Montenegro is the first to test the EU’s new safeguards, with member states expected to reach a position as early as next week. But contrary to the other negotiating chapters, Podgorica is finding out that the safeguards, including the possibility of suspending voting rights, are non-negotiable.
The EU is discussing stronger safeguards for new member states, including the possibility of suspending voting rights, with Montenegro first in line. But candidate countries face a take-it-or-leave-it deal.
Last month, the European Commission proposed a 15-year probation period for newcomers, designed to allow swift action against those that violate EU values and the principle of sincere cooperation.
The proposal stems from requests by five of the EU’s founding members to draw lessons from the experience of Hungary’s Viktor Orbán, who for years blackmailed the bloc into concessions by wielding his veto over major decisions.
“When I mentioned this for the first time, I said: no new Trojan horses in the European Union. This was still before the elections in Hungary. Today I can say no more Viktor Orbáns,” Enlargement Commissioner Marta Kos told reporters presenting the measure.
There is only one catch: candidate countries have no say in these institutional safeguards. They must accept them as they are or walk away from the prospect of EU membership altogether.
For Montenegro, the most advanced candidate, walking away is hardly an option after well over a decade of investing massive administrative capacity, not to mention the political capital of pro-EU forces, in joining the bloc.
Yet changing the terms of membership at the last mile leaves a bitter aftertaste for Montenegrin officials, who are careful not to criticise the measures openly for fear of derailing the process.
“It was always the case. Safeguards were always a bit one-sided,” a senior EU official told Euronews on condition of anonymity.
Safeguards per se are not new: they featured in the accession treaties of Croatia, Bulgaria and Romania. But those covered potential breaches of economic, internal market and justice rules.
Now, drawing on Orbán’s experience, Brussels is discussing going as far as suspending a country’s voting rights. Here, too, there is a major difference from the rest of the accession process, procedural as much as political.
Normally, a chapter is opened once the candidate meets the EU’s initial conditions. The candidate then implements the required reforms and meets any interim targets and, once all requirements are fulfilled, the EU agrees to provisionally close the chapter.
This time, Montenegro is not asked to submit a negotiating position, nor to meet any targets beyond accepting what is on the table, making the safeguards effectively non-negotiable.
The Commission is currently preparing EU common positions under Chapters 34 and 35, including draft treaty provisions on institutional safeguards.
Last month, it sent a first draft of the safeguards to be included in Montenegro’s accession treaty to member states for feedback. The Irish presidency of the EU Council is now collecting governments’ views and aims to send a consolidated position at ambassador level next week.
Once EU countries finalise their position, which is more general on safeguards for candidate countries, the Commission is expected to reflect it in Montenegro’s treaty.
In other words, Podgorica’s best chance of influencing the outcome is to lobby member states: once the EU position is set, there will be hardly any way to move it.
Three issues dominate the debate: the measures the safeguard could trigger, such as suspending voting rights for the most serious offences; its duration, which candidate countries consider too long at 15 years; and governance, as the proposed decision-making method would give the Commission significant sway.
Some EU capitals are sympathetic to the candidates’ arguments and want to distinguish between the political demand for stricter safeguards and a legal text that can be enforced.
Italy, a member of the so-called Friends of the Western Balkans, has pushed for respecting the equality of member states and for safeguards that are proportionate and tailor-made for each candidate.
The Netherlands, by contrast, has championed no differentiation between EU hopefuls. But whichever worldview will eventually prevail is fully outside Montenegro’s hands.
Source: www.euronews.com
