Abstract
The research investigates the salience and position of the Latvian government and the parliament on the differentiated integration (DI) of the EU. The results attest that differentiated integration (DI) is a very low-salience issue in Latvia. It has occasionally appeared in parliamentary debates and rarely in government programmes. The issue of DI became more prominent in Latvian political debate after 2012. This was largely due to debate on the future of the Economic and Monetary Union and Latvia’s preparations for the introduction of the euro. The salience of DI models was highest during political crises in the domestic and global political arenas. Specific instances of DI were more often mentioned than differentiated integration in general, although there was little or no in-depth discussion of the DI instances either. Politicians have rarely discussed DI models, except for the ideas of a European core and a two-speed/multi-speed Europe. On Latvia's position, one can conclude that Latvia advocates closer EU integration and equal conditions for all the Member States. Differentiated integration is not in Latvia's interests: since Latvia’s accession to the EU, the country has positioned itself as wishing to avoid different integration speeds in Europe as it fears that Latvia would be left behind by the western European countries for subjective reasons or following objective criteria. Latvia’s outlook on DI in the EU experienced adjustments when the Baltic country joined the eurozone in 2014. In the most recent years Latvian politicians emphasised that the preferred solution was participation by all countries in EU policy initiatives. Meanwhile differentiated integration could be an opportunity to move forward in certain areas. Public discussions in Latvia on DI and the future of Europe in general have lacked depth most of the time, although the most recent couple of years have shown a tendency of their quality to improve.
Highlights
This report investigates the salience of differentiated integration (DI) in Latvian government discourse between 1990 and 2019
I am well aware that it is difficult to achieve the repeal of this pact (...) It is imperative to control Member States' deficits in the framework of the flexibility mechanism, which has been allowed in the existing Stability and Growth Pact. (...) Instead of structural deficits, the size of expenditure should be used. (...) The Stability and Growth Pact needs to extend the flexibility to the programmes of the European Union Funds for a withdrawal of co-financing from Member States' deficit calculation.”57
It is evident that the Prime Minister only spoke minimally about DI
Summary
The results attest that differentiated integration (DI) is a very low-salience issue in Latvia. The 2007 Schengen area accession, the adoption of the Lisbon Treaty, the 2008 global financial crisis, the communications on the future of the EU and EMU originating from the EU institutions, Latvia’s eurozone accession, Brexit and other decisive political challenges highlighted Latvia’s position on closer integration in the European Union. In the case of inter se agreements, there were no mentions of the Prüm Convention but there were discussions about the European Stability Mechanism, the Fiscal Compact and the Single Resolution Mechanism When it comes to external integration, the most salient key words were the European Economic Area and the Eastern Partnership, but no references were found to the Customs Union with Turkey or to Euromed
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
