Emmanuel Macron has often said it, and so now does Olaf Scholz: Without a reform of the principle of unanimity in the EU, no new members may join. On the other hand, while leaders like Jarosław Kaczyński or Viktor Orbán are keen to admit (certain) new members…
... Kaczyński does not want to give up Poland's veto right for the sake of 🇺🇦, nor does Viktor Orbán, who vehemently wants (Vučić's) Serbia to become EU member. If it were just about this or that politician, things wouldn't be that serious, as new leaders will come. But.
The conflict on whether the principle of unanimity in the EU should be reformed (abolished) or kept is about core interests of Paris, Berlin, Warsaw, Budapest, and other member states.
It is not foreseeable that the core interests of EU member states on the question of unanimity voting will change fundamentally just because new politicians come to power. The basic constellation remains the same.
Given these circumstances, does it make sense to pretend that EU enlargement, namely the inclusion of new full members with veto-rights, is realistic? Or is it not high time to discuss alternatives to full membership of the Western Balkans, Moldova and 🇺🇦? (more via F.A.Z.)
Loading suggestions...