Well, maybe you're right.
But I have to remind you all that even in early 1990 anyone who would claim that Yugoslavia would fall was rediculed. And by "claim" I don't mean in public apperances, where nobody even considered it, but among circles of friends. People honestly believed it was impossible. Even after the referendum for independence, nobody in Croatia believed there would be war, including my family, until the war started.
UE is a conglomerate of different sovereign countries
YU was a federation of republics with a central gov (which we have not in UE) and ethnic problems triggered by the independance decisions
The spark is not existing in the UE situation
Alsacians don't want to break away to become Germans. Germans are not going to provide weapons and financial support to some Alsacian hypothetical breakaway province
We all have our share of regionalism but either it is insignificant (case of Corsica for example) either it is solved through an autonomous system (Spanish system, Scottland example)
Going down Yugoslav road doesn't mean things will happen exactly the way they happened in Yugoslavia. As you yourself said, the situation is quite different.
What the article is saying is that EU could break up and that violence could erupt. I'll leave it up to the experts to determin the most likely wheres and whys, and how widespread it would be.
EU could break up ?is that EU could break up and that violence could erupt
But EU is nothing so it cannot break up.
Or if you prefer it is just a common market with very little political integration. Even if it breaks up that won't spark violence (at least not on international level like a war between its members)
As for internal violence (civil unrest) it has already existed under EU, still exists under EU and will exists with or without EU
Being member of such kind of entity is not a condition for eternal peace
As not being member of such kind of entity is not a condition for eternal war
If you want a parallel, remember that 40 years ago, 2 NATO members (an organization far more integrated from a political and mainly military pov) threw themselves at each other's throat.
That you have/had regular problems among other NATO members (Spain and UK, UK and Island, etc etc)
Being member of NATO doesn't prevent them
Not being member doesnt prevent them either
That the same thing with EU
Europe, contrary to most of the Balkans have overcome their hatred, the borders are clear cut, accepted and there are no "racial tensions" between the nations. There is also no "balkanisation", e.g. hundereds of thousands of "foreigners" living in "islands" in other nations (creating trouble). The EU is no hegemon commanding troops around to stop nations from breaking away. Total inadequate comparison.
The difference is in the money spent to buy peace. Nothing more, nothing less. Hell those same folks that once were eager to break up, see no issue to have a different kind of Union.
oh ok, just every example in the history of world of a government becoming more centralized so too did the erosion of freedoms follow right behind. Lets just ignore that.
I am sure you can dream up some theory where it doesn't happen,...which is cool and everything. Utopia's have been dreamed up ever since our species starting forming social groups.
practice and real world examples,...none exist
government, by their very nature, is restrictive. The more government, the less freedom. It is inherent.
absolute freedom would be anarchy, the further you move from that the more restrictive you become.
No! No! No! We're all going to go broke at the same time, get rid of the dollar and build the utopian New World Order of fairness, one currency, organic food and gender neutrality...I can't wait.
like i said, purist form of freedom is anarchy....yes or no?...we both know this answer (yes). So moving on...
at any point you start adding more government it becomes restrictive...the more government you add the more restrictive it becomes. IT IS INHERENT.
and before you straw man me, I am not promoting or in favor of anarchy, but there is a balance in there somewhere.
the fact remains that the more government you add the more restrictive of freedoms the government becomes. There is simply no way around it.