Suchergebnisse

The objectives and mechanisms of the European Union (EU) communication policy are considered. The article is based on the author's definition of the EU political myths as the main messages of its official communications, which contain imaginative ideas about the values of the EU and a guide to action to achieve the ideal. Communication policy has been studied as a tool to preserve the sustainability of EU values and to consolidate them on the agenda. A review of the official sources and the works of European think tanks allowed us to reveal its transformations in modern conditions. They consist in greater wastefulness and regularity of communications, increased requirements for communicators. Official Brussels gives priority to active communications (conferences and other forms of discussion of norms and strategies involving stakeholders) as the most effective in terms of influencing public opinion and, presumably, uses triangulation tactics. In passive communications (in reports, brochures, communitations on the results of activities), transformations consist in the establishment of mandatory organization standards and criteria for submitting information - modernity, reasonableness, added value for the EU. Taking into account the experience of the EU, recommendations are given for the EAEU.

The subject of the study is the problem of assessing and perceiving the contribution of the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) to the economy of the member states. In the first part, a variant of calculating the role of the Union is proposed on the basis of an additive model summarizing the results of trade and investment cooperation within the Union over the period of its activity; the values obtained are correlated with the GDP of the member states. The conclusion is made about the leading role of trade and economic ties in the EAEU space in the development of Kyrgyzstan, Belarus, Kazakhstan and Armenia. It is recommended to take into account the statistics of mutual trade turnover, rather than the balance, in the description of the role of the EAEU; significant differences in estimates are shown depending on the chosen approach. In the second part, the tools of information support and coverage of the organization's activities are tracked, contributing to the popularization of the benefits of integration. The ways of development of the information and communication policy of the EAEU are proposed, including taking into account the experience of the relevant policy of the European Union. In the passive forms of communication, according to the author, it is advisable to create official Internet portals explaining the legislation of the EAEU; it is valuable to focus attention in information publications on quantitative achievements and integration benchmarks; among the active forms, the organization of network conferences on the present and future is proposed, contributing both to awareness of the benefits of integration and further disclosure of the potential of the EAEU

The article gives an idea about the volume of companies subsidizing in the EU. The characteristics of the last decade are revealed: stable growth, which led to a doubling of government aid spending, then a huge surge at the end of the period under review due to the COVID-19 crisis. The types of assistance are described, as well as the conditions under which it can be provided from state budgets according to the Temporary Anti-Crisis Program of the EU, put into effect in March 2022 in connection with Russia's Special Military Operation in Ukraine and allowing additional state subsidies. Significant differences between EU countries in the level of state support of the national economy are shown. It shows also the active use of state support as a tool for influencing the economy by large European countries: Germany, Great Britain, France, Italy, Spain, as well as a noticeable increase in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe. Against this background, the forecast of further deepening of cross-country imbalances in the EU is given. The modern role of the European Commission in the control of state support is revealed: once the guardian of fair competition, which does not recognize state interference in market relations, and now the conductor of state subsidies to the economy, distorting the normal course of competition.

Changes in the current rhetoric of the European Commission (EC) have been revealed by reviewing the content of its press releases and measures taken to respond to the Russian special operation in Ukraine. The author of the article considers these changes dangerous, undermining the ideological foundations of European integration – openness and partnership, as well as standards and norms of the functioning of the Internal Market. An explanation of the current activity of the EC is offered: official Brussels uses the Ukrainian crisis to activate the economic conjuncture, as well as to increase the effectiveness or cover up the miscalculations of its policy in other areas such as green transition, strategic autonomy, global leadership. The EC's attempt to introduce criminal liability through European legislation for circumvention by European companies and countries of anti-Russian sanctions adopted at the EU level was tracked (the corresponding proposal was made on May 25). Two hypotheses have been formulated. First: the EC, whose existential goal is to expand its powers, de facto sees itself not only as a market regulator, but also as an EU power structure, increasingly coordinating the real European law enforcement agencies Europol, Eurojust and Frontex, which seems to be an equally dangerous trend for the future of European integration. Second: activation of the conjuncture and economic growth in the EU are impossible in conditions of a decrease in the resource and market base.

A feature of the first decade of the XXI century was the shift of the EU from the second to the third position in the competition of global geographical centers of power; the beginning of the third decade was marked by the withdrawal of the UK from the EU. Despite many external and internal challenges, the EU remains committed to its chosen economic model and its unique asset, the Single internal market. The article focuses on the following questions. Why did the neoliberal ideas embodied in the creation of a model for the integration of national markets receive support in Europe in the middle of the XX century? How has neoliberalism strengthened over time? Does the process of developing a common economic policy and expanding the EU's powers run counter to the development of a neoliberal idea? What alternative models compete with the European neoliberal model? How stable is the neoliberal idea in the EU? The subject of the study is the growth of supranational economic regulation in the EU. Using general scientific methods, historical, comparative analysis and abstraction, a schematic representation of the classical market model and the EU model (European model) is given, with the designation of common and special reference elements that ensure economic efficiency. The author describes the three stages of the formation of the European model. It is concluded that the EU's regulatory activities are neoliberal in nature. It is aimed at using market leverage, and the model itself retains a margin of stability. The author argues that the current stage started in 2000 is a stage of a smart neoliberal model formation.

Based on the review of regulations and press releases of EU institutions, the content of changes in the cohesion policy in 2021–2027 was revealed in comparison with the period 2014– 2020. The conclusion is made about the preservation of a significant role of the cohesion policy in the EU's activities and high volume of its allocations from the EU Budget. The author sees an element of novelty in the synthesis of well-known methods and principles of supranational regulation of the socio-economic development of the EU territories – the budget method, the principle of financial conditionality and the open method of coordination. Particular attention is paid to the decision to reorient a third of the allocations of European regional policy funds for programs of transition to a circular and climate-neutral economy in 2021–2027. The explanation of such strong link between the goals of regional policy and the ecological and climatic goals of the EU is proposed. Namely, the success of the «Europe 2020» Strategy only in terms of climate benchmarks, according to the author, gives to the official Brussels a reason to see the potential to increase the effectiveness of regional policy.