‘Twilight membership’ sparks fears of new divisions in the EU

It is not just Europe’s air passengers who have been left in a state of uncertainty on learning that Bulgaria’s aircraft cannot be trusted enough to benefit from the European Union’s single market. The European Commission’s pre-Christmas announcement underlined that the EU has moved into entirely new territory with the latest enlargement - not just geographically, but in the Union’s underlying philosophy.

For 50 years, the assumption has been politely maintained that all member states are equal and deserve equal treatment. For 30 years, enlargement has functioned on the premise that once a country has qualified to join the EU, it becomes, on accession, an equal member.

The arrival of Bulgaria and Romania has changed all that. Bulgaria’s aircraft have not been ostracised under the routine procedures the EU uses for sanctioning non-compliance by a member state. The limitation was imposed under a new regimen: a complex damage-limitation mechanism that the EU25 equipped themselves with in advance of becoming the EU27.

Aviation was the first victim of these "co-operation and verification mechanisms". But this new armoury contains plenty more protective devices against Balkan contamination - unlimited in time and particularly focused on corruption and organised crime. The new arrangements threaten to consign Bulgaria and Romania to a form of twilight membership, in which they remain subject to a perpetual probation.

Although these revolutionary mechanisms were agreed upon months ago, there is still surprisingly little clarity over the way they will be used. It is far from obvious whether they are aimed principally at helping the new member states catch up, or at catching culprits red-handed. And there has been almost no reflection on the deeper implications of these new arrangements.

At an operational level, the Commission’s secre-tariat-general has been put in charge since the start of 2007. It is responsible for co-ordinating the monitoring and verification that individual directorates-general (DGs) will conduct within their specific areas - which include policies as diverse as animal health, structural fund management and transport.

Catherine Day, the secretary-general, describes the mechanism as intended "to encourage further efforts from the side of Bulgaria and Romania so as to ensure their successful integration as EU member states". She told European Voice that the role of her services was "to ensure that this verification is done and to provide co-ordinated reports to the Commission, Council of Ministers and European Parliament". The first report, due in June, will be based on inputs from the DGs, including information from verification missions they decide to conduct, she said.

Questions have already been raised, however, over how far and fast DGs will be able to exercise these new responsibilities, particularly since their officials who were focused on enlargement issues have been redeployed since the accession.

Legal questions remain to be explored, too. There is as yet no consensus on whether to initiate remedial action under the EU’s normal infraction procedures, or to use the new defence mechanisms with their provision for much harsher sanctions, if member states so choose.

The member state consultation procedures are also undecided - although it has been agreed that continued reliance on the Council’s enlargement working group would too obviously perpetuate a second-class status for the two new member states. Member states’ representatives in Brussels are now discussing the creation of a specialised ad hoc working group and its role and its interplay with the Commission will need definition over the coming weeks. So too will the procedures for the EU25 to provide experts for the envisaged verification missions.

Some EU diplomats perceive disturbing political and psychological implications in these new arrangements. They wonder how seriously the Council will listen, for instance, to the justice minister of a country under formal and intensive scrutiny for deficiencies in its justice performance.

The Commission has issued reassurances about "business as usual" and presidency sources deny that the arrangements amount in any way to second-class membership. But the well-documented resentment about secondary status among the ten member states that joined the EU in 2004 - which were subject to far less stringent post-accession conditionality - is provoking some uncomfortable presentiments.

How deep, it is now being asked, will divisions run within a Europe with not just two classes, but with a new form of twilight membership too.

• Peter O’Donnell is a freelance journalist based in Brussels.

It is not just Europe’s air passengers who have been left in a state of uncertainty on learning that Bulgaria’s aircraft cannot be trusted enough to benefit from the European Union’s single market. The European Commission’s pre-Christmas announcement underlined that the EU has moved into entirely new territory with the latest enlargement - not just geographically, but in the Union’s underlying philosophy.