Demographic features. In total, the region is home to up to 60.5 million people. The demographic situation is characterized by the same trends as in most European countries. It is characterized by a sharp decline in fertility and
natural growth, which is due to socio-economic factors. The birth rate and, accordingly, natural population growth are highest in Montenegro (3.5%), Bosnia and Herzegovina (1.35%), Albania (0.52%) and Moldova (0.28%), and in Bulgaria, Romania, Slovenia , Croatia - it is negative (on average -0.05%). The age structure of the population is favorable for the reproduction of labor resources: children under 15 years old - 19%, people of working age (15-64 years old) - 69%, retirement (65 years old) - 12%. There are more women everywhere (51%) than men.
Racial makeup. In most countries of the region, representatives of the southern group of the Caucasian race predominate. They have more intense skin pigmentation than other Caucasians, mostly dark, sometimes wavy hair, dark eyes. V northern regions the majority of the population belongs to the middle European racial types.
Ethnic composition. Southeast Europe is a very heterogeneous region in terms of national, ethnic and religious relations. This leads to numerous conflicts leaving the historical past of peoples - several powerful states fought for influence on them: Orthodox Russia, Protestant Germany, Muslim Turkey, Catholic Austria and Bavaria, Hungary. Constant military conflicts gave rise to significant population migrations. The consequence of this is the specific settlement of huge territories (Serbian, Croatian, Bosnian, Albanian villages are located nearby).
In the countries of the region, the percentage of national minorities is high, and in some of them there was a territorial mixing of ethnic groups (Bosnia, Croatia, Serbia). In Bulgaria, Turks (8%) belong to national minorities, in Bosnia and Herzegovina - Serbs (32%), in Macedonia - Albanians (22%), in Moldova - Ukrainian (14%) and Russians (13%), in Romania - Hungarians (9%) and Roma (1.1%), in Kosovo (Serbs - 8%).
Most of the inhabitants of the region belong to the Indo-European language family: Slavic group (Slovenes, Croats, Serbs, Montenegrins, Macedonians, Bosnians (Muslims), Bulgarians) Albanian group (Albanians) Romanesque group (Romanians, Moldavians).
In the south of Bulgaria, Macedonia and Albania there are a small number of Turks who belong to the Turkic group of the Altai language family. In the west of Romania (Transylvania) there are many Hungarians who belong to the Finno-Ugric group of the Ural family.
Religious composition. The overwhelming majority of the population professes Christianity (Orthodox Christians - Bulgarians, Romanians, Moldavians, Serbs, Montenegrins, a significant part of Macedonians, and Catholics - Slovenes, Croats, part of Romanians and Hungarians) and Islam (Albanians, Kosovar Albanians, Bosnians, Turks). Albania is the only country in Europe where almost the entire population is Muslim.
Accommodation of the population. The population is distributed evenly. Its low density can be traced in the upper regions of the Carpathian and Balkan mountains, the highest - in the valleys of the Danube and its tributaries: Sava, Drava, Tisza, Prut.
Urbanization has an increasingly tangible effect on the distribution of the population, primarily associated with the movement of rural residents to cities. This causes high rates of urban population growth, an increase in the number of new cities, concentration of people in big cities, and the formation of urban agglomerations. However, in terms of the share of the urban population (53%), the degree of "maturity" of agglomerations, the level of urbanization of rural areas, the countries of Southeast Europe lag significantly behind most countries in other regions of Europe. In some of them (Bosnia, Moldova, Albania) more than 2/3 of the population lives in rural areas, mainly in small villages.
The largest metropolitan area is Bucharest (2.3 million people).
Labor resources. They make up more than 23.4 million people, of which 15.6 million are in Romania, Bulgaria and Serbia. Employment in agriculture is very high - 24%, and in Albania - 55%, the highest figure for Europe, 38% of the population is employed in industry, construction and transport, 38% - in the service sector (one of the lowest rates in Europe). Especially crowded population in ancient industrial areas, capital cities and their environs, areas of intensive agriculture.
One of the important problems is overcoming the socio-demographic and religious-ethnic crisis that has arisen on the territory of the former Yugoslavia. The democratic development of some countries in the region largely depends on this.
In the last months of World War II, popular fronts were formed in the countries of Central and Southeastern Europe, which included various parties and most of the social corpses. The years 1944-1946 went down in the history of these countries as a period of "people's democracy". The emergence and consolidation of the Soviet regime in the region was influenced by the following factors:
- Soviet army units were located on the territories of these European countries;
- The USSR abandoned the "Marshall Plan".
These factors also influenced the elimination of the multi-party system in the countries of Central and South-Eastern Europe and created conditions for the autocracy of the communist parties.
In 1948-1949, the communist parties in power set the course for building socialism, and market economy replaced by a centralized planned economy. As a result, a totalitarian socialist society emerged in these countries. Private property was abolished, entrepreneurship and individual peasants were reduced to a minimum.
Among the countries of "people's democracy", Yugoslavia was the first to spoil relations with the USSR. At the end of 1948, the Union of Communists of Yugoslavia, which opposed Soviet rule, was expelled from the Communist Information Bureau.
In 1949 for coordination economic development socialist countries of Central and Southeastern Europe, the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance (CMEA) was created, and in 1955 the same countries entered the Organization Warsaw Pact, which united their armed forces.
The death of Stalin and, especially, the criticism of the personality cult contributed to a change in the political climate in the countries of Central and South-Eastern Europe. In the fall of 1956, a crisis broke out in Poland, which was weakened by the partial democratization of the political system.
On October 23, 1956, mass demonstrations began in Hungary. Imre Nagy, elected head of the Hungarian government, announced on November 1 Hungary's withdrawal from the Warsaw Pact. On November 4, Soviet tanks entered Budapest and literally sunk liberation movement in blood. Imre Nagy was charged with high treason and executed.
In 1968-1969, events took place in Czechoslovakia, which received the name "Prague Spring".
Czechoslovak Communist party under the leadership of A. Dubcek adopted the "Program of Action" to build a model of socialist society that would correspond to the conditions of modern Czechoslovakia. The USSR and some socialist countries reacted negatively to this idea.
The troops of the USSR, Poland, East Germany, Hungary and Bulgaria invaded Czechoslovakia. In August 1968 A.
Dubcek and his associates were arrested and deported to Moscow. In 1969 A.
The policy of "perestroika" in the USSR and the collapse of the empire in the late 1980s and early 1990s provoked the paralysis of the socialist system in the countries of Central and Southeastern Europe. Poland was the first to fall out of the socialist system.
As a result of the collapse of the socialist system, the "Balkan Empire" - Yugoslavia collapsed together with the USSR. It broke up into independent states: Serbia, Montenegro, Croatia,
Slovenia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Macedonia. And Czechoslovakia was divided into Czech Republic and Slovakia.
The video tutorial allows you to get interesting and detailed information about the countries of Eastern Europe. From the lesson you will learn about the composition of Eastern Europe, the characteristics of the countries of the region, their geographical position, nature, climate, place in this sub-region. The teacher will tell you in detail about main country Eastern Europe - Poland.
Topic: Regional characteristics of the world. Overseas Europe
Lesson: Eastern Europe
Rice. 1. Map of the sub-regions of Europe. Eastern Europe is highlighted in red. ()
Eastern Europe- a cultural and geographical region that includes the states located in the east of Europe.
Composition:
1. Belarus.
2. Ukraine.
3. Bulgaria.
4. Hungary.
5. Moldova.
6. Poland.
7. Romania.
8. Slovakia.
In the post-war period, the industry was actively growing and developing in all countries of the region, and non-ferrous metallurgy relies mainly on its own raw materials, black - on imported.
The industry is also represented in all countries, but the most developed in the Czech Republic (first of all, machine tools, production of household appliances and computers); Poland and Romania are distinguished by the production of metal-consuming machines and structures; in addition, shipbuilding is well developed in Poland.
The chemical industry of the region lags far behind the West European due to the lack of raw materials for the most advanced branches of chemistry - oil. Still, one can mention the pharmaceutical industry of Poland and Hungary, the glass industry of the Czech Republic.
In the structure of the economy of the countries of Eastern Europe, under the influence of scientific and technological revolution, significant changes took place: the agro-industrial complex appeared, specialization of agricultural production took place. It manifested itself most clearly in grain farming and in the production of vegetables, fruits, and grapes.
The structure of the region's economy is heterogeneous: in the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary, Poland, the share of livestock production exceeds the share of crop production, in the rest, the ratio is still the opposite.
Due to the variety of soil and climatic conditions, several zones of crop production can be distinguished: wheat is grown everywhere, but in the north (Poland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania) rye and potatoes play an important role, in the central part of the subregion, vegetable growing and horticulture are cultivated, and the "southern" countries are specialized on subtropical crops.
The main crops grown in the region are wheat, corn, vegetables and fruits.
The main wheat and corn regions of Eastern Europe formed within the Middle and Lower Danube lowlands and the Danube hilly plain (Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria).
Hungary has achieved the greatest success in grain production.
Vegetables, fruits, grapes are cultivated in the sub-region almost everywhere, but there are areas where they primarily determine the specialization of agriculture. These countries and regions also have their specialization in terms of the range of products. For example, Hungary is famous for winter varieties apples, grapes, onions; Bulgaria - with oilseeds; Czech Republic - hops, etc.
Livestock raising. The northern and central countries of the region specialize in dairy and meat and dairy cattle breeding and pig breeding, while the southern countries specialize in mountain pasture meat and woolen animal husbandry.
In Eastern Europe, which lies at the intersection of the routes that have long connected the eastern and western parts of Eurasia, the transport system has been formed over many centuries. Now in terms of the volume of traffic, railway transport is in the lead, but road and sea transport are also developing intensively. The presence of the largest ports contributes to the development of foreign economic relations, shipbuilding, ship repair, and fishing.
Poland... The official name is the Republic of Poland. The capital is Warsaw. Population - 38.5 million people, of which more than 97% are Poles. Most are Catholics.
Rice. 3. The historic center of Warsaw ()
Poland borders on Germany, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Ukraine, Belarus, Lithuania and Russia; in addition, it borders on the sea areas (zones) of Denmark and Sweden.
About 2/3 of the territory in the north and in the center of the country is occupied by the Polish Lowland. In the north - the Baltic ridge, in the south and southeast - the Lesser Poland and Lublin uplands, along the southern border - the Carpathians (the highest point is 2499 m, Mount Rysy in the Tatras) and the Sudetes. Large rivers - Vistula, Odra; dense river network. Lakes are mainly in the north. 28% of the territory is under forest.
Mineral resources of Poland: coal, sulfur, iron ore, various salts.
Upper Silesia - a region of concentration industrial production Poland of European significance.
Poland generates almost all of its electricity at thermal power plants.
Leading manufacturing industries:
1. Mining.
2. Mechanical engineering (Poland occupies one of the leading places in the world in the production of fishing vessels, freight and passenger cars, road and construction machines, machine tools, engines, electronics, industrial equipment and etc.).
3. Ferrous and non-ferrous (large-scale zinc production) metallurgy.
4. Chemical (sulfuric acid, fertilizers, pharmaceutical, perfumery and cosmetic products, photographic goods).
5. Textile (cotton, linen, woolen).
6. Sewing.
7. Cement.
8. Manufacture of porcelain and faience.
9. Manufacture of sporting goods (kayaks, yachts, tents, etc.).
10. Furniture manufacturing.
Poland has a highly developed agriculture. Agriculture is dominated by crop production. The main crops are rye, wheat, barley, and oats.
Poland is a large producer of sugar beets (over 14 million tons per year), potatoes, and cabbage. The export of apples, strawberries, raspberries, currants, garlic and onions is of great importance.
The leading livestock industry is pig breeding, dairy and beef cattle breeding, poultry farming (Poland is one of the largest suppliers of eggs in Europe), beekeeping.
Homework
Topic 6, p. 3
1. What are the features of the geographical location of Eastern Europe?
2. Name the main branches of specialization in Poland.
Bibliography
The main
1. Geography. A basic level of... 10-11 grades: Textbook for educational institutions / A.P. Kuznetsov, E.V. Kim. - 3rd ed., Stereotype. - M .: Bustard, 2012 .-- 367 p.
2. Economic and social geography of the world: Textbook. for 10 cl. educational institutions / V.P. Maksakovsky. - 13th ed. - M .: Education, JSC "Moscow textbooks", 2005. - 400 p.
3. Atlas with set outline maps for grade 10. Economic and social geography of the world. - Omsk: FSUE "Omsk Cartographic Factory", 2012. - 76 p.
Additional
1. Economic and social geography of Russia: Textbook for universities / Ed. prof. A.T. Khrushchev. - M .: Bustard, 2001 .-- 672 p .: ill., Maps .: color. incl.
Encyclopedias, dictionaries, reference books and statistical collections
1. Geography: a reference book for high school students and those entering universities. - 2nd ed., Rev. and finished. - M .: AST-PRESS SHKOLA, 2008 .-- 656 p.
Literature for preparing for the State Examination and the Unified State Exam
1. Thematic control in geography. Economic and social geography of the world. Grade 10 / E.M. Ambartsumov. - M .: Intellect-Center, 2009 .-- 80 p.
2. The most complete edition of standard variants real assignments Unified State Exam: 2010. Geography / Comp. Yu.A. Solovyov. - M .: Astrel, 2010 .-- 221 p.
3. The optimal bank of tasks for preparing students. Unified State Exam 2012. Geography: Tutorial/ Comp. EM. Ambartsumova, S.E. Dyukov. - M .: Intellect-Center, 2012 .-- 256 p.
4. The most complete edition of typical versions of real USE assignments: 2010. Geography / Comp. Yu.A. Solovyov. - M .: AST: Astrel, 2010 .-- 223 p.
5. Geography. Diagnostic work in the format of the Unified State Examination 2011. - M .: MCNMO, 2011. - 72 p.
6. Unified State Exam 2010. Geography. Collection of tasks / Yu.A. Solovyov. - M .: Eksmo, 2009 .-- 272 p.
7. Tests in geography: Grade 10: to the textbook of V.P. Maksakovsky “Economic and social geography of the world. Grade 10 "/ E.V. Baranchikov. - 2nd ed., Stereotype. - M .: Publishing house "Exam", 2009. - 94 p.
8. Textbook on geography. Geography Tests and Practical Tasks / I.A. Rodionova. - M .: Moscow Lyceum, 1996 .-- 48 p.
9. The most complete edition of typical versions of real-life USE assignments: 2009. Geography / Comp. Yu.A. Solovyov. - M .: AST: Astrel, 2009 .-- 250 p.
10. Unified State Exam 2009. Geography. Universal materials for training students / FIPI - M .: Intellect-Center, 2009. - 240 p.
11. Geography. Answers on questions. Oral exam, theory and practice / V.P. Bondarev. - M .: Publishing house "Exam", 2003. - 160 p.
12. USE 2010. Geography: thematic training tasks / O.V. Chicherin, Yu.A. Solovyov. - M .: Eksmo, 2009 .-- 144 p.
13. USE 2012. Geography: Typical exam options: 31 options / Ed. V.V. Barabanova. - M .: National education, 2011 .-- 288 p.
14. USE 2011. Geography: Typical exam options: 31 options / Ed. V.V. Barabanova. - M .: National education, 2010 .-- 280 p.
Materials on the Internet
1. Federal Institute for Pedagogical Measurements ().
2. Federal portal Russian Education ().
Alla Alekseevna Yazkova - Head of the Mediterranean - Black Sea Region Center of the Institute of Europe of the Russian Academy of Sciences.
Alla Yazkova
Southeast Europe in an era of change
In the context of international events of the last two centuries and in the contemporaries' contemporaries that accompany it, Southeastern Europe, better known as the Balkans, has invariably been combined with negative connotations. The term “Balkanization” was associated with the concept of “Balkans”, which, according to the well-known Yugoslav analyst and publicist Ranko Petkovic, meant a state of constant conflict between states over the disputed territories and the situation of ethnic groups living outside their countries. To this characteristic can be added the factor of the long-term self-serving "game" of major European and world powers on the contradictions both between the Balkan states and between the peoples inhabiting them.
At the end of the twentieth century, these complex processes ended with the collapse of the largest Balkan state - the Federal Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, and the resulting regional crises and conflicts have not been overcome to this day.
Despite this, most of the countries of the region, although not always consistently and successfully, are involved in the processes of modernization and advancement along the path of Atlantic and European integration. In pan-European projects and scientific and political literature, the Balkan region is increasingly referred to as “Southeast Europe”. And in public consciousness In most of his countries, the desire to quickly overcome the dangerous propensity for conflict, the notorious syndrome of "Balkanization", stereotypical ideas about the Balkans as a "powder magazine" and "vulnerable underbelly" of the continent are becoming more and more noticeable.
But is it possible today to assert that the concept of "South-Eastern Europe" has already replaced the term used for many decades Balkans?
Yes and no. The Balkan Peninsula undoubtedly remains the geographical base of Southeast Europe. But in the context of the ongoing processes of modernization and progress along the path of regional and pan-European integration, an indication of its European affiliation becomes especially important and significant for its member countries. As modern authors rightly point out, the region is acquiring grounds for a gradual inclusion in European integration precisely as Southeast Europe. Wherein it comes about the historically formed group of Balkan countries, the commonality of which became apparent only at those stages of history when they had to solve common problems. For example, to fight for national and state independence at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries.
In this segment of history, a complex of regional characteristics was formed, in the presence of which the Italian researcher Stefano Bianchini saw Balkan specificity. On the one hand, it is characterized by the similarity of the spiritual and material culture of all peoples inhabiting the Balkans. On the other hand, the local mentality has such features that oppose it to the cultural world of Western Europe. The well-known Romanian historian Nicolae Iorga wrote about the same in his time, noting that in terms of clothing, types of ornaments used, architecture, farming methods, customs and superstitions, way of thinking and feeling, the Balkan peoples are "absolutely identical to each other."
At the same time, the strategically important and densely populated region of South-Eastern Europe (the total population living here is about 50 million) is literally riddled with sources of various kinds of potential contradictions. Here, for a long time, there has been a contact between Orthodoxy, Catholicism and Islam, which has repeatedly resulted in acute religious conflicts. The ethnic map of the region in its diversity is incomparable with other parts of Europe (with the exception, perhaps, of the Caucasus). Being under the rule of the Ottoman and Austro-Hungarian empires for centuries and feeling the constant, albeit far from unambiguous, influence of Russia, the Balkan region perceived both positive and negative aspects of all these influences.
In the 19th century, the Russian Empire, although not disinterestedly, but rather actively contributed to the emergence of new independent states here. After the emergence of the USSR and up to the Second World War, the states of Southeastern Europe were to one degree or another incorporated into the policy of the "cordon sanitaire", and in the postwar years, their relations with the Soviet Union developed according to the well-known model of 1968 became known as the "doctrine of limited sovereignty." After the collapse of the USSR, a period of alienation began again, and therefore, Russia's relations with the countries of this region have had to be rebuilt over the past decade and a half.
Thus, the states of the Balkan Peninsula were formed under conditions of conflicting cultural, historical and political influences. Moreover, in the twentieth century in the Balkans there was a powerful clash of ideologies generated by Western civilization - communism, fascism and nationalism, which further increased the conflict potential of the region. In other words, many of the current problems in the Balkan region are rooted in the past. Among them are the historically established multi-ethnicity, and the late formation of nations and states, and, as a consequence of all that has been said, protracted economic backwardness and political instability.
A characteristic feature of the international development of the Balkan states is their dependence on the major European powers, which, after the world wars, resolved themselves - as a rule, with their own benefit - the issues of establishing or changing state borders that were extremely painful for the Balkans. After World War II, the current borders between Romania and Hungary were determined, territorial disputes between Bulgaria, on the one hand, and Greece and Turkey, on the other, were resolved. The problems of territorial settlement between Italy and Yugoslavia turned out to be more complicated, the dispute between which over the "free territory of Trieste" was finally resolved only in 1975. The post-war settlement between Greece and Albania also dragged on for a long time, the state of war between which was formally ended only in February 1988.
In the years cold war»The opposition of the blocs was added to the territorial disputes, which made it possible to speak of the Balkans as a micro-model of the whole world with its conflicts and contradictions. The states located in the region were members of NATO (Greece and Turkey), the Warsaw Pact Organization (Romania and Bulgaria), the Non-Aligned Movement (Yugoslavia), or remained in self-isolation (Albania is the only European country, not a signatory of the Final Act of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe). The situation was also complicated by intra-system political clashes. Among them - the conflict between Stalin and Tito in 1948, the breakdown of relations between the USSR and Albania in 1960, the transition of Romania in the mid-1960s to the position of a "dissident" in the socialist community.
True, in contrast to this, in the 1960s-1980s, the processes of inter-Balkan cooperation developed autonomously, which after 1975 became a kind of refraction of the “spirit of Helsinki” and a prologue for the subsequent overcoming of the confrontation between world systems in the Balkans. In this regard, it should be noted that the intensification of such interaction at that time contributed to the gradual erosion of national, ideological and geopolitical barriers in relations between the Balkan countries themselves and in their contacts with the West.
However, the subsequent collapse of the communist regimes in Bulgaria, Romania and Albania led to the destabilization of the general political situation in the region and the revival in the late 1980s of nationalist ideas and slogans. Even before the outbreak of the war in Yugoslavia, American researcher Stephen Larraby noted that the main threat to European security now comes not from the Soviet bloc, but from interethnic conflicts and political fragmentation. Greek researcher Thanos Veremis, who believes that the main causes of instability in the Balkans in the early 1990s were the escalation of interethnic conflicts and the weakening of mutual trust, joined his opinion.
The most difficult consequences for South-Eastern Europe were the consequences of the collapse of the SFRY - the former Yugoslavia. The resulting crises and conflicts were tried to prevent and extinguish, although not always by acceptable methods, first by the European Union, and then by the United States and NATO. According to many international experts, the prologue to the escalation of large-scale conflicts in Yugoslavia was the hasty recognition of the independence of Croatia and Slovenia by the European Union in late 1991 and early 1992, in opposition to the nationalist policy of the Serbian leadership. The culmination of the Balkan policy of the United States and NATO was the bombing of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia in March - June 1999, which only post factum was formalized by UN Security Council Resolution 1244, which recognized the territorial integrity of the FRY.
Throughout the 1990s, Russia also tried to assist in resolving the Yugoslav crisis, but at first the Russian ruling elite had neither a clear understanding of its origins, nor constructive ideas for overcoming it. For a long time, the stake was placed on those forces of the FRY, which gave rise to this crisis - on Slobodan Milosevic and his entourage. Russian foreign policy in those years showed a number of features that made it possible to speak of a situational reaction to events in the context of Russian problems proper and, at the same time, of a desire to conserve status quo in the region and avoiding any changes. Its disappointing outcome was the results of voting in the UN Security Council after the start of airstrikes on the FRY, when on March 26, 1999, only Russia itself, China and Namibia voted for the resolution proposed by Russia, which characterized NATO's actions as aggressive.
There is no shooting in the Balkans today - and this is the merit of the peacekeeping forces of the UN, NATO and the European Union - but smoldering hotbeds of potential crises remain. In this situation, the function of Russia as a permanent member of the UN Security Council remains important. In this regard, suffice it to mention her contribution to the complex and lengthy process of negotiations on the settlement of the "Kosovo problem", an autonomous province within Serbia with a predominantly Albanian population. The granting of independence to the province, on which the Kosovars insist, could easily entail a new explosion of territorial and interethnic contradictions and seriously undermine stability in the region.
At the final stage of negotiations on the status of Kosovo in the Security Council (March - April 2007), Russian diplomacy succeeded in transferring them to the level of direct contacts between representatives of Belgrade and Pristina through the mediation of the troika consisting of Russia, the EU and the United States. At the same time, the negotiations were based on the idea that "not a hasty resolution of the status of Kosovo, but the achievement of a compromise should become the goal and necessity for all."
The deadlock situation around the Kosovo problem creates a potential threat of new armed conflicts in the Balkan region. If independence is granted to Kosovo, the bordering territories of Macedonia and Montenegro inhabited by Albanians may reach this edge. Anticipating this possibility, the nationalist circles of the Republika Srpska are announcing their intention to reunite with Serbia today, which threatens the very existence of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Finally, the inevitable explosion of nationalism in Serbia in such a case could finally undermine stability in the western part of the Balkans. All of the above casts doubt on the current unity of South-Eastern Europe. Its western part, which unites six countries - Albania, as well as fragments of the former Yugoslavia comprising Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Macedonia, Serbia and Montenegro - remains the most problematic part of the European continent.
The transition to a market economy has proven to be more difficult here than in other former socialist countries. The disintegration of Yugoslavia and the armed conflicts on its territory had a most destructive effect on the economic situation of the countries affected by them, and had a negative impact on the course and pace of the transition period. Despite significant international assistance, the region is still far from macroeconomic stability and economic recovery. Today economic indicators the countries included in it differ from the results achieved not only in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe, but also in the eastern part of the Balkans themselves - in Bulgaria and Romania, which became members of the European Union in 2007.
But, despite the predisposition to political crises and economic stagnation, one cannot ignore the continuing commonality of goals and objectives of the historically formed group of countries of South-Eastern Europe. The processes of modernization and democratization taking place here are still far from European standards. The consolidation of an imperfect party system is conditional, the independence of the judiciary and its effectiveness are problematic, the freedom of the media is ephemeral. But given the chosen orientation towards joining the European Union, the choice of a democratic path for the countries of the region seems to have no alternative. Backward movement will be possible only if the European perspective is lost or in the event of explosive destabilization in certain points or in the region as a whole.
European vector in foreign policy countries of South-Eastern Europe emerged in the early 1990s, becoming a determining factor for the next stage. A significant reason that strengthened the gravitation of the former socialist countries to Euro-Atlantic structures was their inability to independently settle protracted interstate crises and conflicts. The disintegration of the USSR, as well as a new configuration of relations with its heirs, primarily with Russia, played a role here. But the main factor that prompted them to focus on a "return to Europe" and integration into NATO and the EU was that not only state leaders, but also the majority of the population associated hopes for a better life and overcoming the authoritarian legacy with such a course.
However, other opinions are also expressed, according to which the proactive role in the expansion of NATO to the east belonged to the North Atlantic Alliance itself, which was striving to strengthen its strategic positions. Without disregarding the undoubted significance of the Western influence, I would like to note that the main stimuli of the “westward drift” were still internal factors. In different countries, they manifested themselves in different ways, but all the Balkan states were united by the fact that the obvious inconsistency of their economic and political development with NATO and especially the EU standards only confirmed the direction of their movement.
Romania and Bulgaria were the pioneers: in May 2004 they became NATO members, and since January 2007 they have secured EU membership. The situation is more complicated with the states of the Western Balkans. Their negotiations with the European Union are unlikely to be crowned with success in the foreseeable future. As for NATO, the most active contacts with the alliance today are supported by Croatia, Macedonia and Albania, which signed an agreement in November 2002 on joint actions in this direction. Serbia, Montenegro, as well as Bosnia and Herzegovina, for various reasons, have not yet been included in the negotiation process, although their persistent desire to achieve at least initial involvement in the integration process is obvious.
No less complex problems in connection with the new vector of Balkan politics after the collapse of "real socialism" arose in the West as well. The task of establishing contacts with the countries of the Balkan region turned out to be extremely difficult for the EU. According to a decision adopted in June 1993 at a meeting of the European Council in Copenhagen, EU membership is possible for those states that meet the so-called “Copenhagen criteria”. However, even the most stable Balkan states - Bulgaria and Romania - did not fit into them, and that is why the dates of their accession to the EU were repeatedly postponed. Albania was not even offered specific dates, and the republics of the disintegrated SFRY were only included in the preliminary program “Regional approach for the Balkans”. As a result, by the end of the 1990s, EU relations with the countries of Southeastern Europe were characterized by, according to one of the Greek researchers, "amazing diversity." The region was adjacent to: a full member of the European Union - Greece, two candidates for the "second wave" of enlargement - Bulgaria and Romania, Turkey, which has been waiting for integration into the EU for almost twenty years, as well as Albania, Macedonia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia and the FRY, included in additional programs of the European Union.
Subsequently, as already noted, only Bulgaria and Romania managed to overcome the bar. Meanwhile, a kind of vicious circle has developed in the western part of the Balkans: political stability in Southeast Europe is impossible without progress in the economy, which, in turn, is hampered by the lack of political stability. This does not mean that the position of the countries that have been awarded accession is absolutely cloudless: the most significant obstacle to the normal functioning of Romania and Bulgaria within the EU remains corruption, which, according to the European Commission, is a large-scale and systemic problem that undermines justice, the economy and the faith of citizens. to the state. But attempts to accelerate curb corruption and especially the shadow economy will entail negative consequences, in particular, an increase in the already high level unemployment. In addition, according to experts, the introduction of European quotas on the export of agricultural products and strict food safety standards can lead to the ruin of 40% of small and medium-sized enterprises in the industry. It will take years to remove such barriers. This will significantly complicate the implementation of social programs of the EU member states and candidates for accession.
The 1999 Washington Summit was of particular importance for the relations between the states of Southeast Europe and NATO. Strategic concept, where, for obvious reasons (the summit was held at the height of the NATO bombing of the FRY), the main attention was paid to the state of affairs in the Balkan region. The documents adopted in Washington formed the basis for further processes of transformation and modernization of NATO. The first practical steps on the regulation of international crises outside the traditional zone of responsibility of the alliance were made precisely in the Balkan region, but their results turned out to be much more modest than expected. The main goal was not achieved - to ensure stabilization in the crisis region of South-Eastern Europe. The establishment of an international protectorate over Kosovo also did not solve the key problem of determining the status of the province and the position of national minorities in it.
In the relevant sections Strategic Concept the conditions for the integration of the countries of South-Eastern Europe into NATO were outlined. Among them - the settlement of international disputes by peaceful means; resolution of interethnic and territorial conflicts with neighbors; adherence to the rule of law and the protection of human rights, renunciation of the threat of the use of force and the establishment of a system of democratic and civilian control over the armed forces; providing partners with information about the state of the economy and the principles economic policy.
Romania and Bulgaria were able, albeit rather tentatively, to overcome the bar set by the alliance. As for the states of the western part of the Balkans, NATO Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Skeffer said that in order to become candidates for membership, Bosnia and Herzegovina, as well as Serbia, in addition to implementing military reforms, should actively cooperate with the Hague Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia. ... After 2002, Albania, Croatia and Macedonia had well-known prospects for joining NATO, and the strategic interests of the North Atlantic bloc itself became decisive here.
Summing up, we can conclude that, despite numerous obstacles and difficulties, the countries of South-Eastern Europe will continue to cooperate with European and Euro-Atlantic structures. The desire to "return to Europe" remains dominant not only for politicians, but also for the majority of the population of these states. Its implementation will largely depend on when and how successfully the economic and social barriers between the East and West of Europe are overcome and, at the same time, on a new basis, their cooperation with traditional partners, primarily with Russia, is established.
Today, if we exclude the "Kosovo problem", South-Eastern Europe can no longer be perceived as a field of geopolitical confrontation between Russia and the West. In the new situation, real conditions are emerging for large-scale economic cooperation between our country and the countries of the region. Relying on the largest energy companies, Russia is now able to pursue a more active regional policy than before. In this sense, the expansion of the Russian economic presence logically fits into the policy of stabilizing the region and Russia's relations with the European Union. But this does not exclude aggravation of competition for control over oil and gas routes, attempts to create alternative routes for Russian energy supplies to Southeast and Southern Europe.
A significant imbalance in mutual trade and a clear asymmetry of interests of Russia and its partners, who are striving to return to Russian market... Russia itself is not satisfied with the fact that 90% of its exports to the countries of Southeastern Europe account for energy resources, raw materials and semi-finished products, while the share of finished products continues to decline steadily. Here, of course, the orientation of our partners towards obtaining high-tech products from the EU countries affects, although at the current stage their capabilities in this regard remain limited.
From all that has been said, it follows that there is a need for trilateral cooperation of the states of South-Eastern Europe with Russia and the European Union, which is more beneficial and promising for them than any unilateral options. Only in this way, despite the inevitable obstacles and difficulties on this path, can the stage of the age-old confrontation between Russia and the West in the Balkans come to an end.
This part is devoted to a huge territory stretching from the taiga Prikamye to the subtropics of the Black Sea region. Its northern half is occupied by the vastness of the hilly Russian plains lying in the basins of the stately Volga and the Quiet Don. And in the south, between the Black Sea and the Caspian Sea, stretch the mountains of the Greater Caucasus, with peaks crowned with eternal snow. The plain Ciscaucasia lies in front of them.
Seven regions and six autonomous republics, two territories and two autonomous regions belonging to them are in this part Russian Federation... There are territories here with a monolithic Russian population and multinational regions where a large number of peoples and nationalities live, especially in the mountains of the Caucasus. Large industrial cities stand out - Kazan and Kuibyshev, Saratov and Penza, Volgograd and Astrakhan, Rostov and Krasnodar, Ordzhonikidze and Grozny. Ulyanovsk, the birthplace of Vladimir Ilyich Lenin, is also located here.
Grain granaries of the Trans-Volga and Kuban regions, Don orchards and Dagestan vineyards, unique fishing basins of the Caspian and Azov-Black Sea regions, plain and alpine pastures, oil Tataria and coal Eastern Donbass, Stavropol combustible gas and Caucasian mineral waters, seaside and not full mountain resorts a list of the riches of the South-East of the European part of Russia.
It is not only the wealth that is striking, but also the diversity of this part of the country. The European South-East is not a single administrative or economic region: it does not have its own center or governing organizations, and you will not find it in the reports of the Central Statistical Office. The volume describes two historically formed natural and economic parts of the country, two independent large regions: the Volga region and the North Caucasus.
And yet, the South-East of the European part of the country is not at all a beginner in geographical literature: many works have been devoted to it. Direct proposals were also put forward - to organize such a large economic region within the Russian Federation (albeit somewhat within different boundaries). The fact is that between the Volga region and the North Caucasus, along with great differences, there are similarities, ties, and mutual interests.
First of all, these are neighboring areas, and a set of landscape zones of the Volga region continues southward up to the Tersko-Kuma plain. The plains of both regions are equally open to the westerly winds, bringing moisture from Atlantic Ocean, the amount of which decreases to the southeast, and the hot breath of Central Asia, the influence of which is weakening to the northwest. As we move to the south, the amount of solar heat increases, but due to the absence of mountain barriers, cold air masses in winter easily reach the northern slopes of the Caucasus.
There is a lot in common in the historical destinies of the Volga region and the North Caucasus. Both of them lay on the outskirts of the Russian state during its formation, in both the feudal elite of the conquerors - the Tatar-Mongols on the Volga, the Turks and their vassals in the Caucasus - were hostile to the Russian state, raided its border lands, and impeded trade. The advance of the Russians and the development of lands in both areas was accompanied by the creation of defensive lines with fortresses and strongholds, from which many modern cities subsequently developed.
Both regions developed as highly commodity agricultural, primarily grain and livestock, bases of the country, and only after the Great October socialist revolution turned into powerful industrial-agrarian regions. The Volga region and the North Caucasus are related to the general features of the geographical position on the routes between the most important regions of the country. It is known that the development of the Volga region economy was facilitated by the position between the Industrial Center of the country and the Urals: this stimulated the growth of acreage, many industrial centers of the region, not rich in minerals (oil was discovered recently), formed at the intersection of railways with the Volga.
The North Caucasus lies on the routes to the republics of Transcaucasia, and in its geographical position, in the development of its largest center - Rostov-on-Don - there are many common features with the Volga cities. Finally, studies of mainly post-war years in the Volga and Ciscaucasia revealed huge accumulations of oil and gas, and all this space is becoming a single oil and gas region. Naturally, the commonality of natural conditions, main minerals, geographical location, and, finally, historical destinies determined many features of the similarity of the economies of both large economic regions.
And now they are characterized by powerful commercial agriculture, the basis of which is the cultivation of grain. But these are not only the main wheat regions. They are also famous for various industrial crops, including oilseeds and sugar beets, vegetable growing and horticulture; these are the most important regions of the Russian Federation for melon growing and viticulture, as well as for fine-wool sheep breeding.
Front agriculture both areas face many common challenges. In agriculture, this is the provision of stable yields on fertile soils, by protecting the fields with forest belts from the destructive influence of dry winds, and the further development of irrigated agriculture, in terms of which the North Caucasus is still ahead of the Volga region. Both regions also solve the problems of organizing distant pasture animal husbandry, and they even use the winter pastures of the Black Lands and the Nogai Steppe together. There is a lot in common in the industrial structure of the Volga region and the North Caucasus.
The diversified food industry formed on the basis of the processing of local agricultural raw materials and now plays a significant role in their industrial complex... To meet local needs, agricultural and transport engineering, which subsequently not only determined the all-Union specialization of the industry of these regions, but also served as the basis for their powerful and versatile industrial development.
Its new page is connected with oil and gas: on their basis, a powerful industry has been created in both regions, including the production of oil-producing equipment, the extraction and complex processing of oil and gas, up to the enterprises of the chemistry of organic synthesis. Both regions are the largest cement producers in the country and stand out for their catch of the most valuable fish, especially sturgeon.
Along with these features of similarity, there are significant differences between the economic complexes of both regions, which only enhance their mutual interest. The Volga region, for example, apart from oil, gas, salt and raw materials for the building materials industry, has almost no minerals; on the other hand, thanks to the construction of giant hydroelectric power plants on the Volga, it is one of the main energy producing regions of the European part of the USSR.
Non-ferrous metal ores have long been mined in the North Caucasus, and non-ferrous metallurgy has been created; rich in coal bowels of the Eastern Donbass. Historically, ferrous metallurgy has developed in the region. But despite the abundance of fossil fuels and the large potential energy reserves of the Caucasian rivers, the region lacks electricity. It is largely replenished by the inflow from the Volga region.
The oil refining capacities of the Volga region are not yet able to cope with the flows of produced oil, but there are excess capacities in Grozny. Also, woodworking plants and factories of the North Caucasus are not fully provided with local timber: they are interested in raw materials from the Kama basin, just like the Donbass in the timber. On the contrary, Donetsk coal, raw materials for food and chemical industry, finished products Food Industry and mechanical engineering. The Volga region itself has become one of the main arsenals of mechanical engineering in the country. All this determines the powerful economic ties between the two regions of the South-East. And their consequence is connections transport networks both areas.
The historical transport pivot of the Volga region - the waterway along the great river - not only continues along the Caspian Sea to the eastern regions of the North Caucasus; now the Volga-Don shipping canal named after V.I. Lenin connected it with the ports of the Azov and Black Seas, and also gave a direct outlet to the Volga region for Donetsk coal.
The railway duplicating the Volga from Kazan to Volgograd received an exit through the Salsk steppes to Krasnodar and Novorossiysk. In Tikhoretsk, it intersects with the main transport axis of the North Caucasus - the Moscow - Rostov - Baku highway, which is now connected through Kizlyar and Astrakhan with the railways of the left bank of the Lower Volga region. The railway ring Rostov - Grozny - Astrakhan - Volgograd - Rostov was closed, providing the widest connections between both regions.
Railroad and waterways are complemented not only by a dense network of highways, but also by power lines stretching from the Volzhskaya HPP named after the XX Congress of the CPSU. All these paths are common to both regions. Different peoples inhabit the Volga region and the North Caucasus. The rhythms of the fiery dances of the inhabitants of the mountain republics are not like the lingering, long-range melodies of the Volga choirs, just as the mountains do not look like flat plains.
The work of a plowman differs from the work of a miner, different problems are solved by breeders of the Kuban and employees of the Institute of Atomic Reactors in the Volga city of Melekess. One tourist will lay his own route through the glaciers of the Caucasus, the other will prefer an excursion along the Volga, past the picturesque Zhiguli.
But the main thing that unites these areas is accomplishments Soviet people, who transformed the lands during the 50 years of Soviet power, the sovereign masters of which they became after the victorious Great October Socialist Revolution.