The enlargement of the European Union. Opportunities and threats

Enlargement entails both opportunities and threats for the European Union. The analysis of the threats reveals that the Union's strategy presents some deficiencies. These deficiencies should be corrected, because otherwise they risk bringing the EU to a halt as well as provoking negative reactions in public opinion, both in the Member States and in the candidate countries.

This enlargement will differ from previous ones, both quantitatively and qualitatively. From a quantitative point of view, the number of countries involved will be the biggest ever. From a qualitative point of view, several factors account for a major difference with previous enlargement waves. The revenue per capita of these countries is much lower than in the present Member States. The economies of these countries are still, in some aspects, in transition. Their experience with parliamentary democracy and decentralisation remains limited. Moreover, their accession is bound to generate new geopolitical problems. And finally, this enlargement wave will destabilise relations between big and small members of the European Union, as this wave consists mainly of small countries.

Enlargement presents undeniable opportunities, for both the candidate countries and the European Union. It offers a possibility to stabilise the region of Central and Eastern Europe, and to prevent the onset of various troubles, be they economic, environmental, ethnic or geopolitical. It also offers significant economic opportunities for both sides. Finally, it will enhance the global weight of the EU.

There are nevertheless potential problems. First, the enlargement requires a significant adaptation of various European policies, which already appear inadequate in the present context, notably the common agricultural policy (CAP), the economic and monetary union, the immigration and asylum policy and for police and judicial co-operation and the common foreign and security policy.

Second, the enlargement requires money. The structural funds and the CAP are the likely future battlegrounds in this respect. As the richer Member States stand to gain most from EU enlargement politically and economically, there is a more than convincing case for making them accountable for bearing the budgetary burden of EU enlargement. In turn, this makes the case for a fundamental reform of the CAP even stronger.

Thirdly, the enlargement requires a reform in depth of the institutions, which cannot in their present design bear such an increase in membership. The composition of most institutions should be significantly reduced, since the implementation of the original rules of the European treaties would lead to administrative obesity in an enlarged Europe. The traditional compromises (repartition of votes, veto) should be abandoned because otherwise they will create some kind of bureaucratic thrombosis.