The Enlarged EU

While the 2004 enlargement of the EU was imbued with the spirit of reuniting a continent divided by a century of war and ideology, this month’s admission of Romania and Bulgaria lacked a sense of historical justification and celebration outside the two countries themselves.

The decision to let in the two countries, the EU’s poorest, was unenthusiastic if unanimous, permitted only on the strictest of conditions in return for going ahead with enlargement this year rather than a few years down the line.

The reasoning has been that if the two states are let in now, the pressure for reform, which has been disappointing, will be greater than if their entry is delayed, with the risk of further inaction for another year or two.

Nevertheless, Romania and Bulgaria find themselves in the unprecedented position for new members of having their progress monitored after accession, with the threat of decisions taken by their courts not being recognised in the rest of the EU because of concerns about the independence of the judiciaries.

The strictness for these two countries reflects the EU’s growing reluctance to enlarge further. Surprisingly, opinion polls show that there are still more supporters for enlargement than opponents. The latest Eurobarometer results from December show 46% in favour with 42% against. The ranks of supporters have been swelled by voters in the recently joined member states themselves who see the positive effect joining the EU has had on their countries. But in Germany, Austria, Luxembourg and France there is still a great deal of opposition to enlargement. Only 30% of Germans, 31% of Austrians, 32% of Luxembourgers and 34% of French voters are in favour of further enlargement, according to the 2006 Eurobarometer survey. A recent opinion poll commissioned by the German newspaper Die Welt found 53% of those polled were against Romania and Bulgaria joining and only 39% in support. But 48% said that the 2004 enlargement would benefit Germany.

Politicians in some countries have reacted to the public hostility with the French and Austrian presidents pledging referendums on any enlargement after Croatia.

It is clear that most of the unease being expressed about enlargement reflects particular opposition to Turkey’s eventual membership, even though this is at least 10-15 years away, possibly longer if the current political impasse over Cyprus continues. Opposition to Ankara’s entry is overlaid with general fears about immigration and the ability to integrate Islamic communities into western European societies.

EU leaders tackled the thorny issue of enlargement at their last summit in December, with several calling for close examination of the EU’s ability to absorb new members before any further enlargement takes place. The then Austrian chancellor Wolfgang Schüssel said that a pledge from the Commission to provide reports on the impact of future enlargements gave his country the power to veto any future expansion.

Yet the increasing public scepticism about enlargement fails to emphasise the successful aspects of the EU’s successive round of expansions in bringing political stability, the rule of law and market-based economies to parts of Europe devastated by war and suffering under oppressive regimes of the political left and right.

With the exception of Croatia, further enlargement seems hard to envisage at the moment. But any halt in taking in new members as a reward for political and economic reform would be a major strategic mistake which would only detract from the enormous benefits achieved, especially with the 2004 big-bang enlargement.

While the 2004 enlargement of the EU was imbued with the spirit of reuniting a continent divided by a century of war and ideology, this month’s admission of Romania and Bulgaria lacked a sense of historical justification and celebration outside the two countries themselves.