EU: Reform to prepare the bloc for new members

The European Commission wants to give fresh impetus to the enlargement process, in which some candidate countries have waited decades to join.

Albania, Montenegro, Moldova and Ukraine are currently the countries most advanced towards EU membership. European officials have expressed the hope that Montenegro could become an EU member as early as 2028.

“A bigger union is a long-term investment for Europe’s peace, security and prosperity,” Enlargement Commissioner Marta Kos declared before journalists in Strasbourg (06.10.2026).

One of the key questions is how the EU can admit more countries in the near future without becoming harder to govern or risking democratic backsliding in the new member states.

The Commission’s answer is that, in parallel, the candidate countries should meet EU standards and the EU itself should reform by removing obstacles in the accession process and protecting its democratic values.

Less unanimity, more qualified majority voting

One of the main obstacles in accession negotiations so far has been the need for unanimous decisions by all 27 member states. In the past, individual states have blocked the progress of candidate countries because of bilateral disputes.

A notable example is the delays caused by Hungary in Ukraine’s negotiating process.

Now, and not for the first time, the Commission recommends that member states move away from the principle of unanimity for decisions such as opening negotiating chapter clusters and replace it with qualified majority voting.

The unanimity dilemma

“Each chapter cluster that is opened is subject to three separate decisions, and each decision requires unanimity. This is incredible, and I think it clearly needs to change,” said a Commission official, who wished to remain anonymous.

The problem is that switching to qualified majority voting would itself require a unanimous decision.

“I have reservations about whether the member states would unanimously agree to this change,” said Tinatin Akhvlediani, head of the enlargement programme at the Centre for European Policy Studies (CEPS), recalling previous failed attempts to change the voting rules.

Gradual access to the benefits of membership

To encourage reforms in the candidate countries, the Commission proposes gradual integration. This means these countries can benefit from some advantages of membership before becoming full members, as long as they meet the EU criteria.

“Gradual integration is not a substitute for full membership. It is the accelerator of enlargement,” said Marta Kos, stressing that the process will remain merit-based.

According to Nina Vujanovic, a researcher at the Brussels-based Bruegel think tank, this can have a motivating effect for candidate countries: “Reforms are important, but it is just as important that this process is rewarded somewhat earlier, before accession.”

Earlier access to EU benefits is not entirely new. For example, Montenegro already participates in the Single Euro Payments Area (SEPA) even though it is not yet an EU member.

Facing geopolitical realities

The Commission now wants to make this approach more systematic and link it to strategic alignment.

“This will not be available to candidate countries if they do not orient themselves clearly towards the EU,” a Commission official said.

Conditioning on strategic alignment is a new element and reflects the EU’s efforts to adapt to the geopolitical tensions faced by members and candidates.

The candidates’ choice: Russia or the EU?

“The EU is trying to keep candidate countries away from Russian influence,” said Heather Grabbe, a senior fellow at Bruegel. “The aim of strategic alignment is directed particularly at politicians like Aleksandar Vuçiq in Serbia, who has clearly promoted Russian interests,” she added.

The new procedures would require alignment not only with the EU’s foreign and security policy, but also with its economic security standards. “Gas trade with Russia is simply not something that builds trust with the European Union,” said Nina Vujanovic.

The lessons the EU learned from Hungary and Poland

To prevent violations of democratic rules by new members, the Commission proposes a 15-year period during which it would be easier to sanction new countries by restricting their financial funds or voting rights.

In an interview for The Guardian and other European media, Marta Kos made clear that the EU has learned lessons from the democratic backsliding seen in countries like Poland and Hungary: “No more Viktor Orbáns. We need faster mechanisms than just Article 7.”

Double standard or necessary protection?

Critics argue that this safeguard measure would create unequal conditions within the union. “It is inherently unfair,” says Heather Grabbe. “Why in the 2040s should Montenegro face different conditions from, for example, Slovenia?”

However, many current candidate countries have a fragile history when it comes to democratic norms. “They are in fact fragile democracies. So this approach towards them can be justified,” says Tinatin Akhvlediani.

Experts say that although it would be desirable for similar rules to apply to all members, this is not really feasible, because it would require unanimous approval. As Heather Grabbe puts it: “It is very hard to persuade turkeys to vote for Christmas.”

Although the Commission’s initiative for new enlargement rules is likely to move the debate forward, in the end it is up to the member states to decide how much of the proposals will become reality.

The European Council, made up of the heads of state or government of the 27 member countries, the president of the European Council and the president of the European Commission, is expected to discuss these proposals at its next meeting on 15-16 October.

The outcome of these talks will determine how quickly the Commission’s new enlargement agenda can move forward./DW