The EU’s 2004 enlargement was a “success story” but action is needed to address public concerns about the process and ensure the Union has the institutional capacity to function effectively as it grows, Enlargement Commissioner Olli Rehn told a Breakfast Policy Briefing on Challenges of EU enlargement organised with the King Baudouin Foundation. And while the Union must honour existing commitments, “there is a need for informed, responsible debate on future enlargements and what they mean for the Union as a whole”.

The EU’s 2004 enlargement was a “success story” but action is needed to address public concerns about the process and ensure the Union has the institutional capacity to function effectively as it grows, Enlargement Commissioner Olli Rehn told a Breakfast Policy Briefing on Challenges of EU enlargement organised with the King Baudouin Foundation. And while the Union must honour existing commitments, “there is a need for informed, responsible debate on future enlargements and what they mean for the Union as a whole”.

Enlargement Commissioner Olli Rehn began on an upbeat note by saying that the EU’s enlargement in 2004 had been a formidable challenge, but was “a success story” which had “proved the Cassandras wrong”.

Enlargement had had a positive economic effect on both new Member States and the countries of the EU-15. It had extended Europe’s zone of peace, liberty and democracy, and had driven central Europe’s spectacular economic and democratic transformation over the last 15 years. It had also acted as a “shock absorber”, enabling Europe to respond positively to outside events such as the end of communism or the fall of dictatorships.

Despite this, Commissioner Rehn accepted that support for enlargement was dwindling and being replaced by “the enlargement blues”, which he said could equally be described as “the unemployment blues, the globalisation blues or the welfare state blues”. European citizens’ concerns had to be addressed, with new policies to enhance economic growth and job creation, as well as tackling myths and misconceptions about enlargement.

It was important to build a “new consensus” on EU enlargement, respecting Europe’s strategic interest and ensuring it had sufficient institutional capacity to function effectively.

Enlargement conditions

Commissioner Rehn said that while the Union must honour existing commitments, “there is a need for informed, responsible debate on future enlargements and what they mean for the Union as a whole”.

On the issue of the EU’s borders, he reminded the audience that the EU Treaty specified that any European country which respected democratic values and the rule of law could apply for EU membership, since it was Member States’ shared values - not their geography – which defined the Union.

But this does not mean that all European countries must apply for membership, or that the EU had to accept all applications.

EU enlargement policy today is based on “consolidation”, i.e. being cautious about taking on new commitments. The Union is now concentrating on Southeast Europe: completing the fifth round of enlargement, with the accession of Bulgaria and Romania; the accession negotiations with Croatia and Turkey; and eventual membership for the countries of the Western Balkans.

Absorption – the “a-word”

The EU’s capacity to absorb new countries depended on two factors, said the Commissioner: first, applicants had to transform themselves into worthy Member States; and second, the Union had to develop and refine its own policies and institutions.

Bulgaria and Romania still had to redress some shortcomings before joining, the fulfilment of certain criteria was the key to progress in the negotiations with Croatia and Turkey, and Western Balkan countries had to fulfil the conditions of the Stabilisation and Association Process, including full cooperation with the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia.

The Commissioner explained that the EU’s capacity to absorb more countries was a “functional not a geographical” concept. The Union had to ensure it maintained its capacity to “act and decide according to a balance within institutions, respect budgetary limits and implement common policies that function well and achieve their objectives”.

The European Commission monitors the Union’s capacity to absorb new members and takes this into account during negotiations. This had happened during preparations for Turkey’s accession negotiations, where the Commission had assessed the effects of Turkey’s possible entry on the Union and its policies.

The EU also makes long-term economic preparations for enlargement by, for example, establishing free-trade agreements or customs unions. In Turkey’s case, the EU Customs Union has stimulated bold economic reforms and new economic dynamism in the country. Western Balkan countries are being prepared for accession through Stabilisation and Association Agreements, and the Central European Free Trade Agreement is paving the way for greater regional economic integration and eventual EU membership in Southeast Europe.

The Commissioner argued that all this meant it was no longer necessary to have a “third way” (i.e. a waiting period) during negotiations. Instead he was in favour of reinforcing the European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP), particularly for Ukraine, Moldova and, possibly one day, Belarus.

Preparing for future enlargements

As to future enlargements, the Nice Treaty had provided institutional rules for up to 27 members, including Bulgaria and Romania, but a new institutional arrangement would be needed before the next phase of enlargement could begin. Commissioner Rehn said he expected the European Council in June to lay the ground work for this.

There will also be a budget review in 2008 or 2009, coupled with a review of common policies to support competitiveness, innovation and solidarity through a new policy agenda. The Commissioner described these as a “major challenge”, but “not rocket science”.

The Commissioner then returned to the role of public opinion and democratic legitimacy in the enlargement process. He stressed that the public’s views should be channelled into decision-making through democratically-elected bodies, and that this had happened with enlargement, with key decisions taken unanimously by EU Member States and ratified by national parliaments. MEPs also had to give their assent.

He finished by insisting that the EU must now focus on improving the way it functioned, and not just on the “more abstract” future absorption capacity, and on reforming its own policies and institutions to deal with a changing world. But the Western Balkans and Turkey must not be “held hostage” to the EU’s internal debates.