FLASH
Shkruar nga Florian Bieber, Nikola Dimitrov & Michael Emerson 
In the "Enlargement Package" of November 2023, the European Commission published an important new initiative of the Growth Plan to increase the readiness of the countries of the Western Balkans for membership in the European Union.
They have been proposed a financial aid of up to 6 billion euros for the years 2024-2027, depending on the fulfillment of the conditions that will be specified in the reform calendar.
Positive aspects
The idea that, in addition to increasing the readiness for membership, the advantages of membership should also be built in a progressive manner, instead of postponing everything until the moment of membership, is more than justified.
The burden of complying with all EU laws and policies is extremely heavy, and the time required to do so takes many years. Furthermore, full membership of the European Union has become increasingly illusory, contingent on the EU's parallel and politically challenging internal reforms, which have an uncertain outcome.
This puts a lot of pressure on the political capacities to support the process. Thus, the Growth Plan aims to create beneficial financial advantages progressively in parallel with negotiated packages of measures that increase compliance with EU norms and regulations.
It aims to provide these countries with tangible incentives to move forward with reforms. Also, this plan represents a move by the European Commission towards independent proposals to reform the enlargement methodology, especially under the heading of Phased Membership.
Furthermore, it makes a modest contribution towards closing the gap in terms of funds made available to member countries, as Croatia was vis-a-vis member countries. While its aim to contribute to greater economic compatibility may be overly ambitious, it can at least help bridge the gap between the six Western Balkan countries and their EU neighbours.
Weaknesses of the plan
This initiative has caused different reactions in the region. While the region's leaders welcomed the initiative at an informal meeting in late January in Skopje, North Macedonia, many analysts have sharply criticized it as an old gift in a new package.
The Growth Plan provides considerable additional funding for the region. However, as a recent opinion of the Court of Auditors points out, there is a risk that the conditions for this plan are not ambitious enough and they cannot be properly measured. In addition to the weakness found by the Court of Auditors, the proposal in its form has another serious obstacle.
The Growth Plan has no relation to the progress required by the official membership process, based on the opening and closing of 35 chapters classified into several groups. As presented so far, it looks like a separate path, parallel to that of the official enlargement methodology.
The European Commission can say that the successes in the implementation of the Reform Agendas of the Growth Plan can be perfectly adapted to the steps necessary to close the different chapters of the talks. But the processes are still only parallel.
The submission of the terms of the Growth Plan, even when formally agreed by the Commission to stimulate financial payments, according to the Commission's current proposal does not have a direct impact on membership negotiations for chapters and groupings with member states in intergovernmental conferences.
Correction of defects
These serious flaws should and can be corrected very easily. For example, the detailed conditions set out in the required Reform Agendas can be configured as commitments to increase the ratings of the specified chapters as seen in the Expansion Package reports.
More specifically, these voluminous reports summarize the current state of progress for each chapter in an assessment of readiness for membership on a 5-level scale: 1. Early, 2. Somewhat Early, 3. Moderate, 4. Good, 5. E advanced.
Thus, a given reform package would aim, in summary, to increase the ratings for chapters X, Y and Z from "Moderate" to "Good" and so on. While based on this, there will be a list of planned actions for each selected chapter, following the recommendations in the European Commission's reports.
This would create objective baselines for achievement under the Growth Plan, to influence the formal enlargement process. While EU member states would retain their power to decide on chapters and groupings, successes in the implementation of the Growth Plan would create at least a well-structured presumption in favor of consistent decisions by the Council, which today they are chronically overloaded with political considerations.
Without this link, the proposal would appear to be a replacement for the accession process, rather than an incentive for it, thus reducing incentives to focus on EU membership and weakening the political actors who are pressing for membership.
This should go with another long-overdue reform, that of achieving decision-making in the Council on chapters and groupings on the basis of qualified majority, instead of the requirement for unanimity, which currently paralyzes any decision-making.
The discretionary use of individual veto rights on matters unrelated to the Copenhagen criteria, as in the infamous case of Bulgaria's treatment of North Macedonia, compromises the merit-based nature of the accession process, destroying its conditionality and credibility. .
It diverts attention from the core of the process - reforms - both in the candidate countries and in the EU. The transition to a qualified majority in the intermediate stages is legally a simple matter to be decided by the Council, without requiring legislation, treaty amendment or ratification.
Note: Florian Bieber, professor of Southeast European history and politics at the University of Graz. Nikola Dimitrov, head of the Balkan Center for Constructive Politics and former Foreign Minister of North Macedonia. Michael Emerson, Fellow at the Center for European Policy Studies (CEPS), Brussels.
Lini një Përgjigje