Authors Iain Begg | Gabriel Glöckler | Anke Hassel ... - The Europaeum

Reports, though considerably less attention was paid to them. Instead of
addressing all minority issues in accession countries, the EU has
concentrated on those minority groups representing a risk for the security
and stability of the CEE region. This suggests that minority protection has
been used by the EU as a problem-solving approach suited only for those
countries where nationalism and the dissolution of multi-national states
have been identified as a major source of conflict. 19
To some, it is clear that the EU has only been “half-heartedly” committed
to respect for minority rights within its borders. 20 In effect, the European
Commission has promoted standards of minority protection in accession
countries without showing any willingness to adopt an EU minority policy.
This gave way to accusations of a “double standard”: candidates were to be
measured against norms of minority protection for which there was no
basis in EU law, no agreed definition, no established monitoring
mechanisms and no consistency in practice among member states. 21 These
accusations and the questionable minority records of certain old member
states have considerably limited the authority of the EU in assessing and
enforcing minority protection in new member states. The long-term
effects of the EU shortcomings have yet to be seen, but it is doubtful that
this half-hearted response has provided a lasting solution to minority
issues previously deemed severe enough to potentially transform into
ethnic conflicts.
Funding possibilities for minorities issues
under the EU budget
The EU has devised financial instruments dedicated to minorities in
accession and candidate countries, but not those in member states. Some
of the funding for pre-accession instruments has been used to ensure the
effective implementation of the EU framework for combating
discrimination in accession countries. 22 The PHARE programme 23
specified the integration of Roma minorities as an Accession Partnership
priority for Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Romania and Slovakia.
Over the period of 1999-2003, the largest share of resources (ME 95.77),
some 60%, was spent on education related 24 and infrastructure
development activities.
For the years 2007-2009, the new instrument for pre-accession countries, 25
IPA (Instrument for Pre-accession Assistance), includes a reference to
cross cutting issues like equal opportunities and non-discrimination, as
well as the protection of minorities and vulnerable groups. For this period,
€3.5 billion of IPA is targeted to effective assistance to each country.
Chapter 10 – Simona Milio 147