The European Commission is moving to toughen the terms of EU enlargement, arguing that future entrants must be more firmly locked into the bloc’s values and policies before and after joining to prevent the kind of rule-of-law disputes that have dogged relations with newer members such as Hungary.
In a set of proposals that would still need approval from member states, the Commission set out stricter pre-accession safeguards designed to curb the risk of democratic backsliding once a country becomes a full member of the European Union.
The plans come as the EU gears up for the potential accession of countries including Montenegro, Albania, Ukraine and Moldova in the coming years, while simultaneously trying to reassure existing members concerned about the political and economic implications of bringing in new states.
Brussels’ revived push on enlargement — strongly backed by the Irish Government — follows Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine and Kyiv’s push to join the EU as part of a peace settlement.
One of the most striking ideas would allow other EU countries to suspend a new member’s voting rights in its first 15 years of membership if it stops complying with the bloc’s fundamental values.
The Commission also floated limiting financial support for Ukraine’s large farming sector, with a particular focus on its grain economy.
Alongside tougher safeguards, the proposals call for reinforcing an existing approach: bringing candidate countries step by step into EU programmes and key parts of the economy, including energy, transport, digital and defence.
Participation, however, would not be automatic. Countries would have to meet specific conditions for each scheme and demonstrate that they are aligned with the EU’s overall strategic direction.
Dublin, for its part, hopes Montenegro can wrap up accession negotiations before Ireland’s EU presidency concludes in December.
Albania, Moldova and Ukraine are also regarded as frontrunners, though they are widely seen as still being at least several years away from membership.
“As enlargement countries advance on their path of reform, the EU must be ready to welcome them,” European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said in a written statement.
“This means preparing our institutions, adapting our policies for new realities, and ensuring our budget reflects our shared ambitions.”
The Commission’s tougher stance is shaped by years of confrontation with Hungary during former prime minister Viktor Orban’s increasingly authoritarian tenure, a period marked by repeated clashes over what Brussels and other capitals described as anti-democratic drift and recurring breaches of the EU’s rule of law obligations.
Under the measures outlined today, rule-of-law monitoring would start even before a candidate joins the EU and would continue after accession.
Current safeguards covering areas such as the economy, the EU internal market and justice and home affairs could be kept in force for longer. The Commission also proposed a new safeguard that would apply in cases of “serious breaches” of EU values and the principle of sincere cooperation.
Earlier this year, Mr Orban angered other member states when he declined to back a €90 billion loan for Ukraine, despite having already agreed to it at an EU summit in December last year.
Although the EU treaties allow for the suspension of a member state’s council-level voting rights in the most extreme cases — through Article 7 of the Lisbon Treaty — the mechanism has never been used because it requires unanimous agreement from all other member states.
The Commission now proposes an additional safeguard to sit alongside Article 7. Under this plan, new member states would commit, for a limited period in the first years after joining, not to block EU decisions on future enlargements or on bilateral disputes.
Reaction to the proposals was cautious. “The European Commission wants stronger safeguards against democratic backsliding after enlargement,” said Corina Stratulat, Associate Director and Head of European Politics and Institutions Programme at the European Policy Centre.
“It has good reasons. But its proposed institutional safeguard, lasting 15 years after accession, raises a question that reaches beyond the next entrants: If the Union’s ordinary enforcement mechanisms need supplementing when a country joins, what will make them sufficient fifteen years later?”
Additional reporting Reuters
