Politico: model for Ukraine's accelerated accession in EU 'have been scuttled'
Kyiv • UNN
EU ambassadors stated that member states would not accept the 'membership first, then integration' model for Ukraine. This resistance blocks the model that the European Commission had been promoting for Ukraine's accession to the EU by 2027.
EU ambassadors stated at a meeting with the European Commission that member states will not accept the proposed "reverse enlargement" model for Ukraine, which envisages "membership first, then integration," and some indicated that the European Commission may need to rethink the central idea on this, Politico reports, writes UNN.
Details
"Ukraine’s hopes of accelerated European Union membership have been scuttled at a Brussels dinner, with EU ambassadors telling Ursula von der Leyen’s chief of staff that member countries won’t embrace the Commission’s controversial "reverse enlargement" proposal. The resistance effectively shuts down the membership-first, integration-later model the executive was pushing in a bid to have Ukraine join by 2027," the publication states.
As the publication notes, "this is another blow for Kyiv, as the EU is also trying to rescue a urgently needed financial aid package, which is delayed due to a standoff with Hungary."
"This was not a decision that the dinner participants made while waiting for their counter. Several key capitals had already agreed on their tough stance on Ukraine's accession to the EU before the dinner, where von der Leyen's influential chief of staff, Björn Seibert, outlined the European Commission's thoughts on the reverse enlargement mechanism," the publication notes.
Ukraine faces resistance to accelerated EU accession - Reuters03.03.26, 17:45 • 74758 views
As the publication indicates, "reverse enlargement" involves granting membership and then gradually building up privileges. This was one of four options circulated by the European Commission before Wednesday's dinner.
One diplomat called the atmosphere of the dinner "normal" but said the message from the capitals was sharp. "It's done. Reverse enlargement is going nowhere," another diplomat said shortly thereafter, "suggesting that Seibert may have to rethink the European Commission's central idea."
Four other EU diplomats firmly rejected "reverse enlargement" as a viable strategy for Ukraine - or any other country. "They created false hopes," one senior diplomat said. "Now we have to correct that and tell them: 'Well, actually, this reverse enlargement is dead from the start.'"
"The draft conclusions of the European Council on March 19, which have already begun to circulate, mention both the loan dispute and the enlargement debate. Previous drafts suggest that leaders are expected to support the bloc's traditional merit-based approach to accession at the next EU summit, which will strengthen the capitals' preference for the existing system. This will negate the European Commission's hopes for Ukraine's rapid accession," the publication states.
"We want to anchor Ukraine in the EU... but we cannot destroy our procedures and abandon the merit-based system," another diplomat said. "The point is to find a realistic way forward." As the publication notes, "realistic" here means something that takes into account the political interests of national capitals.
When asked why Seibert was at the ambassadors' meeting instead of Enlargement Commissioner Marta Kos, one diplomat joked: "We know that the European Commission has a pyramidal structure. Coreper doesn't want to waste time. He needs to talk directly to God."
Kos, meanwhile, was in Berlin on Wednesday, where she defended the need for new thinking on enlargement. The current model dates back to the accession of Spain and Portugal more than 40 years ago and was "designed for a stable, rules-based world that no longer exists," Kos said.
One senior EU official said that the issue of enlargement arose in Coreper largely "due to the fuss created by wild ideas." Nathalie Loiseau, an MEP, was equally direct, warning that such an approach risks creating "confusion in member states and frustration in candidate countries."
Regarding the loan
Another line in the draft conclusions of the European Council attracted some attention, the publication writes. In paragraph 9, leaders "welcome the approval of the loan by the co-legislators and look forward to the first tranche." "The wording is not even in square brackets - usually a sign that the wording is still being discussed," the publication writes.
"So... case closed? Hardly," the publication writes, referring to the pipeline dispute related to Hungary's veto on the 90 billion euro loan package for Ukraine, amid "reports that the EU is pressuring Ukraine to grant access to the pipeline for inspection - a key demand of Budapest."
"Behind the scenes, several member states also pressured Kyiv to grant inspectors access to the pipeline, but were refused. Ukraine insists that it needs time to assess the extent of the damage, several EU diplomats said," the publication writes.
On Tuesday, during a conversation between von der Leyen and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, the issue of the pipeline was raised, "although it is unclear how much pressure Brussels put on Kyiv." One EU official suggested that "the European Commission prefers to quietly pressure Ukraine on this, hoping to avoid public attempts to resume oil supplies, which would ultimately benefit Russia."