Europe’s Choice: Admit Alliance, Not Antipathy
European Union expansion is no trivial matter, even if it seems quite clear very few Europeans take notice of enlargement. Until they either get tired of it or alarmed by it, of course. Enlargement is a process that shapes the continent’s future, testing both the resilience of candidate states and the readiness of the EU itself.
Just Wednesday of this week, the European Commission adopted its 2024 “Enlargement Package”, providing a detailed assessment of the state of play and the progress made by Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo, Montenegro, North Macedonia, Serbia, Georgia, the Republic of Moldova, Ukraine and Turkey, on their respective paths towards EU accession. The assessments are accompanied by recommendations and guidance on the reform priorities.
Expanding the EU means taking a hard look at who genuinely wants to join, and even more importantly, who is willing to uphold the values that make membership meaningful. There’s a distinct difference between countries that burn with the desire to join and those that merely go through the motions, hoping to extract more benefits than they’re willing to give back.
In my view, accession and the enlargement process isn’t just about meeting technical requirements or ticking boxes on governance, rule of law, or economic standards. It’s about a fundamental alignment of purpose. Do these countries share the vision of a united Europe, grounded in democracy, human rights, and the rule of law? And are they willing to show it, not just in words but in actions that demonstrate a clear break from the murky waters of authoritarian influence? And in sufficient numbers as to be a real majority?
Look at Serbia, for instance. The country’s official line suggests a desire to join the EU, but the reality is muddied by a persistent affinity for Moscow and Beijing. Serbian leadership continues to hedge its bets, playing both sides of a geopolitical divide. And despite being surrounded by EU and accession States and loving the access to the EU they presently get through that; it is quite incredible how seriously anti-EU so much of Serbia is. Dare I over-state it: Serbia is less a pre-accession country as a JANC (just another nearby country). The allure of Russian energy and Chinese investments casts a long shadow over its supposed aspirations for European integration. It’s difficult to believe in the sincerity of Serbia’s bid for membership when public opinion is barely recognisable as tepid, if not outright resistant, to European values. For such countries, the door to the EU should remain firmly closed until they choose which side of history they wish to stand on. Lithium be damned.
In contrast, take a look at the likes of Ukraine and Moldova — nations that have faced down external aggression, societal upheaval, massive Russian disinformation, and economic hardship, all while insisting on their European future. They’ve shown their commitment in blood and sacrifice, far beyond diplomatic gestures. These are not nations wavering in their stance. The question isn’t whether they meet every single technical requirement yet. It’s whether the EU has the political will to reward genuine effort and unyielding commitment to the European project. Where there is really skin in the game, checkboxes come second.
Enlargement is about more than just admitting new members — it’s a decision about what Europe stands for. Who gets to join our club? Those who will bring both heart and spine to the Union’s mission, or those who keep one foot out the door, always ready to align with authoritarian powers if it suits their short-term interests. When we see countries rallying their populations around European ideals, facing down pressure from autocratic neighbours, it is not just admirable — it’s essential for the future of Europe itself. The EU should meet that enthusiasm with a clear pathway, not bureaucratic dithering.
In the coming months, I’ll tackle the specifics of each candidate state in a series of articles. These will include assessments of where Ukraine, Moldova, and Georgia stand in their European journey, with special focus on how their people perceive the process, not just their governments. The same scrutiny will apply to the Western Balkan countries like Serbia and Albania. Each piece will delve into the public sentiment, political will, and economic transformations that drive — or inhibit — their progress. And then there is Turkey.
But for now, one thing is clear: EU membership should be a reward for those who demonstrate a steadfast commitment to European values, not a consolation prize for geopolitical fence-sitters. We already struggle with EU solidarity because of increasing EU-ambivalence in Hungary and Slovakia. They both make us less. We will see nothing but enlargement fatigue and further loss of solidarity — at a time when solidarity in the face of Russian aggression is nothing short of a clear and present threat — from miring ourselves in antipathy. Yes, I fully understand the argument that we must engage neighbours. I’m here for that. But not if it imports corrosive antipathy.
We need only to take in allies. To welcome nations into the fold, we must be sure they are prepared to strengthen the union, not weaken it by dragging their unresolved conflicts, enemy-leaning, and undemocratic tendencies into the mix. The path to membership must be earned, not handed out in a vague hope that proximity to Brussels will cure all ills.
