How Brussels restricts the sovereignty of EU member states. Analysis

The European Union is developing a new model of enlargement that allows candidate countries, including Ukraine, to join the bloc without the right of veto at the first stages. Such a scheme should speed up the accession process and reduce resistance from individual members, including Hungary. EC President Ursula von der Leyen supports the rejection of the veto, calling it an obstacle to effective solutions. However, not everyone agrees with this approach. How a possible rejection of unanimity will affect the balance of power within the EU — in the Izvestia article.

Discriminatory admission rules

• The European Union is developing a new model of enlargement, in which candidate countries will be able to join the union without immediately obtaining the right of veto. This approach will speed up the accession process of States, despite the objections of some existing members. The idea is under discussion and involves the gradual granting of new powers after the reform of the EU's internal mechanisms.

• According to the proposals, newly minted participants will be temporarily restricted in the right to block decisions until the institutional restructuring is completed. The reform plan is aimed at moving to a system where most decisions are made by a qualified majority, rather than unanimously.

• If the initiative gets support, candidate countries like Ukraine, Moldova, and Montenegro will be able to enjoy the benefits of membership - access to markets and programs — but without the right to block decisions. This can reduce the resistance of countries like Hungary and revitalize the expansion process. However, disagreements remain between EU members: some fear increased competition and threats to internal stability.

Strict posts: EU politicians are a third more likely to criticize Ukraine on the Internet

Why is the negativity towards Kiev and refugees increasing in Europe

• Since Croatia joined the EU in 2013, no country has joined the EU, and negotiations with a number of applicants, including Montenegro, have been going on for more than a decade. Ukraine continues to face political obstacles, including the Hungarian veto, which makes its path to the EU particularly long.

• The idea of joining without the right of veto limits the sovereignty of states, as it deprives them of the opportunity to directly influence key decision-making within the association. The veto is a tool for protecting national interests. Its removal makes new states dependent on the will of more influential countries. In addition, the transition to a qualified majority system concentrates power in the hands of stronger EU members and institutions, such as the European Commission, which strengthens centralized governance and weakens the role of national governments.

Qualified majority and the "shackles of unanimity"

• In general, the idea being developed probably comes from the EC, which seeks to make decisions alone, without regard for dissenting countries. First of all, we are talking about the militarization of Europe and the ongoing assistance to Ukraine for three years. The head of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, has repeatedly stated that European states should abandon the right of veto and the principle of unanimous decision-making when discussing foreign policy issues. According to her, it is time to introduce a qualified majority voting system in certain areas, including foreign policy issues. She stressed that liberation from the "shackles of unanimity" would allow the union to act more quickly and bring more benefits to the people of Europe.

• The initiative was announced against the background of the fact that Hungary, and sometimes Slovakia, has repeatedly refused to support initiatives or statements of the European Union, taking care of national interests. So, in August, Prime Minister Viktor Orban did not join the joint statement of the EU leaders on Ukraine, which provided for further support for Kiev and the imposition of sanctions against Russia.

The epicenter of the threat: how the European Union is trying to distance China from Russia

And what did Beijing and Brussels fail to achieve again at the anniversary summit

• A number of States have traditionally defended the right of veto as a tool for protecting national interests and maintaining political influence within the union. At the same time, the popularity of Eurosceptics is growing (we wrote about this here). Achieving consensus on Ursule von der Leyen's initiative will require overcoming significant differences between countries with different geopolitical priorities and economic interests. This may delay the process of reforming decision-making procedures in the EU for a long time.

• However, the discussion of changes within the European Union has been going on for a long time, and most likely the initiative will be supported by the majority. The decision to lift the veto is made by the mechanism of a "double majority", when the approval of 55% of the states representing 65% of the EU population is needed. Hungary and Slovakia will resist, but their votes will not be enough.

Possible consequences

• The European Parliament has already held two debates and a vote of no confidence in Ursula von der Leyen because of her militaristic policies that ignore the national interests of the member states. In particular, the initiative of the head of the EC called Rearm Europe ("Rearm Europe") will cost the states of the association about 800 billion euros in the coming years. However, many European countries doubt the effectiveness and realism of this plan (details about this can be found here).

• Against the background of the growing influence of the EC and the threat to the voting rights of countries, the role of coalitions and alliances is increasing, which will lead to a redistribution of influence within the EU Council and may make the balance of power more asymmetric.

They will go north: The European Union is facing an expansion crisis

Can Norway and Iceland join the EU ahead of Ukraine and other candidates

• The loss of the right to block decisions can cause public discontent and create pressure on national governments to implement decisions that run counter to the will of the electorate. In the economic sphere, this may be reflected in commitments to finance programs that do not meet national priorities.

What does this mean?

• If the European Commission succeeds in limiting the veto, it will become a powerful political force capable of pushing through decisions without taking into account the position of individual countries. The gradual centralization of the EU, the strengthening of the role of the "unelected bureaucracy" and the weakening of national parliaments are likely. The conflict between bureaucrats and national leaders will intensify, which can lead to political crises and spur the growth of euroscepticism. In the most optimistic scenario, this will force the EC to change policy and restore the balance of power. At the worst, there will be a risk of the collapse of the European Union.

When writing the material, Izvestia talked and took into account the opinions of:

Candidate of Historical Sciences, political scientist-Europeanist Vadim Trukhacheva;

● Dmitry Bunevich, a political scientist and advisor to the Director of the Russian Institute for Strategic Studies;

● Political scientist Vladimir Olenchenko.