For more than 15 years, the enlargement of the EU has held an important place in political rhetoric. Often the tone has been optimistic, suggesting that a new enlargement is just around the corner and that candidate countries from the Western Balkans, and soon also from Eastern Europe, will become members. Yet nothing of the sort has happened.

Since the accession of Croatia, the EU has not admitted a single new country. At the same time, leaders have for years enthusiastically spoken about an imminent new enlargement, fueling expectations and hopes in countries aspiring to join. Unfortunately, the reality is much bleaker.

Achieving consensus is becoming increasingly difficult

No one has changed the enlargement criteria, which candidate countries must meet in order to join. In addition to technical or legal criteria, there is also the political dimension. Admitting a new member requires that all existing EU countries agree. Consensus is also needed to start accession negotiations. During the negotiations themselves, there are around a hundred moments when a single current member state that does not wish to continue talks is enough to bring them to a halt.

Several Western European countries, led for example by France, oppose enlargement before the EU itself has been reformed — above all its decision-making process. At present, decisions in foreign and security policy require consensus among member states, but achieving that consensus is becoming increasingly difficult.

We have seen for years what the requirement of consensus means in foreign and security policy, where a single country — such as Hungary or Slovakia — is enough to prevent adequate support for Ukraine or effective pressure on Russia.

If it is already extremely difficult to make decisions with 27 members, it will be even more impossible with more member states if the current decision-making system remains unchanged. This is precisely why many current member states want to change the decision-making rules before any new enlargement. But such changes themselves also require consensus, and it is hard to expect that this can be achieved in the foreseeable future.

Therefore, promises that Western Balkan countries will become members any moment now, or that Ukraine and Moldova could join within a couple of years, are unrealistic under the current circumstances. Incidentally, Ukraine and Moldova received candidate country status nearly two years ago, but it has still not been possible to begin accession negotiations because Hungary has opposed it.

Be honest and realistic with candidate countries

The reality is that for the Western Balkan countries that are not part of the EU, as well as for Ukraine and Moldova, an alternative solution must be found quickly — at least for now — to bind them more closely to the EU and prevent disappointment from growing too great. China, Russia, and others are very much interested in the EU failing in this region and in rapidly expanding their own influence.

The initial alternative to EU membership should be a close contractual relationship, like the one the EU currently has with Norway, Iceland, and Switzerland. These countries are not members of the EU, but they are very closely integrated — for example, they are part of the Schengen area of free movement.

At present, the only even remotely realistic direction for EU enlargement in the coming years involves three Nordic countries: Iceland, Norway, and Greenland. These countries and territories are already very similar to EU member states in many respects, such as the rule of law, standard of living, and low levels of corruption. It can therefore be assumed that potential opposition to their accession would be more limited, although it cannot be ruled out even in their case.

More than 10 years ago, accession talks with Iceland broke down due to disagreements over fisheries issues. Russia is also firmly opposed to EU enlargement and has unfortunately managed to place some of its representatives among EU decision-makers — one of whom was recently removed through the will of the people.

Still, if the EU genuinely wants to demonstrate its ability to enlarge in the coming years, it must keep the door open and remain receptive to these three Nordic countries. Of course, what matters most is what they themselves want. At the moment, however, the situation is more hopeful than it was some time ago.

Iceland will hold a referendum in August on whether to resume EU accession talks. In Norway, debate on the issue is also gaining momentum, and the situation is similar in Greenland. The main reason for this is external — above all, the rapidly increasing uncertainty around the world.

Over the next few years, further EU enlargement is not entirely impossible. But it is high time to stop shouting slogans and instead focus on achieving substantive, realistic results. That means quickly binding current EU candidate countries into a dense network of contractual relations, beginning the seemingly extremely difficult process of amending the EU's founding treaties in order to preserve the EU's decision-making capacity even with, for example, 35 or 37 member states — and being honest and realistic in promises and rhetoric toward candidate countries.

The result of years of empty promises is disappointment and conflict, as we have unfortunately seen in EU–Turkey relations. It should be possible to avoid repeating a similar situation.

--

Follow ERR News on Facebook and X and never miss an update!