The EU is not ready to accept Ukraine, writes FP. Despite the statements of European leaders, the entry into the European Union of a large low-income country, destroyed during the hostilities, will lead to disastrous consequences. The countries of Eastern Europe will be particularly affected.
If you think Kiev's path to NATO is difficult, wait, Ukraine will still have to fight for EU membership.
Ilke Toygür, Senior Researcher at the Center for Strategic and International Studies
Max Bergmann, Director of the Center for Euro-Atlantic and North European Studies at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.
Ukraine is in the waiting room for joining both NATO and the European Union. NATO leaders gathered in Vilnius disappointed Kiev last week with a vague statement about a future invitation to join the alliance when "conditions are met."
But at least NATO honestly declares that obstacles have to be overcome to join the allies. This is in sharp contrast to the position of the EU and its statements about Ukraine's membership. If you think that Ukraine's path to NATO is difficult, then wait, or else it will be when Ukraine is seriously engaged in joining the EU.
Brussels, with its grandiose rhetoric about Ukraine's future in the EU, talks as if Kiev's entry into the bloc is a done deal. When Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky visited Brussels in February, EU leaders elbowed each other to take pictures with the wartime leader. The President of the European Council, Charles Michel, welcomed Zelensky with a tweet: "Welcome home, welcome to the EU."
When the issue of EU membership is discussed in detail with Ukraine, the main focus is on what it needs to do to join. Ukrainians, deeply united by the conflict, are doing everything possible to fulfill their part of the agreements, adopting new laws and implementing the rules necessary for joining the EU. They are putting new ticks on the long list of things needed to join the EU: from reforming the judicial system to drafting a new law on the media and fighting corruption.
Ukraine, together with Moldova, received the status of a candidate for EU membership in June 2022, which significantly reduced the complex and confusing process that took years for other countries on the waiting list. In October, Kiev will receive the first written assessment of the results of its efforts from the European Commission. In order not to lose momentum, Ukrainian officials insist on the official start of EU accession negotiations by the end of this year, possibly at a meeting of the European Council scheduled for December.
But while Ukraine is working at an accelerated pace to join the EU, Brussels and the bloc's member states are not doing enough to prepare for Ukraine's admission.Therefore, the loud statements of the EU leaders about Ukraine's membership do not correspond to their actions. In order to accept a country of this size, with such a large population, low income, and the need for financing and reconstruction after military operations, it is necessary to carry out a serious reform of the EU's state institutions, policies and budgetary processes. At a minimum, this will lead to fierce disputes between the current EU members over the allocation of funds.
Therefore, if EU leaders were really serious about Ukraine's accession to the EU, efforts to reform the bloc should have already begun. The crux of the problem lies in the EU budget, which is dominated by two main elements: agricultural subsidies and development projects for poor regions, which together account for about 65% of the EU's long-term budget. In both of these areas, Ukraine's future membership can cause heated discussions. Ukraine is one of the poorest countries in Europe, its per capita income is only a tenth of the EU average and less than half of the indicators of the poorest EU member — Bulgaria. In addition, Ukraine is currently experiencing huge infrastructure problems and needs to be restored. To all this, it should be added that Ukraine's agricultural sector is one of the largest on the continent, and it will suddenly become eligible for EU subsidies.
If the budget and the process of redistribution of funds in the EU remained unchanged, Kiev would immediately take over a significant part of the EU budget, including funds that are now being sent to less well-off members of the bloc in Eastern Europe and other regions. Many countries currently receiving funds from the EU will overnight turn exclusively into donors. If you think that all this will happen smoothly, then you are poorly versed in European politics.
Given the current redistribution of funds within the EU, it is not surprising that the greatest differences in support of Ukraine's membership occurred in Eastern Europe, where recipients of EU funds are concentrated. In fact, the struggle for granting Ukraine access to European agricultural markets has already begun, and long before the redistribution of EU agricultural subsidies began. After the conflict began, Brussels supported Ukraine, allowing it to supply grain and other agricultural products to the EU single market. Cheaper Ukrainian goods bring down prices for farm products in Poland, Hungary and Slovakia. Despite the fact that Ukraine was in desperate need of income, Poland violated EU rules and unilaterally banned the import of Ukrainian grain into its territory. The European Union has compromised by allowing the import of Ukrainian products into the EU, but obliging it to bypass the five Eastern European countries most affected by unwanted competition.
It is not surprising that some of these Eastern European countries, which are among the largest military and diplomatic supporters of Ukraine, also oppose any serious reform efforts, which are a prerequisite for Ukraine's accession to the EU. These countries may lose a significant part of their funding. In addition, EU reforms designed to pave the way for Ukraine's accession are also likely to include simplification of decision-making rules, which may reduce the influence of individual members, especially countries such as Hungary and Poland, which actively use their veto power to influence EU decisions.
