Talk:Third-country economic relationships with the European Union

	European Union portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject European Union, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the European Union on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.European UnionWikipedia:WikiProject European UnionTemplate:WikiProject European UnionEuropean Union articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

International relations Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Economics Mid‑importance

	Business and economics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Economics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Economics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EconomicsWikipedia:WikiProject EconomicsTemplate:WikiProject EconomicsEconomics articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

[[Enlargement of the European Union#Potential Candidate Countries|were moved]]

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

Untitled

I added the link to http://ec.europa.eu/comm/external_relations/index.htm, becouse this looks like the official EU external relations resource.

on the wikipedia "Third country relations with the EU" I think that more info (or at least links to such pages) should be given about Neighboorhood policy, Stabilization and Assosiation Agreements/Process (Balkans), etc.

also some explanation of the differences between "customs union", EFTA, EEA, full EU single market would be welcome (but their place is not here, on this page should be put only a link to the description)

EEA and EFTA typo

on the last line about Switzerland/Schengen after the point there is a word "See", but nothing more ...

Yeah, sorry. Hold on a sec, and I'll find that link I meant to add there. Aris Katsaris 23:44, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)

CIS european countries

I will reword the last sentence in Neighbourhood Policy, becouse according to the list of european countries at the Europa page and the list of CIS members at the CIS page it should be a little different. Current wording is close to the wording on Neighbourhood Policy official site, but I think we should make Wikipedia pages compatible with one another and in this case I think Europa/CIS pages are more correct than the official Neighbourhood Policy wording.

Oops, yeah, I mainly forgot the Caucasus when I talked about European CIS states. Sorry. that'll need to be indeed fixed.Aris Katsaris 23:44, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I removed "witch are not part of the EU", becouse it wasn't passing good to the new wording and also becouse it is obvious - the title of the page is "third countries", so I think that it is clear that any mentioned below are not part of the EU...

Also it would be good to add a section about the Balkans - there are some countries still considered "third" - Bosnia, Serbia-Montenegro, Albania, Macedonia (Croatia is already candidate, so the External Relations europa.eu website is outdated in that regard) - a few words about the Stability and Assosiation proces/agreements (maybe with dates). If someone does not do it, maybe I will get enought courage to try :)

I'm sure I'm being dense, but why "third country"? What are the first and second countries? Perhaps a note of explanation could be added to the article. - Nunh-huh 04:43, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Probably not the place to discuss a phrase that's as common as that. Third countries from the POV of the EU are obviously those countries that aren't members of the EU, the same way that "third parties" from the POV of a contract are those parties that aren't part of it. You may consider this a bizzarre oddity of the language but a googling of the phrase "third countries" offers about 583,000 hits [1]. It's the language that the EU itself uses: (e.g. [2]) Aris Katsaris 05:40, Mar 12, 2005 (UTC)

So there is no first country or second country. It is indeed rather peculiar! While it may be a common enough phrase within the EU, it's not common enough outside the EU to be used without explication...if the goal is to be understandable to those outside Europe. If it means nothing other than a non-EU country, it ought to be glossed as such somewhere, if not in this article, in something linked to it. - Nunh-huh 09:48, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)

It's not just about the EU. You can find use of "third country" in talks about NAFTA [3], in random BBC articles [4], in talking about American visa law [5], in lots of places. Aris Katsaris 13:45, Mar 12, 2005 (UTC)

It doesn't mean the same thing in all those places! In US visas, for example, the first country is the US, the second country is the applicant's homeland, and the third country is the one in which the application for the visa is being made. In NAFTA, third country is also clearly not a synonym for non-member (and is certainly does not mean "a non-EU country"). - Nunh-huh 13:50, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)

EU-Russia four common spaces

what about these - replacement for ENP... Alinor 08:03, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

more important third countries

I added a brief note about the candidate states, but maybe it should be explained more broadly that the EU deals with candidates trough the Enlargmenet policy (very close relationship, participating in various programes, meetings, etc.) and with other states trough the External Relations policies. Another question is if we should follow this distinction here (It makes sense, but should be mentioned - otherwise "Third Country relationships" are missing states, that will join the EU soon. Odd.).
Also, what about EU-US relations. Are they unimportant, unexistent, or what? :) Maybe to be delat on another page, but at least there should be a link.
Other "traditional" states too. This page seems too focused on "near abroad" (EFTA, Mediterranean, USSR).

Alinor 07:34, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See Third country relationships with the European Union for links to such articles. Alinor 10:01, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think that we should not refer to Serbia-Montenegro and Andorra in this section. Their euro use is UNILATERAL, so this is a NOT EU RELATIONSHIP. Of course a link to Euro or Eurozone can be included with the note "some other countries unilateraly decided to use the Euro without a formal agreement with the EU" (also on the Euro/Eurozone the issue of the ongoing Andorra Euro-negotiations is elaborated). Besides EU-SiM relations are delat with on the Enlargement of the European Union page (as SiM is an official potential candidate, etc.) Agree? Alinor 21:18, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The statement that Monaco, San Marino and Vatican City are not 'official' members of the Eurozone is somewhat misleading. They are in fact official members of the Eurozone, but have different agreements which allow them to produce their own euro coins in limited quantities, as stated in the article. I propose removing this section from this article and placing it on its own page, which would further elaborate on this special relationship. This is because in the next 5 years, Andorra, Montenegro and Kosovo will have similar agreements and Monaco will join the EU. Thoughts? -Theeuro (talk) 02:19, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why are there nearly zero references for this article?

Seriously -- this is supposed to be implemented into a larger important body of work and it only has TWO references to substantiate what it's saying?! It references a speech by a commissioner but doesn't provide a reference to it. Theoretically I could be within my rights to delete nearly all this article because there are no citations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.98.39.95 (talk) 10:33, 28 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]