1

Josh Munro

“Asses the broad implications of EU enlargement for the future

functioning of the EU?”

On the 1st of May 2004 10 new countries will join the EU bringing the
number of member states up to 25. Most of these countries are Central and
Eastern European Countries (CEEC’s). The list of countries joining is as
follows, Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Slovenia, Latvia,
Lithuania, Estonia, Cyprus and Malta (Osborn 2002).
Although not for the first phase of EU enlargement this phase seems to
be the most daring. This enlargement will nearly double the size of the EU
from it current 15 member states. For many reasons one being that they are
former communist countries that were once perceived as enemies of the
‘community values’ of the EU that are now being perceived as our European
partners. Although this latest stage of EU expansion is the most daring their
has been much work between the EU and the soon to be joining member
states to accommodate these states and to keep the functioning of the EU
running smoothly.
Due to these countries undemocratic political institutions and poor
economic conditions hitherto, the EU set out criteria that must be fulfilled if
any country wants to join the EU. These conditions were outlined in the
Copenhagen summit of 1993(See Appendix). The main features include
Democratic and accountable political institutions, Judicial system, protection
for minority groups and liberalised economies. Further developments to aid
the accession of incoming member states were aid programmes such as
Poland, Hungary: Actions for Economic Reconstruction (PHARE). (Falkner
and Nentwich (2001), in Richardson (2001))
So what are the implications of EU enlargement for the future
functioning of the EU? First of all the institutional infrastructure of the EU will
need to be altered to accommodate this enlargement. The near enough
doubling size of the EU will put considerable strain on the existing EU
institutions. Examples of this are the European Parliament (EP) and the
 2

Commission. If no alterations were made there would be a parliament with

850 MEP’s and the commission would be too large if we gave the ascending
states a commissioner each. (Falkner and Nentwich (2001), in Richardson
(2001))
A further implication of EU enlargement is the problem of how to make
decision-making procedures effective. With such diverse countries joining the
EU it will be extremely difficult to get a unanimous agreement on decision-
making issues. This has led to the increased use of QMV rather than the
national Veto in the Council of Ministers. (Nugent (2003))
Thirdly the accession of these CEEC’s although opens up large
markets for the existing EU countries it also may incur many costs. First of all
the population of the EU will increase by 30% where as the GDP of the EU
will only increase by 5%. The countries coming in are less prosperous than
existing states and may strain structural funds with countries such as Greece,
Spain and Ireland loosing out. A second cost is with the already expensive
CAP. These countries have large and inefficient agricultural sectors. This
means that CAP will need to be further reformed. Along with this the
industries in these countries are outdated and if they fail to effectively
modernise their industries they will only add to the gap between these
countries and existing states. (Nugent (2003))
A fourth point is that although the EU will be a bigger player in external
relations it will also be harder for it to have a common strategy and united
stance in regards to external relations. The political culture and viewpoints of
member states will be far more divergent. This has many implications
especially in relation to common foreign policy. (Nugent (2003))
Final implications are involving languages of the EU. Although at this
moment in time there are 11 working languages in the EU, expansion will
mean there will be many more languages spoke in the EU. This will lead to
problems in translating documents to and fro many different languages. Also
with the deepening and widening of the EU where are the European
boundaries exactly would the include Russia as a possible candidate in the
future? (Falkner and Nentwich (2001), in Richardson (2001))
 3

So what institutional adjustments have taken place to accommodate

accession of these CEEC’s into the EU? Nugent (2003. pp506) outlines the
following changes:

- The commission, the EP the CoR all were given an upper limit
to what size these institutions can be.
- From 2005 and until there are 27 members each state will
have only one commissioner. (Nice).
- Allocations of votes in the council and QMV were set. (Nice).
- Extension of QMV to more treaties.

With all these problems and the efforts made to solve the problems
with accession why do member states want enlargement. One reason is that
the European internal market will be far bigger. Furthermore as many of these
countries are underdevelopment so they have much potential for investment.
The second reason why the enlargement is a good thing is for political
stability in Europe. It is very much in Western Europe’s interest that CEEC’s
have stable liberal democracies this is especially true with border countries
such as Germany, Greece and Austria.
The third main reason is a moral issue. Since the collapse of
communism the west feels it is a moral obligation to aid these countries to
become liberal democracies.
In conclusion we have learned that there is going to be much difficulty
in accommodating these member states within the EU structure. Although
many of the problems of Accession have been addressed and with
cooperation this further advancement of the European project can be a
success. Finally if this is successful we can expect a further advancement of
the EU with some Balkan republics and maybe even Russia in the future.
 4

Appendix

The Copenhagen criteria.

“Membership requires that the candidate country has achieved stability

of institutions guaranteeing democracy, the rule of law human rights
and respect for and protection of minorities, the existence of a
functioning market economy as well as the capacity to cope with
competitive pressure and market forces within the union. Membership
presupposes that the candidates ability to take on obligations of
membership including adherence to the aims of political, economic and
monetary union.” (European Council (1993) cited in Nugent (2003) pp.495)