The geopolitical shock of the Russian invasion of Ukraine on February 24, 2022 led the European Union to take unthinkable decisions not long ago, such as opening the doors to Kyiv. In this new security context, enlargement is “a geostrategic imperative”, argues Luuk van Middelaar in an analysis published by the Institute of Geopolitics in Brussels a few days before the Granada summit, in which EU leaders will address this debate for the first time. “The more concrete this idea becomes, the more difficult it will be. Our small contribution to the debate is to say that we have to start looking at these difficult issues head on.”
His analysis concludes that the expansion is “a strategic imperative”. What means?
The situation on the continent changed fundamentally with the start of the war. If we look back, when the Berlin Wall fell it was the end of the USSR and for a few decades we were able to have a kind of intermediate zone between Europe and Russia. It wasn’t a very comfortable situation for countries like Ukraine or Belarus, which were in the middle, but it was something we could live with. With the war we see that there is a deep dividing line on the continent, further east than in the times of the cold war, with Russia and Belarus on one side and all the other European states on our side. Now there is no place for gray areas on the European map. It’s not just about the EU. Sweden and Finland, two countries that have been neutral for a long time, have asked to join NATO. They also feel that there is no more room for that non-aligned status. The EU must ensure that the countries on our side of the new dividing line are part of our sphere of prosperity and security. All this is new and has accelerated discussions about what to do with the Western Balkans. Because we are talking not only about Ukraine and Moldova, but about six other countries in this region and perhaps also Georgia. We’re talking about going from 27 to 36 states and that opens up a long list of questions.
Where would Turkey be?
It is a special case. It is the only country that has the necessary strength and will to be neutral. Erdogan wants to be able to talk to Moscow and Kyiv and has the military strength as a country to be an actor. It is the exception to the new dividing line. Only Turkey can afford to be neither inside nor outside.
In Granada, EU leaders will talk about enlargement in very specific terms for the first time. Ukraine poses enormous challenges. How to prepare?
The key discussion will be deciding whether there is a link between enlargement and internal reforms. Some countries, like Lithuania, do not even want to talk about making changes because they give full priority to enlargement. Others, such as Germany and France, do not see it that way and say that reforms must be made first. Deciding how these processes are linked, whether they will be parallel or whether it is necessary to finish the reforms first before opening the doors, is something deeply political. We say that some internal changes should be made first and that there is no need to change the treaties like last time (Lisbon took almost ten years of discussions) because we can make quite a few adjustments within the current framework. Better that than focusing on treaty changes, because there is no magic formula that will please everyone and they may never be made.
But there are things that can be changed now to prepare the EU.
Yes, for example the budget. If you go from 27 to 36 states it is simply impossible to stay the same and keep the policies as designed. According to some estimates, Portugal and even Bulgaria, the poorest country in the EU today, would pay more than they would receive from the budget. It is an inevitable discussion.
There are countries that want to limit the right to veto on certain issues so that the EU is more agile.
I agree with Charles Michel when he says that sometimes it is overestimated what it would mean not to have a veto and to decide by qualified majority. A lot of important things have been done in the current framework [vaccines, Next Generation funds, sending arms to Ukraine…] and there are decisions that, even if the treaty says they can be passed without the vote of all countries , politically it is complicated, as was seen with the reform of the asylum policy, which was approved with the countries of the East against it and opened wounds that have never completely healed. Our conclusion is that removing the veto would not be the panacea. Effectiveness cannot be the only criterion and we do not think that it is the most important to achieve progress with enlargement and for the EU to be more strategic.
How can you explain to public opinion that the EU must open the door to Ukraine, a country that, at least in the future, will have territorial conflicts with Russia?
There is a lot to do here. There is a wide gap between the determination of political leaders about the future of Ukraine and public opinion. The solidarity that people have shown with the country is impressive. In general, there has been broad support in the parliaments for the sending of military aid and people have not minded lowering the heating by a few degrees if that served to punish Putin. This solidarity is a natural thing, it is helping a neighbor in trouble. But people have not made the connection of what it means to open the door to them and share with them our institutions and policies, our internal market, our funds.
All these things make it look like something more concrete…
Yes, it is what is happening in Poland and the grain of Ukraine. It is his most important ally and his sister nation, but when he has suddenly felt the cost of his decisions on his farmers – just weeks before the election, okay – he has backed down, closed the corridors solidarity and has suspended the shipment of weapons. The European leaders must not forget this at the meeting in Granada. After the meeting they will have to speak to their public opinions and defend that we are facing a new strategic situation, that Putin is still there and that the moment demands to assume responsibilities. It is not worth saying that Ukraine is part of the European family, the fairy tales can be found again. People want to be taken seriously.
