The first real sign of whether the EU has changed its opinion on the issue of European integration will come after next year’s European elections and the appointment of a new Commissioner for Enlargement. Similarly, it is important whether the reform of decision-making processes in the EU will be initiated, as this is an informal prerequisite for enlargement
The war in Ukraine has elevated the issue of enlargement on the list of EU priorities. It is enough to observe the rhetoric of the French leadership. Prior to the war, this country was rightly perceived as the top sceptic when it comes to accepting new members. However, speaking at the recent Bled Strategic Forum, France’s Secretary of State for European Affairs, Laurence Boone, insisted that “there will be no stability and security in the EU and neighbouring countries without enlargement”. The same panel included Natalie Tocchi, director of Italy’s influential Institute of International Relations, who wrote in a recent editorial piece for Brussels-based Politico Europe that the geopolitical argument in favour of EU enlargement must prevail in the near future.
Nevertheless, not everything is so simple. Although the war has significantly strengthened pro-enlargement currents within the EU, a consensus has yet to be reached. Over the past year and a half, there has been plenty of stumbling when certain steps needed to be taken, such as opening accession negotiations with North Macedonia and Albania. Viewed as a whole, no significant developments should be expected ahead of next year’s European elections. After that, the main elements that the region needs to pay attention to are who will be the new Commissioner for Enlargement and whether the reforming EU decision-making processes will be initiated, which represents an informal precondition for enlargement.
Now that the EU seems readier to accept new members, candidate countries also need to demonstrate their commitment. However, the signals sent to date are disappointing
Now that the EU seems readier to accept new members, candidate countries also need to demonstrate their commitment. However, the signals sent to date are disappointing. The Albania PM and Serbian MFA immediately expressed scepticism over dates, with Serbia’s highest representatives – the president and prime minister – having so far completely ignored the announcement mentioning 2030. One gets the impression that those claiming that many political elites across the region are more comfortable with the status quo than a more serious commitment to the enlargement process are correct.
The year 2030 is indeed realistic for some candidate countries – those that will be ready for accession by that time. Although the Ukraine situation has reinvigorated this process, it is difficult to expect that it could achieve this state of readiness itself, which is certainly an impossibility while the war continues. On the other hand, Montenegro could achieve it, and probably also North Macedonia, and Serbia could make it too, provided it “buckles down” immediately. The fulfilling of the Government’s programme to adopt EU legislation has remained at a very low level in recent years. Serbia’s Minister of European Integration recently announced that the pace of reforms will be accelerated, and let’s hope that this will be the case – provided new extraordinary elections aren’t prevented in the meantime.
