How important it is for us to enter the EU in January, rather than in June 2012.

Right at the beginning, I just want to say that I am not a eurosceptic. I believe that membership in the European Union is beneficial for small economies as it facilitates access to other markets, knowledge exchange, and potential funding from EU funds should not be underestimated, especially in the case of unqualified leadership, which is often accompanied by economic policies that are better than those offered domestically. Everything, of course, has its price, but we can also view this as an opportunity cost.

With respect to various criteria, conditions, provisions, directives, not to mention the blockades that Croatia has faced in the past five years of negotiations, the claim that early elections would close the door to Croatia in the long term and significantly affect the date of entry into the European family simply sounds too much to me. In other words, Brussels is telling Croatia that nothing needs to change regarding corruption and the judiciary (which, as far as I remember, has been a stumbling block for five years) but that it is crucial to maintain the status quo (that is, unchanged regardless of the fact that we are daily ‘tripping’ over scandals whose final number cannot even be estimated) and to enter the EU as soon as possible. The Union is now in such a hurry for us to join the integration as soon as possible. So, somewhere at the beginning of 2012. Because if we manage to resolve all those numerous problems (such as shipbuilding, which is indeed a significant problem no matter how you look at it) by spring (!) we will enter in the best-case scenario at the beginning of 2012. If early elections are held, everything will be delayed by several months. But really. Is six months of delay after – in the best-case scenario – 84 months of negotiations a long period?

To call the behavior of the ruling party in the style of ‘the state is our private ATM without limits’ within political disputes and competitions is simply not right. Supporting such governance of the country after years of repeating that laws need to be enforced, that we need to fight against corruption, and for a more effective and transparent judiciary? It is claimed that early elections would also slow down the implementation of economic recovery measures. This would technically be correct if the recovery measures were being implemented. Which, obviously, is not the case. At least as far as those that have been publicly announced are concerned. Such a stance from the Union does not seem logical to me, especially since after so many years of negotiations it would be normal for tasks to be divided, for infrastructure to be established, for it to be known who needs to do what, and that there is no reason for elections to significantly delay entry into the EU. Namely, these would not be the first elections in these five years of negotiations, and maintaining the status quo seems like an excellent alibi for sweeping under the rug problems whose weight is counted in billions of euros of ‘missing’ state funds.