Enlargement is a successful example of the EU’s soft power unifying nations peacefully to work toward common goals. It is the most powerful policy tool to extend the zone of peace, liberty and prosperity and to project Europe’s values and interests in the world. This path of peaceful unification continues now toward Southeast Europe.

Every enlargement has entailed voices of concern among the population. Also now many question the pace and scope of enlargement and some politicians have called for a definition of the ‘borders of Europe.’ We should bear in mind that Europe is essentially an intellectual and political project and therefore its borders are not a purely geographical concept. Moreover, we have taken the concerns regarding the enlargement seriously and that is why the EU enlargement policy is founded on three main pillars: consolidation, conditionality and communication.  
To avoid overstretching our commitments, EU enlargement policy today is based on consolidation, which means that we are cautious about making any new commitments, but stick to our existing commitments toward countries already in the process. Our consolidated enlargement agenda focuses on Southeastern Europe: Bulgaria and Romania, Turkey and Croatia, and the other countries of the Western Balkans.

The capacity of would-be members to accede is rigorously assessed by the Commission on the basis of strict conditionality. The last enlargement showed that conditionality combined with a credible accession perspective works by triggering needed reforms and improvements in the socioeconomic development of the countries. Our rigorous application of conditionality has already inspired some bold reforms in the countries of Southeast Europe.

The debate on enlargement

Democratic legitimacy is essential for the EU accession process. For any of its policies, including enlargement, the EU has to win the support of its people. That is why an informed, serious and responsible debate on future enlargements is needed. The recent Eurobarometer survey revealed that a majority of the people lack information on enlargement. Lack of knowledge fosters prejudices. Therefore both the member states and the EU institutions need to communicate the successes and challenges of enlargement better, address the real concerns and tackle myths with facts.

Recently there has been a lot of talk on the absorption capacity. This is determined by two factors: the transformation of the applicants into worthy member states, and the development of the Union’s policies and institutions.

Absorption capacity is about whether the EU can take in new members while continuing to function effectively thereby having economic, financial, institutional, democratic dimensions. It is a functional concept, not a geographical one.

To prepare the countries from the economic perspective, the EU has followed the successful examples of the last enlargement by continuing to establish trade-related agreements with the view to enhance economic development in the countries and to avoid any trade shocks once the countries become members. The EU Customs Union has stimulated Turkey’s bold economic reforms resulting in economic dynamism. In the Western Balkans, the countries have or strive for Stabilization and Association Agreements that cater for free trade. They are also negotiating a Regional Free Trade Agreement which paves the way for regional economic integration. Economic development also lays foundations for opportunities for an improved social development.

The functionality of the EU

To maintain the EU’s functionality we need an institutional architecture for an efficient, transparent and democratic Europe. Differentiated integration may be a way forward provided that it is anchored in the EU framework and open to any member state that is willing and able to participate in it.

We are living in a union of 25 countries with national differences, which entails both challenges and opportunities. The different visions enrich the policies we create. To have a homogeneous union is neither possible nor desirable. We can therefore continue to both deepen and gradually widen the Union, if we accept differentiated integration. It can help us to continue the success story of the EU, provided that enlargement is pursued as a consolidated and carefully managed process where rigorous conditionality is the guiding principle.

Before the next enlargement, a new institutional arrangement is needed, not only for the sake of enlargement but also for the sake of making the current EU function better, to better serve our citizens. We should focus on improving the immediate functioning capacity of the current EU, not only the more abstract absorption capacity in the distant future.

By revisiting the institutional settlement and reviewing the budgetary arrangements and common policies in 2008-9 we are actually suggesting a new policy agenda for the Union. Its main motive is Europe’s political reconstruction and economic modernization. But it will, as a spillover effect, also prepare the Union for the next enlargements.

This is a major challenge, but we have done it before, and we can do it again, if we have the political will.

This article was written especially for "The bridge" by Commissioner Olli Rehn.
Olli Rehn is a member of the European Commission, responsible for enlargement.
- Olli Rehn’s webpage