It has been 11 years since the EU last expanded, welcoming Croatia as its newest member. For the rest of the Western Balkans, EU membership has remained an elusive goal—a promised land that feels farther away with each passing year. Progress toward joining the European family has been excruciatingly slow, and the prevailing sentiment is that membership is still a distant dream. In my view, this delay has dragged on far longer than the EU can afford to justify.
To put things into perspective, let’s look at the timeline. Historically, the shortest time it has taken a candidate country to join the EU was just 3 years—Finland applied in 1992 and became a member in 1995, while the longest wait was 14 years for Malta and Cyprus, both of which applied in 1990 and joined in 2004. Excluding the six founding countries, the average time to complete the necessary reforms and accession process stands at 9 years. Now consider the Western Balkans: most of the countries with official candidate status have already exceeded this average and as of 2024:
North Macedonia has been a candidate since 2005 (19 years)
Montenegro since 2010 (14 years)
Serbia since 2012 (12 years)
Albania since 2014 (10 years)
Bosnia and Herzegovina, a more recent candidate, since 2022 (2 years)
In fact, if we calculate the waiting period from the initial application dates, most countries have been waiting for over 15 years. Note that Kosovo is not included in this list, as it only holds potential candidate status.
This region is the EU’s unclaimed backyard—a black hole on the map with undeniable geostrategic importance. Its location serves as a crucial link to southeastern Europe, facilitating better transportation and faster trade routes to that part of the Union. The Commission has already signed an agreement to connect the trans-European transport network (TEN-T) with the Western Balkans, which, in addition to providing economic benefits, could also serve military and security purposes. Membership would also expand the EU’s market, unlocking untapped investment and economic opportunities for all member states. Albania, for example, has emerged as an unexpected prime tourist destination, overcoming its historically isolated status, and there remains substantial potential for investment in the tourism sector that EU members should capitalise on.
Beyond economics, accession would enable the EU to address unresolved or simmering ethnic tensions, preventing them from escalating into sources of instability and conflict, as seen in the 1990s. It would also strengthen the EU’s ability to enforce collective policies on critical issues like immigration and organized crime, challenges that have already tested the Union’s unity in the past and remain today. The Western Balkan route, for example, continues to be one of the main paths for immigrants to Europe. Despite the European Commission presenting an action plan for the region, the implementation of EU policies would likely be more effective if these countries were full EU members. All of this adds up to a stronger, more stable Europe overall. And yet, enlargement is not a top priority in the EU's 2024-2029 strategic agenda. The focus is on strengthening core values, enhancing security and defence, and boosting prosperity through innovation and green transitions. While enlargement is acknowledged, the emphasis is on progressing toward it, with a priority on reforming EU systems to manage an expanded Union.
Well, the EU must have assessed the potential for reforms in the Western Balkans and deemed them insufficient for membership at this time. Major reasons are the bilateral disputes that the EU lacks mechanisms to help resolve. Just look at the Greece-North Macedonia naming dispute that continues to stall North Macedonia’s path to EU membership even if it was supposed to have been resolved with the Prespa agreement in 2018. Corruption remains a significant issue, and there are examples of weak governance, such as Bosnia and Herzegovina, where the political system struggles to function effectively. Fellow commentator Triandafillidis notes in his article “...there is a deep connection between the Albanian political system and the criminal underworld” and so “Albania actually joining the EU is pointless at the moment.” The issue of "enlargement fatigue" is also a major factor. There are concerns about internal divisions created by differing national interests growing and making policymaking even more difficult. The new strategic agenda also mirrors the current competing priorities such as the war in Ukraine, internal reforms, elections, and climate policies.
However, the EU’s divided focus leaves room for other actors to exert influence. China’s activities are actively fostering corruption and reversing progress on environmental reforms. Combined with stricter reform demands compared to earlier enlargements, this approach is already hindering the process and fueling reform fatigue among Balkan citizens. Why not offer the benefits of EU membership earlier in the process? This would allow citizens to experience the advantages firsthand, sparking a genuine desire for EU integration. The EU must increase its visibility and constantly show the support it offers. Failure to act risks creating a vacuum that could be exploited and turn Europe’s backyard into a geopolitical battleground. It is not just about adding a single country but an entire region—one that is too large and too dissatisfied to be left to seek help elsewhere. Let’s stop moving the goalposts and instead offer as many carrots as we can.
Image: European Union
No image changes made.
Comments