Tried to give a good summary:
European politicians continuously restate that EU enlargement is necessary for geopolitical reasons. But they have not yet managed to bring European societies on board to support this view.
A plurality (37%, on average) of the citizens in the six countries surveyed by the ECFR believe that Ukraine should be able to join the EU – and this often includes people who are aware of the negative consequences of such an event. It seems that the emotional support for Ukrainians is still strong and outweighs rational considerations
There is no other way to underline the EU’s commitment to enlargement as a crucial geopolitical choice than to give clear commitments to Ukraine and other candidate countries.
At this week’s summit, it is imperative that leaders do not shy away from alarmist language and tough decisions.They should open negotiations with Ukraine and Moldova, commit to necessary military support in 2024 and declare that the EU will prepare the next budget for enlargement.
The key measure of Ukraines victory, however, will not be the restoration of full control of its territory, but winning control of its future as a European, prosperous and democratic country. The EU is Ukraine’s only chance.
It is time for Europe Union 2. It is like a second onion-shell around Europe Union(1), but this time, only countries can apply that agree, that one or two small mini countries that have a dictator at their lead, are not able to veto the whole others. All the big players are in (DE, FR, IT, ES, etc.) and Ukraine can join us in EU2 without the problems of EU1 where dwarf-states with their dwarf-leader with their dwarf-brain can veto the wish of the others. In 2050 we can make even a EU2.1 and let Georgia, and Kazakhstan join EU2.1, no problem. Some countries will still run EU1 and will never upgrade and will never gain the new features and allocation formula of the 2.1 Member countries, but its their own fault if they wish not to upgrade. Let us not get hold back because of backward compability and errors from the v1.0 Version but keep developing! Want to veto the entrance of a new Country to EU2? To bad, your never became part of EU2 and are still running EU1. EU2 decided to let them join EU2. EU Plus - it’s Double Plus Good. All the great features of EU1, but with modern features and without the bugs. Get excited for “EU3 Fortnite”, where only People under the Age of 50 can make resolutions and laws as it is their time now to live and to decide how to shape the future and not some geriatric folks that will die anyway in 10y and does not get affected their whole life by those new rules. Out now: EU3.2 with Microtransactions - UK wants to get back in, but wants to keep the Pound Currency? You can! We do not care if you want to continue showing colonial slave traders (queens) or Pedophiles (princes) on your paper-strips. For a small payment of 3.000.000 EUR per month, you can keep your own currency. With the new EU3.3 Season Battle Pass, you can even join, discontinue and rejoin any regional- or global war at will without a penalty for leaving a game early. Join a war whenever you feel like!
Europe already has a pretty complicated Euler diagram going on.
That’d be another oval.
EDIT: And that’s actually a pretty small subset of existing groups. If you include stuff like all the intergovernmental military integration initiatives, it gets much more-complicated.
Need to move the UK to outside the diagram :(
Can’t have enough ovals
Put me down for a pre-order. Thanks.
The problem with the vetoes could be solved if the proposed reform (to abolish the unanimous requirement) pass.
You know who will block that it will pass: Those fringe authoritarian states. It can not be solved. It is actually like asking them “hey, you cool with losing your veto power that you abused in the last decade because you are a russian puppet?”. Orban will never put a knife in his own back by giving up the crippling power he has over the EU. It is all he has.
You know who will block that it will pass: Those fringe authoritarian states.
It is a possibility, but I am not sure about it.
It can not be solved. It is actually like asking them “hey, you cool with losing your veto power that you abused in the last decade because you are a russian puppet?”. Orban will never put a knife in his own back by giving up the crippling power he has over the EU. It is all he has.
“Hey, you cool losing 5 billion Euros from EU ? If not please approve the reform”, that is how it will be sold to them. And they know that they cannot refuse the money and I am sure enough that they will think that they can use the new voting system to their favour.
Expanding is one option, but honestly strengthening current deals with EU countries would also be wise.
Getting UK back would be a lot less work and more valuable.
Getting UK back…
But that is not up to the EU now, is it?
Politics will always be about public opinion. You can sway that, and my point is that the work needed to be done to show the great things EU accomplishes right now to the UK audience, is less work than getting another member state the UK may not like.
And I’m not saying they should lie or anything, but I’m sure if people actually knew how EU is protecting consumers and ‘normal’ people, everyone would be much more positive about it.
if people actually knew how EU is protecting consumers and ‘normal’ people, everyone would be much more positive about it.
Yes, I agree.
But I’m not sure anymore where you are coming from with your UK thing. You do know what happened and why the Brexit happened ? The public was swayed by UK politicians to believe that being outside the EU was in their interest and so on.
Added: 1st paragraph.
In the author’s opinion the EU shouldn’t shy away from future enlargement, especially as a signal to Putin and as a commitment to EU’S goals for continued peace and stability. It seems he’s advocating for a multi-speed Europe to crrate a passby for the problems with the much needed (Con) Federation reforms. Yet, these problems come forth via our democratic platforms and they manifest a (political) disagreement, of how this enlargement should take place. And yes, we mustn’t be bullied by malcontent speakers, who are usually being opportunistic. Imo, both agendas are relevant, and one cannot be without the other.-
This is the best summary I could come up with:
For EU leaders, there is pressure to open accession negotiations with Ukraine and Moldova and agree a €50bn package of financial help for Kyiv – and they would be well advised not to underestimate the gravity of these two decisions.
As a new opinion poll shows, large numbers of European citizens believe that Ukraine’s membership of the EU would undermine (45%, on average) rather than strengthen (25%) Europe’s security.
The results of the survey – conducted in six EU member states (Germany, France, Denmark, Poland, Romania and Austria) by the European Council on Foreign Relations – are sobering, and a warning.
The worry that accepting new members could drag the EU into conflicts appears to be greater than the conviction that their membership would insulate Europe from Russian or Chinese influences.
A plurality (37%, on average) of the citizens in the six countries surveyed by the ECFR believe that Ukraine should be able to join the EU – and this often includes people who are aware of the negative consequences of such an event.
This would help ensure that, by 2028, candidate countries that have fulfilled the EU’s requisite criteria and accepted a strong rule of law conditionality will, at the very least, enjoy the financial and economic benefits of integration.
The original article contains 1,023 words, the summary contains 211 words. Saved 79%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
