Many countries in the Western Balkans are eagerly awaiting the start of procedures for their entry into the EU. But just these days, the Union building is cracking and in danger of exploding from the inside.
Following Brexit with the departure of the UK, now the fracture comes from Warsaw. Judges of the Polish Constitutional Court, a court placed under the direct control of the government with a controversial reform after its fifteen members were elected by Parliament precisely to approve the judicial reforms that the executive has promoted in recent years, have issued a decision through which they state that European legislation is incompatible with national legislation having priority. The issue concerns the creation of LGBT free zones in about a hundred Polish municipalities: areas where activities related to gender association activities are prohibited.
Brussels has called on the Warsaw government to abandon this new form of apartheid, which runs counter to European principles of freedom to display different sexual orientations. The court responded as stated earlier.
If one of the member States does not recognize the supremacy of European law, it can no longer be involved in judicial cooperation.
The consequence could therefore be Poland’s secession from EU integration on everything related to the “legal” plan: this is not a formal exit from the European Union, but Warsaw may certainly experience a situation different from that of other EU countries.
The reactions of the leaders of the Union have been very severe: “Our treaties are very clear. All decisions of the European Court of Justice are binding on the authorities of all Member States, including national courts. EU law takes precedence over national law, including constitutional provisions,” Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said in a statement, vowing to use “all the powers” at her disposal to ensure compliance with these principles.
European Commission spokesman Eric Mamer, however, did not specify what concrete actions could be taken, as the decision is currently undergoing an in-depth analysis. If the Warsaw executive did not agree to what was required, the Commission would launch a case before the European Court of Justice, which would most likely sentence Poland to pay a fine.
There is talk of activating the blocking mechanism for Poland for 36 billion euros, including loans and grants, required in the “Recovery Fund” Plan for recovery after the pandemic. The Warsaw Plan was presented on May 3 this year and is still being evaluated by the Commission, which, late in completing its analysis, made some observations on the independence of the country’s judicial system.
Brussels has other weapons available besides curbing the Recovery Plan. Most of the programs funded by the Union member States are subject to a regulation on common provisions, which would make it possible to block the flow of cash if one of the countries’ management and control systems were no longer considered effective.
It is not ruled out that this controversy will lead to the country’s exit from the Union. But no one believes that Poland can really leave the Union, nor that Brussels can really force it. The New York Times clearly writes: “Neither Warsaw nor Brussels has an interest in strengthening the hand in this fracture, and they will probably be happy with the start of tedious negotiations that will take many months or even many years”.
The Polish government may decide to procrastinate with the European institutions. A decision of the Court enters into force only when it is published in the Official Gazzette of the country. Since this is decided by the government, it can delay the publication of the decision for months, or even more.
Many prominent political analysts explain why even the ruling sovereigns do not intend to give up on Europe. First of all community funding. Poland is the country that has benefited the most so far, taking a figure equal to one-third of its unhealthy GDP. Since joining Europe, more than two million Poles have relocated to other member states, mainly Germany. EU membership actually corresponds to that of NATO, which represents for the Poles a guarantee against Russia’s historic threats against it.
On the other hand, European industries do not intend to give up the advantages of open borders towards a market of 38 million consumers who buy seventy percent of their goods.
Finally, according to all polls, eighty-eight percent of Poles absolutely want to stay in the European Union. Indeed, pro-Union street demonstrations are currently taking place in Warsaw.
This fracture from Warsaw comes together with the letter sent from Brussels by twelve EU member States (Austria, Cyprus, Denmark, Greece, Lithuania, Poland, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia and the Slovak Republic) seeking funding for walls to be built on the European borders of the Schengen area to stem the flow of migrants.
This request also provoked strong reactions from the leaders of Brussels who reiterated that the protection of borders is an indisputable right of States, but that the rejection of the principle of reception of asylum seekers is not acceptable.
The fact is that more than thirty years after the fall of the Berlin Wall, more than a thousand kilometers have already been erected in Europe: the equivalent of six times the old Iron Curtain.
In short, it seems that, within the continent, East and West are being divided again. If not from the walls, at the moment raised towards the outside of the Union, certainly from the liberal values that the former communist countries are simply unable to share.
The leader of the European sovereigns, the Hungarian Orban, in fact theorizes an illiberal democracy, what some have called otherwise democrature, in open opposition to the liberal one that underlies European principles.
The Visegrad Group (Hungary, Poland, Slovakia and the Czech Republic) increasingly appears to be a foreign body within the Union, interested only in safeguarding the EU funds with which its members support their economies.
In a context of this kind, it seems very unlikely that Brussels would really want to expand the Union to include the Balkan countries. A politically uncertain country like Serbia has great destabilizing potential, while Montenegro and Northern Macedonia are unstable within the country. Kosovo and Bosnia still look to the uncertain future.
At the last summit in Slovenia, European leaders reaffirmed their commitment to enlargement. But rumors are circulating that, during the dinner, they have shown little interest in following the admission procedures.
On the other hand, with so much internal tension and the resurgence of divisions between East and West within the Union, attracting other members who have converging ideas on democracy, civil rights and the rule of law does not seem to be a good idea.
After the summit, Slovenian Prime Minister Janez Janša spoke clearly about the Balkan countries’ impatience with Brussels:
“The European Union is the largest investor in the region. It is very important and appreciated. But in these areas, we have competitors. There are also China, Russia, Turkey. They too are coming with investments and are not conditioning them with anything. Europe, however, is conditioning them with European standards, rule of law, reforms and all this is good if there is a light at the end of the tunnel. But if the prospect of EU membership is not given, then I think we will start to lose this race, the battle of competition”.
Of all the Balkan candidates, Albania appears to be the most reassuring, due to the policy of absolute listening to European and American demands. But governments also differ on issues such as the functioning of institutions, the rule of law, the protection of civil rights, the rule of law and corruption, organized crime … the distance from Europe does not seem, in essence, less than that of Visegrad countries.
Read also: EU and lack of perspective for the Balkans
