Zoran Krunić: EU enlargement

International policies

EU is a real success story. EU is promoting peace, democracy and stability on our continent. Could anybody in France or Prussia and later Germany in 1870 after the battle of Sedan, or in 1914 or in 1939 imagine that German Jägerbatallion would be marching in Paris, on the Champs Elysees, during the Bastille Day parade, on July 14, 2013? And that French people would be applauding them? Incredible for them, but today this is the reality.

One of the main EU's issues is the enlargement. The current question is not if, but the questions are: who, how, when...EU was founded by six nations, today it has 28 member states. Today EU MSs cover an area of 4,5 million square kilometres, with population of half a billion. After the latest enlargements the importance of the EU as an international player has increased, EU's weight in the world enhanced.

There have been 7 successful waves of enlargement:

1973: Denmark, Ireland and the United Kingdom; 1981: Greece; 1986: Spain and Portugal; 1995: Austria, Finland and Sweden; 2004: Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Slovakia and Slovenia; 2007: Bulgaria and Romania; 2103: Croatia.

Despite decreased public support for enlargement in many old EU MSs and concerns how enlargement is going to affect the decision-making process etc., the enlargement process is still ongoing. In December 2013 the E. Council clearly stated that enlargement remained a key policy of the European Union. Today we are talking about Montenegro, Serbia, BiH, Albania, Macedonia, Iceland, Turkey, but also Ukraine, Georgia, Moldova and so on – as possible EU MSs. The European Council of Thessaloniki on 19/20 June 2003 expressed its determination to fully and effectively support the European perspective of the Western Balkan countries. 'These countries will become an integral part of the EU, once they meet the established criteria.'

There are two basic questions:

- are you ready to became an EU MS?

- is the club ready to accept a new member?

Which are the EU's criteria for new members?

At the beginning there was a sole condition: an applicant must be a »European State«. In 1987 Morocco applied for membership, but was rejected on the ground that Morocco was not a European State. But, this principle had and has not only geographical, but also cultural, historical and political elements. For instance, the majority of Turkey's territory is located in Asia, but Turkey is eligible for EU membership. Is Georgia a European state? Some would say yes, the others would say no (as some people in Slovenia think Slovenia is not a Balkan state, the others do not share this opinion). To justify 'yes', the new Georgian president Giorgi Margvelashvili said, when reaffirming Georgia's priority of NATO and EU integration, that Georgians are Europeans ‘by nature’. Well, if not geographically, then at least 'by nature'.

In 1962 the Birkelbach Report stated the necessity to be a democratic state in order to become a member of the E. Communities. This had an immediate impact on Spain, which filled the application for membership on February 1962, but was rejected because it was not a democratic state.

In October 1992 John Major and Jacques Delors met the Governments of Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia and Hungary where they agreed to prepare a list of adhesion criteria. Finally the Council specified the so-called Copenhagen criteria:

  • political: stability of institutions guaranteeing democracy, the rule of law, respect of the human rights and protection of minorities;
  • economic: existence of a functioning market economy and the capacity to cope with competitive pressure and market forces within the Union;
  • acceptance of the Community acquis: ability to take on the obligations of membership, including adherence to the aims of political, economic and monetary union.

Additionally, the European Council added the administrative capacity to implement the acquis in its meeting in December 1995 in Madrid.

In the case of the countries of the Western Balkans additional conditions for membership were set out in the so-called 'Stabilisation and Association process', which has 3 aims:

  • stabilizing the countries politically and encouraging their swift transition to a market economy;
  • promoting regional cooperation;
  • eventual membership of the EU.

But, we saw that fulfilment of these criteria is not a Bible. Decisions have sometimes been taken for strictly political reasons. This was the case of Bulgaria and Romania, they did not fulfil the criteria, and did not do so even when they became EU MSs, being granted some extra time to meet their commitments.

Despite the statements, especially after the Treaty of Lisbon, this will never happen again, it is possible the future decisions on enlargement are again going to be based on political preferences. Also, could it be EU will now a bit neglect the Balkans and give its priority to Ukraine, Georgia etc.? Recently (on 27 June 2014), in the margins of the European Council meeting in Brussels, the EU signed Association Agreements with Georgia and the Republic of Moldova and complete the signature process with Ukraine, each providing for a DCFTA (Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area), in order to deepen political and economic relations between the EU and the other signatories and to gradually integrate these countries in the EU's Internal Market, the largest single market in the world.

I would also like to bring your attention to another, I think very important, question. NATO. I did not see any paper which would ask the candidates for EU MSs to first join the NATO. And it did not happen in the case of Austria, Finland and Sweden. But it is obvious that all, but all!, former non-democratic states first joined the NATO and only after that they joined the EU. Only the timing is different (but it is getting much shorter): Portugal joined NATO 38 years before she entered EU, Greece 29 years, Czech Republic, Poland and Hungary 5 years, Spain 4 years, Romania and Bulgaria 3 years, Croatia 4 years...But, the principle is obvious. Even, in the case of the so-called 'big-bang', when EU accepted 10 new members – all ex-communist countries first joined NATO, and only then EU. But this was not the case of Malta and Cyprus. So, is it necessary that ex-communist state first join NATO to be integrated in EU (now the term is integration, instead of absorption)? Well, you have negotiation process....

Even if a candidate country is well-estimated, it can withdraw its application. Norway did it twice, following referendum results opposed to accession, Switzerland after the referendum which opposed the ratification of EEA agreement (E. Economic Area), and on June 2013 Iceland's Foreign Minister informed the E. Commission that the newly elected government intended to 'put negotiations on hold'.

Candidate status does not give the right to join EU automatically. The Union is free to accept a new member, or to reject the application. EU reserves the right to decide whether a candidate country has met the criteria and also when the EU is ready to accept a new member.

Here we are talking about the EU's capacity to integrate new members. I already mentioned the concerns about decision-making process, financial implications etc. And we have to bear in mind that EU's institutional reform has not been completed yet. By the way, this concern (how enlargement would affect EC in terms of its efficiency) was raised in the case of Denmark, Ireland and UK accession, as well.

The accession process is based on the pre-accession strategy, which provides pre-accession assistance instruments for financial and technical aid. They help the beneficiaries to make political and economic reforms, preparing them for the rights and obligations that come with EU membership. Former instruments, such as PHARE, ISPA, SAPARD programmes, for the Western Balkan countries CARDS (Community Assistance for Reconstruction, Development and Stabilisation) were replaced by the Instrument for Pre-accession Assistance (IPA) in 2007.

IPA (2007-2013), implementation of IPA 2007-2013 is still under way. For the period 2007-2013 IPA had a budget of some € 11.5 billion. IPA consists of the following five components:

Transition Assistance and Institution Building; Cross-Border Cooperation; Regional Development; Human Resources Development; Rural Development.

The IPA Regulation for the period 2007-2013 expired on 31 December 2013, today we have IPA II for the period 2014-2020, with a budget of € 11.7 billion. The most important novelty of IPA II is its strategic focus. Country Strategy Papers are the specific strategic planning documents made for each beneficiary for a 7-year period.

I would like to use this opportunity to tackle another question. Politicians are saying 'we are going to Europe'. But how? On foot, by train, by car, on the horseback...? And where from? From Asia, Africa...? We are in Europe. So we cannot go to Europe. We are going to EU. And this is not an innocent issue. When saying this we are putting ourselves in a kind of subordinate position.

To conclude: enlargement has helped to overcame the division of Europe and contributed to peace and stability throughout the continent. Let us be part of this process, let us build our countries and our region in the same way. The word 'Balkan' derives from the Turkish language, 'bal' meaning 'honey', 'kan' meaning 'blood'. Let us be 'bal' and never again 'kan'.

~~~

Zoran Krunić, M.Sc., Rule of Law and Civil society expert, Public Policy Institute Ljubljana