Ukraine’s EU Accession: A Catalyst for a New European Order
The European Union stands at a crossroads. Facing geopolitical pressures, internal divisions, and a shifting global landscape, the question of Ukraine’s membership has become central to the bloc’s future. Whereas traditionally a slow and meticulous process, the urgency of the situation demands a radical reassessment of enlargement procedures.
The Copenhagen Criteria: A Double-Edged Sword
For decades, the Copenhagen criteria – stability of institutions, a functioning market economy, and adherence to EU law – have served as gatekeepers to membership. Introduced in 1993, they were intended to streamline accession, but have often been used to delay or reject candidates. Varied interpretations of the ‘rule of law’ have further complicated matters, with candidate countries facing rigorous scrutiny while existing members often evade similar assessment.
The criteria, while seemingly straightforward, can be a source of contention. Bulgaria and Romania were admitted with ongoing verification mechanisms, while disputes persist over borders (Slovenia and Croatia) and the application of EU law in certain territories (Northern Cyprus). Turkey’s candidacy, granted in 1999, remains largely stalled.
Fast-Tracking Ukraine: An Emergency Landing
Ukraine applied for EU membership in February 2022, immediately following the Russian invasion. Despite progress made through the Association Agreement signed in 2014, completing the conventional accession process during wartime is unrealistic. Hungary, under Viktor Orbán’s leadership, is currently blocking the formal commencement of Ukraine’s accession negotiations.
The situation necessitates a departure from traditional methods. A key step involves modernizing the Copenhagen criteria to reflect the current geopolitical reality, explicitly recognizing Ukraine’s membership as a strategic imperative for the EU’s security, and independence.
Reforming the Decision-Making Process
Currently, unanimity is required to open and close each chapter of accession negotiations. Reforming this process to allow the European Commission to initiate and conclude chapters, unless blocked by a Reverse Qualified Majority Vote in the Council, would significantly accelerate the process. This aligns with existing treaty provisions, granting the Commission the power to ensure treaty application (Article 17(1) TEU).
A Probationary Membership Model
A novel approach involves granting Ukraine membership on a probationary basis. Reform programs typically required before accession could be implemented as post-accession transition arrangements, increasing EU leverage over Ukraine’s administration. This provisional membership would grant Kyiv a vote in the Council (though without veto power) as chapters are closed, prioritizing areas like permanent structured cooperation in defence (PESCO). Full rights – a Commissioner, a judge at the European Court of Justice, and directly elected MEPs – would follow ratification, potentially by July 2029.
Towards a Common European Defence
Ukraine’s situation underscores the need for a stronger, more unified European defence policy. The current requirement for unanimous Council decisions (Article 42(2) TEU) is a significant obstacle. A potential solution is the creation of a European Security Council, composed of committed member states, bypassing the need for universal agreement.
Commissioner Andrius Kibilius proposes a Security Council consisting of Germany, France, Italy, Spain, Poland, the Presidents of the Commission and European Council, with rotating representation from other nations. The UK, Iceland, Norway, and Canada could as well be invited to join. This council would focus on crisis management, military integration, and overcoming fragmentation in the defence industry, ultimately assimilating Ukraine’s military capabilities.
A New Intergovernmental Treaty
To facilitate this, a new intergovernmental treaty, modeled after the Schengen Agreement, could be drafted. This treaty would confer decision-making powers on the European Security Council, enabling it to act independently and efficiently. It would also aim to integrate existing EU programs in security and defence, and address barriers to a single market for the military industry.
Frequently Asked Questions
Q: What are the Copenhagen criteria?
A: They are the requirements for countries wishing to join the EU, focusing on stable institutions, a functioning market economy, and adherence to EU law.
Q: Why is Hungary blocking Ukraine’s EU accession?
A: Under the leadership of Viktor Orbán, Hungary has expressed reservations and is currently preventing the start of formal accession negotiations.
Q: What is a ‘probationary membership’?
A: It’s a proposed model where Ukraine would join the EU with certain conditions and reform programs implemented post-accession, allowing for greater EU oversight.
Q: What is PESCO?
A: Permanent Structured Cooperation in Defence, a framework for deeper military cooperation among EU member states.
Q: Will NATO still be relevant if the EU develops a stronger defence policy?
A: The article suggests that NATO is already showing signs of weakness and that the EU needs to prepare a contingency plan, regardless of NATO’s future.
Pro Tip: Stay informed about EU policy changes by regularly visiting the official websites of the European Commission, Council, and Parliament.
Did you know? The EU has expanded its membership from six founding countries to 28, demonstrating its capacity for growth and adaptation.
Further exploration of these topics can be found on the official websites of the European Council and the European Union.
What are your thoughts on Ukraine’s potential EU membership? Share your opinions in the comments below!
