Battle lines drawn over enlargement

Date: 18/12/1997

By Mark Turner

Although enlargement to central Europe was never going to be easy, few could have predicted the twists and turns the expansion debate took in 1997.

The first half of the year was dominated by speculation on the European Commission's 'opinions' on the ten eastern applicants, based on a year-long analysis of their various efforts to apply EU standards and laws.

By early spring it became apparent that even the most advanced of the candidates had an extremely long way to go before they were ready for full EU membership.

The big question, therefore, became whether the Commission would draw a seemingly arbitrary cut-off line somewhere between them, call for all the applicants to start negotiations at the same time, or announce that none had any realistic process for reaching western European standards within a decade.

While, on a technical level, the Commission could perhaps have justified delaying negotiations altogether for a few years, political realities - including hugely optimistic promises to Poland by German Chancellor Helmut Kohl and French President Jacques Chirac - meant that the third option was not feasible.

Those involved in the debate, therefore, split into two major camps: those who believed the Commission should 'differentiate' (and thus 'discriminate') between the applicants, and those who favoured a 'regatta approach' with a common starting line but an uncertain end.

In the end, mainly practical considerations caused the Commission to opt for the former. It simply could not, many felt, cope with 11 sets of simultaneous negotiations (including Cyprus) given its lack of staff.

But where should the line be drawn? If differentiation was not to turn into a political minefield, the Commission would have to show that its judgement was based on purely technical criteria and not political favouritism.

In the final analysis, Foreign Affairs Commissioner Hans van den Broek had very little choice. Poland, according to his officials, was around fifth in the readiness hierarchy (technically less prepared than the Czech Republic, Hungary, Slovenia and Estonia) but had to be invited. Given earlier promises to open talks with Cyprus, too, that meant at least six countries would start negotiations.

That, the Commission felt, was about as much as (if not more than) it could manage.

On 16 July, amidst much pomp and ceremony, the long-awaited avis (opinion) were unveiled. To the dismay of borderline candidates, only the six leading countries were told that they had a reasonable prospect of joining in "the medium-term". The rest would have to wait.

It was then that the political battles began in earnest. Germany, France and the UK each endorsed the decision, not least because all their most promising trading partners were included.

But Denmark and Sweden, having strong ties with the Baltic states, could not accept what they saw as a new and arbitrary division between the applicants. A number of southern states, fearing that premature enlargement would be to their detriment, also began to push for a common start, hoping that it might slow the process down.

As if that were not complex enough, Turkey shot to prominence by demanding equal treatment and warning that if it were left out in the cold, it could stymie Cyprus' application.

Despite earlier indications that Germany would be Ankara's major opponent, Greece proved, as usual, to be the most intransigent by far. France, however, felt that it had the solution: it said a European conference should be held with all applicants (including Turkey), but talks should only be held with the six most advanced.

Although strongly disliked by the applicants, which saw it either as a milksop or a drag on the enlargement process, the conference nevertheless became the golden formula agreed by leaders at the Luxembourg summit.

However, following a strong rearguard action by the Scandinavians, there was agreement on starting the 'screening' process with Bulgaria, Romania, Lithuania, Latvia and Slovakia (the latter despite its political problems).

That was enough to elicit warm messages of support from all the eastern European applicants, and marked something of a diplomatic coup for the EU - even though, in reality, talks will only begin in earnest with six.

However, Turkey rejected the formula, arguing that its exclusion from the enlargement process amounted to blatant discrimination.

Part of the European Voice 'Review of the Year'.