The Road to Brussels Goes Through Copenhagen
Georgia, Moldova, Ukraine, and their EU Applications
by Mario Martinez de Butron Garcia and Sofia Bertolaja
1. Introduction
The start of the Russian invasion of Ukraine on the February 24th impacted a multitude of areas, from energy prices to space cooperation. For the EU, it also implied considering applications for membership from three new countries: Georgia, Moldova, and Ukraine. All three of them had, in recent years, expressed an interest in deepening their collaboration with the EU, and, under the tripartite format of the Association Trio, they had started to prepare and coordinate membership applications to be presented in 2024.
Until now, the EU’s position on enlargement had radically shifted from its early 2000s optimism. If the Union rapidly expanded eastwards during that decade, its neighbourhood’s policy focus would then shift to incremental reforms and gradual alignment rather than immediate integration. In fact, the enlargement process in the Western Balkans had stalled in recent years, with Macron notably vetoing the start of accession negotiations with Albania and North Macedonia in 2019. Notably, North Macedonia’s accession path continues to be blocked (vetoed by Bugaria).
Yet the Russian Federation’s aggressive behaviour towards its neighbours has drastically altered the prospects in Eastern Europe and the South Caucasus. In Moldova, Russia supports the Russophone Transnistrian separatists. Against Georgia, an invasion was launched in 2008, with 20% of its territory occupied since. And in Ukraine, the latest invasion follows after 8 years since the illegal annexation of Crimea and the war in Donbas. For these countries, whose territorial integrity and even sovereignty are under external threat, EU membership is now, more than ever, a central priority.
Consequently, Ukraine presented its formal membership application for the EU on the 28th of February. Moldova and Georgia followed suit doing the same on the 3rd of March. These three states were already partners to the EU’s Eastern Partnership and European Neighbourhood Policy and also coordinated their policies, both through the Association Trio format and via other shared organisations such as the GUAM Organisation for Democracy and Economic Development (also including Azerbaijan). Soon after presenting his country’s application, the Ukrainian president called for an accelerated acceptance into the EU due to his country’s situation, a request backed in an open letter by the leaders of Bulgaria, Czechia, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Slovakia and Slovenia.
However, such a move has been rejected by other members, with the Spanish foreign minister Jose Manuel Albares cautioning that before attaining membership, candidates must “meet certain social, political and economic standards”. These evaluation criteria he refers to, commonly known as the Copenhagen Criteria, were agreed upon by EU members in 1993, shortly after the end of the Cold War, and chart three areas of reform prior to admittance into the EU, namely, institutional respect for human rights, the existence of a liberal market economy, and legal homogenisation and alignment. Thus, this article shall analyse where each of these three countries stands in relation to these criteria, hence what their route towards EU membership could potentially be like.
2. First Criteria
Before becoming a member of the EU, each nation is subjected to inspections and checks based on its political requirements. The “Copenhagen Criteria” are a political criterion that determines a country’s preparedness to join the EU. In addition, the European Council set unique requirements for EU membership in 1993 in Copenhagen: “The candidate nation asking for EU membership should have solid institutions that ensure democracy, the rule of law, human rights protection, and respect for minorities”, according to the Copenhagen Summit resolution.
Usually, after a nation has passed through the “transition” phase of democratic reform and has established itself as a “consolidated democracy”, a democratic breakdown is unlikely. As a result, reaching the stage of solidified democracy is an essential milestone in the post-communist reform process and one that is undoubtedly in the EU’s best interests.
2.1 Georgia
Georgia is struggling to achieve its own goals, such as the establishment of democratic institutions, the development of faultless election systems, and the independence of the media and legislative systems to join the EU.
The subject of Russia comes up while debating its EU membership. Russia will make every effort to prevent Georgia from joining the Union. Nevertheless, Georgia should continue to adopt democratic changes and reforms addressing social and economic issues. Achieving EU standards will take years, but it is well worth the effort for the country to make a space for itself in the global economy.
2.2 Moldova
After one week that Russia had invaded Ukraine, Moldova formally sought membership in the EU. Moldova’s President Maia Sandu said that the country had signed a request to join the EU.
“We want to live in peace, prosperity, and be part of the free world,” she said. “While some decisions take time, others must be made quickly and decisively, taking advantage of the opportunities that come with a changing world.” (4th March 2022)
Moldova is a young democracy that has inherited much baggage from its Soviet past. Its state institutions are still politically subordinated and not impartial and independent. The early parliamentary elections demonstrated the necessity for fundamental institutional and regulatory adjustments. The confidence vote granted to a pro-European party is immensely symbolic. It demonstrates a shift in the political worldview of the Moldovan electorate and an intense yearning for change. It is impossible to predict if the commitment to change and reform will bear fruit. Particular is that, for the first time, the Moldovan people voted anti-corruption and anti-system. The system, on the other hand, is opposed to the change. It is not enough to make structural adjustments to attain some level of success. People’s mentalities must be changed, which is a process that takes more than four years.
2.3 Ukraine
Nations that began the reform process after the Soviet rule were those in which the opposition was strong enough to win the first democratic elections. However, unlike countries that began reforming after communism fell, Ukraine’s former communist nomenklatura pursued a policy of partial reforms, despite having a significant number of seats due to the “founding” elections of 1990 and having one of its representatives elected president in 1991. As a result, the anti-communist opposition did not achieve a majority as it did in the Baltic nations.
Moreover, democracy can only be safeguarded if the game’s rules are universally understood and cannot be broken. However, political unanimity has always been a challenge in Ukraine. This refers to the inability of parties to work together and the absence of broad cross-party consensus. The so-called Universal of National Unity breach is a good illustration of the failure to reach a broad cross-party accord. This statement, adopted in August 2006, was a significant attempt to articulate the primary aims of Ukraine’s state-building and change, as agreed upon by key political players.
3. Second Criteria
The economic criteria of Copenhagen demand a free, liberal market economy, the rule of law, macroeconomic and fiscal stability, human resources, physical capital, the development of small and large businesses, central bank independence, legal inflation levels, and national currency stability.
3.1 Georgia
Georgia has enjoyed a remarkable development record over the last decade, supported by careful economic management. Growth averaged 4% per annum between 2011 and 2021. The poverty rate measured by the international upper-middle-income line declined from 59% in 2011 to 42% in 2021. Nonetheless, critical structural difficulties persist most notably low productivity and the need to produce high-quality jobs. Many Georgians still live in rural areas and work in low-productivity agriculture. Human capital indicators remain deficient, with low learning outcomes and a lack of links between education and private-sector demands.
Furthermore, Georgia’s commercial openness and reliance on tourist income render it vulnerable to external and global shocks. High dollarization and a continued reliance on foreign savings heighten dangers. Nonetheless, Georgia’s economic institutions have grown in maturity and resilience in the epidemic’s aftermath.
In Georgia, the GDP per capita is around 3120 euros. However, in Europe, it reaches up to 19,000 euros. It implies that the country’s rapid economic development is even more critical. Building democratic institutions is essential to the country’s prosperity. However, certain political groups and leaders continue to postpone the country’s growth.
3.2 Moldova
Despite a robust economic performance over the last two decades, Moldova remains one of Europe’s poorest countries. Although a growth paradigm based on remittance-induced spending has resulted in strong growth and poverty reduction, it had become less sustainable even before the COVID-19 epidemic.
The pandemic, the energy crisis, and, most recently, the refugee crisis all highlighted this growth model’s vulnerability to shocks. Moldova is expected to be one of the most impacted nations by the crisis, not just because of its geographical closeness to the conflict but also because of its inherent vulnerabilities as a tiny, landlocked economy with close relations to Ukraine and Russia.
As economic activity shrinks due to war-related shocks and the ongoing effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, the government must find ways to mitigate the economic impact while maintaining momentum on the long-term agenda. Therefore, short-term recovery measures must be accompanied by long-term changes that will help lead the economy away from the existing economic paradigm at this stage in the economy.
3.3 Ukraine
Ukraine’s modern economy grew as an extension of the Soviet Union’s bigger economy. Despite getting a lesser share of the Soviet Union’s investment money and producing a higher proportion of items at a lower fixed price, Ukraine could produce a more significant fraction of total production in the Soviet economy’s industrial and, in particular, agricultural sectors. A centrally planned transfer of money from Ukraine, totalling one-fifth of its national GDP, aided economic development in other countries of the Soviet Union.
However, during the late Soviet period, the Ukrainian economy was severely strained, and it declined dramatically early in the independence era. The majority of the people suffered greatly during a time of high currency inflation in the early 1990s. Despite initial optimism that Ukrainian economic independence would ease the country’s failing economy and living level, the country has entered a period of severe economic deterioration. As prices soared dramatically, daily life in Ukraine became difficult, particularly for those on fixed incomes. Ukraine has established some economic stability by 1996. Inflation has been brought down to tolerable levels, and the economy’s slide has slowed significantly.
The economy finally began to expand around the turn of the twenty-first century, thanks to stronger relations with Russia. As a result, in the early twenty-first century, many young Ukrainians sought employment opportunities abroad. Even though such movement occasionally resulted in localized labour shortages inside Ukraine, remittances from the Ukrainian diaspora contributed to around 4% of the country’s GDP.
4. Third Criteria
As a union of 27 member states, a degree of legal convergence and regulatory harmonization is necessary for the EU’s efficient functioning. Each state still maintains its own legal framework, but efforts are to be made to ensure compliance with broader European law. Besides, sharing norms and regulations leads to a less complex, more integrated Europe, easing trade and commerce.
Thus, the 3rd Copenhagen criterium calls upon candidate states to align their own legal systems to the EU legal framework to ensure a smooth integration, thus maximising the benefits of joining the EU both for the joining country and the other Member States.
4.1 Georgia
The alignment of Georgia’s legal system to the EU’s norms and regulations has principally been achieved through the 2014 Association Agreement between both parties. The document’s main achievement was the establishment of a Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area, designed to better exploit the synergies between the European and Georgian markets. Beyond the trade area, however, many other regulatory aspects were covered over its 432 articles. Including areas as diverse as environmental protection, the homogenisation of products’ geographical indicators, consumer protection or healthcare provision.
The last Implementation Report on the agreement, dated from 2021, noted Georgia’s commitment to the European project and highlighted the high degree of convergence achieved in numerous sectors, with special reference to the sanitary response to the Covid-19 pandemic. Nevertheless, it identified judicial independence, and low levels of trust in the country’s judiciary system, as significant areas for improvement. While full legal harmonisation of norms is a relatively long and formal process, these shortcomings in Georgia’s legal system are more worrying and could delay its accession until properly addressed.
4.2 Moldova
An Association Agreement was also concluded between the EU and Moldova in 2014. In terms of content, its provisions mirrored those contained in the Georgian one, including the establishment of a free trade area. Its implementation, however, progressed at a much slower rate, especially since during Igor Dodon’s presidency (2016–2020), closer ties with Russia were favoured over EU integration. As a result, the application of the agreement’s commitments advanced slowly when not simply stalling.
Consequently, the EU’s 2021 Implementation Report noted a backsliding in terms of accountability, reform and regulatory homogenisation during the Dodon administration, though acknowledging a decided change of course in 2021, after presidential and parliamentary elections resulted in a change of administration. The incoming Moldovan authorities, however, face a number of challenges. Among them, is the need to reform its judicial system, strengthening its independence and transparency, while improving its legal framework to tackle malaises such as corruption, fraud and organised crime.
4.3 Ukraine
Few international treaties have been as pivotal for the history of Ukraine as its Association Agreement with the EU, also signed in 2014. After years of negotiation, Ukrainian president Viktor Yanukovych’s refusal to proceed to its signature, instead advocating for integration into the Russian-led Eurasian Economic Union, sparked the Euromaidan protests. Since then, both the Poroshenko and Zelensky administrations have been decidedly pro-European, with EU membership being a central axis of their legislative agenda.
In spite of the challenges faced by the Ukrainian government in the years since, most notably the war in Donbas, it has managed to achieve solid progress. Reforms have been made in areas such as energy, where decreasing dependence on Russia was also a domestic driver, the banking system, or land ownership. Significantly, better coordination among anti-corruption state agencies and the judiciary system has strengthened the tools to tackle this issue, although the overall number of convictions remains low.
Wartime pressures have forced Kyiv to adopt a series of necessary measures in areas as the distribution of arms and price caps. Vital as they are, they run counter to the spirit of Copenhagen and would require either a waiver by European leaders or a swift addressing once the invasion is over.
5. Conclusion
Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine are currently on their way to European integration. Despite having proven their commitment to the European project, the three countries still need to fulfil the criteria established in Copenhagen. What is more, it is also noteworthy that a country’s control over its sovereign territory is also a requirement for joining the EU. Given that all three countries have part of their territory controlled by either Russian-supported separatists or the Russian Federation, this could potentially hinder the trio’s applications. However, Cyprus’ accession in 2004, which formally encompassed the entire island bus suspended the acquis communautaire’s application in the North, could provide a way to bypass this problem.
Due to the rushed nature of their applications, originally planned for 2024, areas of improvement still remain. More specifically, Georgia would need to work more on the first criteria and improve its democratic practices. Parallelly, Moldova’s government would need to bolster economic growth and reach the pre-established GDP target required to be part of the Union. Meanwhile, Ukraine will need to rebuild its social, economic, cultural and political structures once the grave situation it currently traverses is over. Overall, the trio are decidedly moving toward EU integration and is implementing ambitious reforms to materialise it, but they all face several obstacles across different areas.
