Ukraine, reception?

Kyiv promised the “miracle of prosperity” and the status of a candidate for EU members. Against the backdrop of Sob, Ukraine (and Moldova) can “become Europe” earlier than Turkey, which has been waiting for the queue for almost 40 years

One of the side effects of the Russian military operation in Ukraine was a new impetus to the expansion of the European Union, which was frozen after the 2004 Big Bang. On Tuesday, November 8, the European commission in Brussels recommended that negotiations with Ukraine and Moldova on their admission in the EU. This is the most important step in the process of admission, although it does not predetermine the result or time.

Brussels recalled: the reception period does not depend on the length of service, but on the real readiness of the country, on the quality and speed of reforms bringing it closer to the EU standards. For information: those that have already entered the Union, the preparation period and the duration of the negotiations were very different.

For two decades, the EU “digested” the countries of Central and Eastern Europe adopted in 2004, realized the pros and cons of living together with them in the same house, and not without problems tried to equip it better. Not a single new member was accepted. The desire to expand further remained in words-and then only for the West Balkan countries that are surrounded by the EU territory and, by virtue of geography, are organically attached to it (Albania, Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia, Bosnia and Herzegovin, as well as partially recognized by Kosovo). But the eastern border of the Union was predetermined.

Motives of a new expansion

In February 2022, the European order prevailed over the decades was violated. In the wake of the rise of pro -Ukrainian sentiments and unconditional support of Ukraine, the EU country decided to provide her, and at the same time Moldova, the status of candidates for the Union. Out of turn and in violation of an unspoken consensus, stop the expansion on the western borders of the former USSR (with the exception of the Baltic countries adopted in the EU in 2004).

Presenting the press to the decision of his collegium, the chairman of the European Commission, Ursula von der Lyain, recalled that the events of Ukraine that changed the fate of Ukraine showed the desire of Ukrainians for Europe, and the Kiev Maidan was called the “Euromaidan” - an uprising in response to a sudden decision of the government to refuse to sign an agreement on the Association and Free Trade with the EU. After all, the signing of an agreement, which did not even imply the entry of Ukraine to the EU, but only brought them closer, was prepared for a long time and with the widespread support of society, and therefore the course of the authorities backward caused indignation.

But not even the Maidan and Crimea, namely the Russian military operation, according to her, prompted the state and the EU institutions to reanimate the expansion process.

It became clear that the neighboring countries from the EU were faced with which side to accept. The head of the European Commission identified this choice with a rhetorical issue: “Do you want democracy and prosperity or authoritarian regime and a pocket justice system?”

Western Balkans, Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine made their choice, believes von der Layen. They want to go to the European Union. The list of reforms carried out and carried out in these countries shows determination and perseverance, behind which are the political will of leaders and the will of the population to advance to join the EU. “And we want to see them in a European family,” she assured, hinting that there were more supporters of Ukraine under the influence of the events of the last two years in Europe.

The decision of the European Commission in Ukraine and Moldova is unconditionally. The recommendation of Brussels means that negotiations with them will begin immediately after the political decision of the EU, the European Council, which should be held in mid -December.

Members of the EU Executive College agreed that the determination, depth and speed of reforms in these two countries are impressive. Especially in Ukraine, which conducts them in difficult conditions of hostilities. “There are reforms not only in adopted laws, but in real life,” said von der Layen.

The commission also recommended that negotiations with Bosnia and Herzegovina, least "advanced" from the West Balkan countries. She remained the only one of this group of candidates who did not ripen for the introductory negotiations for a long time. And this time, the decision was made “with a creak”: it is recommended to start negotiations with the government in Sarajevo as soon as in the country “the necessary degree of compliance with membership criteria is reached”.

There was no deprived of Georgia. The European Commission with some reservations recommended that the European Council provide Georgia with the status of a candidate for the EU, which Ukraine and Moldova received a year ago. But so far there is no talk of the beginning of the introductory negotiations. Yes, and the candidate may be provided by the European Union with the condition: "Upon understanding that certain steps to carry out reforms will be taken." Against the background of the fact that Tbilisi’s policy in recent years has been causing some suspicions of drif towards Brussels to Europe, this can be considered an encouraging assessment.

Arguments of the European Commission

Von der Layen focused on arguments in favor of a decision on these four countries:

• Ukraine is faced with enormous difficulties and deprivations in conditions of struggle for existence. Nevertheless, it conducts deep reforms. She completed more than 90% of the necessary tasks set a year ago in the report of the European Commission. In particular: I created a transparent preliminary selection system for judges of the Constitutional Court and reformed the judicial administration; expanded the practice of investigations and sentences in cases of corruption at a high level; I strengthened its institutional structure. She took positive steps against the influence of the oligarchs, demonstrated the ability to bring her legislation in line with the EU legislation even during hostilities. Progress in the fight against money laundering, the new law on the media, and the progress in the legislation on national minorities are also noted.

• There are no military operations in Moldova , but it is attempt to destabilize its democratic system, suffers from the indirect influence of military operations in Ukraine, accepts many Ukrainian refugees, encounters malfunctions in the energy system. But, like Ukraine, Moldova made significant efforts in the reform. For example, in the field of judiciary, the fight against corruption and organized crime.

• As for Bosnia and Herzegovina , Brussels recognized a “series of positive political and legal steps”. For example, supporting the purpose of joining the EU political parties, progress in the fight against organized crime, money laundering and terrorism. But with concern, he noted the “non -constitutional laws” adopted in the Republic of Serbian - an integral part of the BIG. Therefore, recommendations - unlike those given in Ukraine and Moldova - are furnished with preliminary conditions. The EU advice is recommended to begin negotiations on the entry of the BIG, "as soon as the necessary degree of compliance with membership criteria is reached."

• In Georgia, the European Commission noted the "sincere desire of the vast majority of citizens to join the European Union." But she made a reservation that this desire should be better reflected in the policies of the authorities who "should be more actively interacting with the opposition and civil society." And before the status of the candidate is granted, the government should ensure further advance in the 12 priority areas determined last year. The commission admitted that the “number of positive steps” has been taken since then. For example, the opposition control was strengthened for parliamentary work, an action plan was adopted against the influence of the oligarchs, and an anti -corruption bureau has been created.

It is interesting that the head of the European Commission, speaking of the promotion of these countries to join the EU, used the word "completion" (completing, Achèvement), which can be interpreted as closing the queue. She believes that this process "has strong economic and geopolitical logic." Because the peoples seeking in the EU "connect geography, history and common values." The history of the expansion of the EU "has become an unprecedented history of economic success."

Political considerations defeated again

In the current decision of Brussels, the role of political will is great. Diplomats say that, according to the members of the commission, neither Ukraine, nor Bosnia and Herzegovin have reached the necessary stage of compliance with the criteria in the field of the rule of law. True, in Ukraine, even in military conditions, there is zeal and rapid progress, and in BIG the reforms move sluggishly and even retreat in something. Another official confirmed that the decision to start negotiations with Ukraine was extremely political, given that the country is in a state of military conflict, its real boundaries are still incomprehensible.

But after all, the explosive expansion of the EU in 2004 was also mainly a political decision and, according to many experts, a political adventure, threatening to ruin the European structure built for half a century. The level of development of some candidates was several times lower than the average for “old Europe”.

Von der Layen said that she would not predict the target date of receipt of Ukraine and Moldova. Although the chairman of the European Council Charles Michelle the day before, apparently hurrying, called 2030. But the head of the European Commission promised that the European Union would open access to their domestic market, without waiting for a political decision on admission. Already in the near future - in seven important sectors.

She recalled that in the previous waves of expansion, "a miracle of prosperity came with joining a single market." It gives a doubling of GDP in ten years.

And she also presented the expansion of the EU and the reception of new members in Eastern Europe as “investment in security”.

At a press conference, she was asked the question: what strengthening of the EU security does she see in the reception of Ukraine, a destroyed country that does not control part of the territory and has an unfriendly neighbor in the East? She diplomatically went around the question of the territory. The EU officially left it to the Ukrainians and promised to help Kyiv as much as it would be required. Apparently, in terms of security, it is not the most important for Europe. “It is important to stabilize Ukrainian democracy,” she said.

“At a time when we see that the international order based on the rules is increasingly questioning, a larger and stronger European union gives us a more loud voice in the world,” the EU main official, which went out next year after the elections to the European Parliament.

Historical experience

In the history of expansion of the EU, there are examples of Spain and Portugal, which, after admission to the Union, committed an economic and social jerk, were transformed in every sense. And Poland, far from the most developed among the countries of the former “socialist community”, which reached almost the level of developed European economies. And other similar countries of Central and Eastern Europe. It is not only about the income of citizens, but also about the broader concept of the quality of life.

But there is also an example of Great Britain that Brexit committed, having been in the European community for almost half a century. And an example of Norway,

Which in the EU was accepted by all the rules, but whose people in a referendum did not agree with this choice of elites. Switzerland did not even start the process of the same considerations.

Türkiye has long been striving in the EU, but got stuck in the candidates. There are no uniform standards in the complex world. Of course, with Turkey, the European Union would be more powerful both from the economic and geopolitical points of view, but for it, membership in the EU remains a mirage.

Türkiye received candidate status in 1999 - earlier than any of the current candidates. And she submitted the application in 1987, that is, in general in another era, even at the end of the Cold War. Negotiations on the introduction began in 2005 - and since then only 16 out of 35 chapters of the contract were opened to discuss (and only one - on scientific research - was agreed and closed). Since 2018, negotiations froze at a dead point. Different obstacles were erected by the “EU locomotives” - Germany and France, then Greece, which historically does not have a soul to a neighbor, then a small Cyprus, the north of which has been occupied by Turkey since 1974. The Cyprus problem is only materially tangible. But more serious others.

Pure “questionnaires” and impeccable “characteristics” are not enough. More importantly, something less material, which in Europe is called common values.

They are in the general sense of democracy, the rule of law and human rights, in similar views on economic development, migration, foreign policy and security.

As the French political scientist Dorotheya Schmid, who explores this problem, told the Libre Belgique newspaper, "we are not able to offer them a common position." The EU sees rather the prospect of a comprehensive and in -depth partnership with Turkey than its membership in the Union. In addition, the more the country is changing by President Erdogan, the further it is from Europe.

“Türkiye is waiting for nothing more from the EU, which has been holding us behind its door for forty years,” Erdogan said on October 1 of this year. He still left the door ajar: "If the EU wants to stop the process of admission, <...> then it will be his decision." But it is clear that the Turkish leader designated a choice for his country.

Brussels believes that negotiations must be continued in any case to strengthen mutual understanding and rapprochement. With hope for a better future. Türkiye formally remains an EU candidate with the same status that Ukraine has now received. The difference is that

• The negotiations are coming to Kiev - and the forecast is positive,

• And with Ankara , negotiations began almost two dozen years ago, came to a dead end - and the forecast is negative.

And what do citizens of the United Europe say to this?

20 years after the “great expansion” of the EU, the Enlargement Fatigue expression (fatigue from expansion) was included in European political everyday life. Politicians and citizens with skepticism perceived any assumptions about admitting new members to the Union. Against this background, Brexit and the cooling of the ardor of reforms in the candidate countries occurred. Probably, in the last one and a half to two years, the situation has changed.

While the acceptance of Ukraine in the EU was not even discussed in the long term, and there has not been conducted studies of public opinion on this score. Few people were interested, but it is known that in general, the attitude of the EU citizens to admit the new members in the Union was cool.

I remember that in Belgium, France and Germany, contemptuous jokes about Polish plumbing, taking work from local masters, went in due time. In the summer of 2023, the Scientific Center of Wilfried Martens at the University of Levines in Belgium conducted and published a study on the mood of the middle class, which has data from a survey about the attitude of citizens of the EU on the possible technique of Ukraine. The share of answers “positively” and “more positively” fluctuated from 24% in Austria, Belgium, the Netherlands and Bulgaria to 64% in Poland, Lithuania and Estonia. In large countries - Germany, France and Italy - it was about half. There are many when it comes to a country covered by military operations.