The European Union’s Next Power Grab Disguised as Expansion

Marta Kos, the European Union’s enlargement chief hailing from Slovenia—a nation often rightly praised as the underrated Switzerland of the Balkans—recently took the stage in Zagreb. Addressing the Croatian Ambassadors Conference, she heralded what she termed a Helsinki Moment. The historical parallel refers to the post-Cold War era that ushered ten new countries into the bloc. Today, the European Commission is dusting off plans for a union of more than thirty member states. The prospective roster includes Montenegro as the current frontrunner, Albania, Moldova, Ukraine, and Iceland, which recently voted to resume its accession process.

Behind the lofty rhetoric of expansion lies a classic institutional maneuver. Kos advocates for internal reforms to make decision-making leaner. In plain English, this means eliminating the veto power of individual member states. Crucially, the Commission intends to push these structural shifts through without amending the foundational treaties. Avoiding treaty changes neatly bypasses the unpredictable process of asking national parliaments for their consent. It is a textbook move for an organization that consistently operates without genuine democratic legitimation, viewing national sovereignty as an administrative hurdle.

The blueprint also introduces rigorous democratic safeguards to prevent what Brussels deems democratic backsliding. Kos explicitly warned against admitting Trojan horses, echoing the anxieties of five founding member states who point to Viktor Orbán’s Hungary as a cautionary tale. By institutionalizing these safeguards, the EU risks creating a two-tier system where member states are treated unequally based on ideological compliance. Montenegro’s ambassador, Petar Marković, signaled that Podgorica could accept such measures if based on objective criteria, but objectivity is rarely a hallmark of this bureaucratic machine.

France and Germany are heavily backing a shift toward gradual integration, aiming to move away from an all-or-nothing approach. Candidate countries are already being offered early perks, such as access to the Single Euro Payments Area and the bloc’s energy grid. This accelerated methodology is heavily driven by the situation in Ukraine, as European capitals calculate that EU membership and security guarantees might be necessary in any future peace settlement with Russia. Kos argued that adversaries could exploit the long timelines of traditional accession, using political pressure to derail the process. Thus, the machine seeks to lock in new members faster.

Ultimately, the grand vision collides with the mundane reality of the Multiannual Financial Framework. Kos acknowledged the need for transitional measures to protect the bloc's budget, admitting that newcomers will heavily impact existing members. Integrating economically disparate nations will drain resources, yet the apparatus seems entirely willing to socialize the costs while monopolizing political power. The Commission even floated the idea of enhanced cooperation, allowing a smaller clique of nations to forge ahead when others hesitate—a mechanism previously used for the euro. It is a fitting summary of the modern European project: a select few driving the agenda, bypassing the rest, and expanding a top-heavy administration.

Written by Freya Stensrud freya.stensrud@alpineweekly.com