), and Hungary (€ 4 million). 21 Bilčík, V. and Mitryayeva, S., ‘Policy Recommendations,’ in: Role of the Carpathian Euroregion in Mitigating Possible Negative Effects of Schengen (workshop proceedings), http://www.sfpa.sk, retrieved on March 7, 2002.

2002 OSI LGI Research Project Impact of EU Enlargement and Implementation of Schengen in the CEE Region

6.

The Future: On the Road to "Schengen Maturity 22"?

'In the domain of internal security, no less than in that of military security, "threat perceptions" are extremely important both as a driving factor in the policy-process and as a justification for action by public authorities. As opinion-polls indicate, a very large majority of citizens in the Member States regard organised crime, drug trafficking and illegal immigration as threats. This perception is well nourished by the media and often also by senior government representatives.' (Monar, 1999) Full inclusion of the CEECs upon accession remains well the final political objective. Yet in case these are not able to take on the entire Schengen acquis either their accession to the EU could be delayed or—the politically less costly option— border controls between the Schengen zone and the applicants could be maintained after accession. The fact that the threat of such exclusion has to be taken seriously is demonstrated by the very significant upgrading on the EU side of mechanisms monitoring the implementation of the Union acquis in justice and home affairs by the applicant countries. As reported by Monar (2001), 'both the Member States and (after an initially more "relaxed" approach) the Commission have adopted the view that the formal legal enactment of the Union acquis by the applicant countries will not adequately guarantee also an effective implementation, the absence of which could have serious negative implications for the internal security situation of the "old" Member States after accession (...) This is a hardly veiled threat to the applicants that non-compliance with the EU and Schengen acquis can quickly become a major issue in the accession negotiations.' Nicolaides (1999) identifies six stages of policy implementation (i.e. transposition application - compliance - enforcement - policy evaluation - policy reform), five steps for establishing effective implementing capacity23 and four "basic ingredients" that together constitute the inputs for developing such capacity. Such concept of capacity goes beyond the legal obligations of the EU membership and focuses instead on actual policy outcomes in terms of removal of barriers (including those hampering the "four freedoms") and integration of national markets. The framework suggested by Nicolaides (1999) reflects not only the letters (i.e. legal texts) but also the spirit of the European integration project, recognising the fundamental difference between "rules" (as stipulated in primary and secondary Community legislation) and their local adoption in the form of national or lower-level "policies" exercised by current or future EU member states. Therefore, it is both sensible and flexible enough to capture the inherent dynamics of inclusion and exclusion which is at the core of the Schengen implementation process. The approach is used to here summarise the political and governance issues discussed in this paper, and to derive some policy conclusions regarding the future of Schengen agenda in Slovakia (see Table 1). (insert Table 1)

7.


Conclusions
Slovakia - despite being a young nation state - has quite a long asylum and immigration policy tradition. However, with Slovakia moving from being mostly a transit country to being a country of destination as well, and given the changing status of its borders due to prospective EU membership, the public policy focus has now been shifted from purely migration policy issues towards "institution- and capacity-building" mainly in the field of JHA. The "free movement of persons" and "JHA" agendas are interconnected: there are basically three "doors" through which a person, a non-EU national can enter the EU/Schengen: labour migration,


22

The Germans have found the somewhat patronising term of "Schengenreife" (i.e. Schengen maturity) for the target of complete fulfilment of all implementation standards (see Monar, 2001). 23 Definition of "implemeting capacity" is broader than that of "administrative capacity" usually referred to and criticised in the EU avis and regular reports.

2002 OSI LGI Research Project Impact of EU Enlargement and Implementation of Schengen in the CEE Region















family re-unification, and asylum. The three corresponding JHA policy areas - asylum, visa and migration - are exactly the ones, in which the political dynamics of inclusion and exclusion have resulted specifically from the emerging EU regime of governance for freedom, security and justice (rather than from the national regimes of member states). Schengen implementation process has so far been largely a technical and technocratic exercise, with very little public debate directed on the potential impacts of Slovakia's EU membership and of specific pieces of EU legislation.24 In order to reduce the risks of such "technicalization" and to gain wider public support for the European policy agenda, a closer linkage between the "internal market" (i.e. the four freedoms) and "internal security" (i.e. JHA) agendas must be established than has so far been the case. Related to the above, there is a lack of both academic and policy research in Slovakia on a complex mixture of motives for migration and a link between different kinds of migration flows. This knowledge deficit must be reduced if appropriate policies are to be devised for the "Schengenland" times. A preliminary desk research shows, that the rigid insistence on the adoption in full of the Schengen acquis will most likely have clear detrimental consequences mainly for the SlovakUkrainian relations. Although much of the media coverage very often amounts to empirically unfounded speculation, and, given the fact that business interests and ethnic kinship are stronger than any visa regulations, the current restriction of economic and cultural links is clearly inhibiting economic development in the border regions, and may in the long-run disrupt the long-established links between local communities, creating new and unnecessary political tensions between the national governments (as illustrated by the visa policy changes in 2000). More field research is needed to learn about the local implications of Schengen in Slovak and Ukrainian border regions, in order to attempt to mitigate its adverse effects. When putting aside the old resentments in the Slovak-Hungarian ethnic relations as well as the election campaign rhetoric on both sides of the border, the current heated political fights over the Hungarian "status law" with their substantial media coverage have an unused potential to develop a wider public debate, which is now under way in the more "mature" Schengen members of the EU - that of the principles of future European citizenship. Similar to Slovakia's NATO accession process and somewhat echoing the "threat perception" in the EU, the Slovak political elite, the general public and foreign investors seem to perceive the "Schengenland" both as a "security zone" as well as a politically stable extended market area. Therefore, the prevailing tendency on the side of the EU to react to the eastern Schengen enlargement with a "Fortress Europe" approach can and has to be replaced with more flexibility and greater willingness to engage actively with the CEE neighbours (either countries of origin or transit), in support of their economic development, administrative reform and political stability, through partnership-building at the inter-national level (via "closer co-operation") and at the interregional level (via "cross-border co-operation"). In implementing the post-Amsterdam Schengen agenda in the CEE region, EU regional development funds could potentially play a role that goes well beyond the strictly economic rationale. For example, the EU Interreg initiative, which has supported CBC schemes among the current member states, has already begun to be applied with the PHARE support to similar activities between existing and prospective new member states (notably between German, Polish and the Czech border regions; another one is planned between Austria and Hungary). 25 The Slovak experience with cross-border regional co-operation shows, that the possibility of mitigating adverse effects of Schengen, either through "top-down" or "bottom-up" approaches, is

24

See for a recent discussion in Bilcik, V., 'Integracia SR do Europskej unie' (Integration of the SR into the European Union), in: Kollar, M., Grigorij Meseznikov, Slovensko 2001. Suhrnna sprava o stave spolocnosti. (Slovakia 2001: Global Report on the State of the Society), Bratislava: IVO, 2001, pp. 351 - 365. 25 Although '"Interreg" schemes have not always been easy or successful,' as reported by Reflection Group (1999), 'such schemes in Central Europe have been impeded less by traditional sensitivities than by inadequate resources of PHARE and CEE governments, by comparison with their EU partners. There have been regrettable problems within the Commission itself: Interreg and PHARE are managed by different departments, leading to bureaucratic confusion, "turf-wars" and difficulties in coordination.' (Amato and Batt, 1999:44)

2002 OSI LGI Research Project Impact of EU Enlargement and Implementation of Schengen in the CEE Region

now significantly limited by inter-country territorial-administrative differences and, more importantly, by a lack of adequate financial resources and organisational capacities on the side of CEE local/regional governments. The EU-aided "top-down" approach appears to be more feasible and sustainable when compared with the "Euro-regional" initiatives, however, the effectiveness of existing PHARE CBC activities is still too vulnerable to various political, administrative and programme-related factors. Above all, the scale of resources allocated is modest compared to the scale of problems faced. On the other hand, the CEE Euro-regions may now be well positioned to play an important proactive role as agenda-setters for central and regional governments26, in articulating local public perception and capitalising on specific knowledge and cultural values shared by the local partners.

References
Amato, G. and Batt, J. (eds.)(1999) The Long Term Implications of EU Enlargement: The Nature of the New Border, "Reflection Group" Report to the European Commission, downloadable from http://www.iue.it/RSC/pdf/FinalReport.pdf Balaz, V. (1995) 'Regional development during economic transition: a case study of the Slovak Republic,' European Urban and Regional Studies, Vol. 2, No. 4, pp. 353-62. Batt, J., 'Transcarpathia: Peripheral Region at the "Centre of Europe",' "One Europe or Several?" Working Paper, W27/01, June 2001. Bilcik, V., 'Integracia SR do Europskej unie' (Integration of the SR into the European Union), in: Kollar, M., Grigorij Meseznikov, Slovensko 2001. Suhrnna sprava o stave spolocnosti. (Slovakia 2001: Global Report on the State of the Society), Bratislava: IVO, 2001, pp. 351-65. Bilcik, V., 'Mitigating the Negative Effects of Schengen in the Carpathian Euroregion: A View from Slovakia,' in: Bilcik, V. and Mitryayeva, S. (eds.) Role of the Carpathian Euroregion in Mitigating Possible Negative Effects of Schengen. International Workshop organised by the Research Center of the Slovak Foreign Policy Association and Strategies Studies Foundation, October 12, 2001, Prešov, Slovakia (workshop proceedings), http://www.sfpa.sk, retrieved on March 7, 2002. Bucek, M. (1992) 'Regional Policy of the Slovak Republic in the Period of Transition,' in: Vasko T. (Ed.) Problems of Economic Transition - Regional Development in Central and Eastern Europe, Avebury: Aldershot. Corrigan, J., Sűli-Zakar, I. and Béres, C. (1997) 'The Carpathian Euroregion: an example of crossborder co-operation', European Spatial Research and Policy 4(1): 113-24. Economist, 'Will Western Europe receive the great unwashed - one day?' April 21, 2001. European Commission (1997) Agenda 2000: Commission's Opinion on Slovakia's Application for Membership of the European Union. Bulletin of the European Union - Supplement 9/97, Office for the Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg.

26

Bilcik, V., ‘Mitigating the Negative Effects of Schengen in the Carpathian Euroregion: A View from Slovakia,’ in: Bilcik, V. and Mitryayeva, S. (eds.) Role of the Carpathian Euroregion in Mitigating Possible Negative Effects of Schengen. International Workshop organised by the Research Center of the Slovak Foreign Policy Association and Strategies Studies Foundation, October 12, 2001, Prešov, Slovakia (workshop proceedings), http://www.sfpa.sk, retrieved on March 7, 2002.

2002 OSI LGI Research Project Impact of EU Enlargement and Implementation of Schengen in the CEE Region

European Commission (1998) Accession Partnership: Slovakia, Office for the Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg. European Commission (2000) Regular Report from the Commission on Slovakia's Progress towards Accession. Luxembourg, 8 November 2000. European Commission (2001): Second Report on Economic and Social Cohesion, Luxembourg. Fowler, B., 'Hungary's Neighbourhood Policies and Western Integration: Complementary or at odds?,' "One Europe or Several?" Briefing Note No. 2/01, February 2001. Fowler, B., 'Fuzzing citizenship, nationalising political space: A framework for interpreting the Hungarian "status law" as a new form of kin-state policy in Central and Eastern Europe,' ‘One Europe or Several?’’ Working Paper, W40/02, January 2002. Jurcova, D. (2002) 'Schengen Agreement: Consequences for National Migration Policy in Slovakia,' Center for Economic Development, Bratislava, mimeo. Malchus, Viktor Freiherr von (1975) Partnerschaft an europäischen Grenzen. Integration durch grenzűberschreitende Zusammenarbeit, Bonn: Europa-Union Verlag. (Partnership at European Borders: Integration Through Cross-Border Co-operation) Ministry of the Interior, Schengen Action Plan, Government of the Slovak Republic, Bratislava, 5 September 2001. Ministry of the Interior, Negotiating Position of the Slovak Republic: Chapter 24 (Co-operation in Justice and Home Affairs), Government of the Slovak Republic, Bratislava, 6 December 2000. Monar, J., 'An Emerging Regime of European Governance for Freedom, Security and Justice,' "One Europe or Several?" Briefing Note No. 2/99, November 1999. Monar, J., 'Justice and Home Affairs in a Wider Europe: The Dynamics of Inclusion and Exclusion,' "One Europe or Several?", Working Paper, W07/00, July 2000. Monar, J., 'Schengen, Closer Co-operation and the Dynamics of Inclusion and Exclusion,' in: Marinho, C. (Ed.)(2001) Asylum, Immigration and Schengen Post-Amsterdam: A First Assessment. European Institute of Public Administration, Maastricht. Nicolaides, P. (1999) Enlargement of the EU and Effective Implementation of Community Rules: An Integration-based Approach. Maastricht: EIPA Working Paper. Nintied, P., 'Local Government and Economic Development in CEE: the Case of Bratislava,' IHS Occassional Paper Series, No 2, Rotterdam, 1997. OECD (1996): Regional Problems and Policies in the Czech Republic and the Slovak Republic; Paris. Sirak, M. (2002) 'Impacts of the EU Enlargement and the Implementation of Schengen on Slovakia: Socio-Economic Perspectives,' Center for Economic Development, Bratislava, mimeo. Smith, A. (1998) Reconstructing the Regional Economy: Industrial Transformation and Regional Development in Slovakia, Edward Elgar: Cheltenham. Sokol, M., 'Regional Development in the Transition Economies: the Case of Slovakia,' paper presented at the Regional Studies Association annual conference held in Bilbao, September 1999 (published in conference proceedings).

2002 OSI LGI Research Project Impact of EU Enlargement and Implementation of Schengen in the CEE Region

Straubhaar, T. (2001), 'East-West Migration: Will It Be a Problem?,' Intereconomics, January/February 2001, pp. 1-2. Watson, G., 'EU Asylum and Immigration Policies: The Point of View of the European Parliament,' in: Marinho, C. (Ed.)(2001) Asylum, Immigration and Schengen Post-Amsterdam: A First Assessment. European Institute of Public Administration, Maastricht. Whitwell, Ch., ‘European Migration and Refugee Policy: New Developments,’ a report on the International Seminar for Experts organized in the series Great Debates by the Cicero Foundation, February 15-16, 2001, Paris, http://www.ciCEofoundation.org/p2reportfeb.html, retrieved on January 28, 2002. Zakon c. 70 zo 14. februara 1997 o zahranicnych Slovakoch a o zmene a doplneni niektorych zakonov, Zbierka zakonov (Bratislava) 30: 390-92. ("the Law No. 70/1997 Coll. on the External Slovaks and the amendments of some relating regulations")