As part of our activities in the framework of the InvigoratEU Expert Hub on EU Enlargement, on 24 March 2026, Barcelona Centre for International Affairs (CIDOB) and the Institut für Europäische Politik (IEP) organised the group’s fourth closed-door meeting with the support of TEPSA and Carnegie Europe. The meeting took place under the Chatham House Rule.

About the Expert Hub on EU Enlargement

The InvigoratEU Expert Hub gathers an exclusive group of distinguished EU and national policy-makers and civil servants from the European Commission, European External Action Service (EEAS), European Parliament, Council Secretariat, Permanent Representations and current/upcoming Presidencies of the Council of the EU, who work on EU enlargement and related issues.

It is created in the framework of the Horizon Europe project InvigoratEU – “Invigorating Enlargement and Neighbourhood Policy for A Resilient Europe”, which sets out to explore how the EU can invigorate its enlargement and neighbourhood policy to enhance Europe’s resilience.

Between 2024 to 2026, TEPSA is organising a series of closed-door discussions to bring together Expert Hub members and researchers from the InvigoratEU project. These meetings provide a forum for a structured dialogue about key research findings and policy advice on EU enlargement. Selected members of the Expert Hub are invited to each meeting based on their specific expertise and its relevance to the topics discussed and can provide feedback and insights into the research process.

Objectives

The European Union is at a crossroads. Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine has triggered a shift in European thinking and revived the enlargement process that had been stagnating over the last two decades. The geopolitical logic, driving this new momentum of the EU enlargement process, currently seems to trump the logic of modernisation, which underpins the accession criteria established in Copenhagen in 1993.

At present, in its geopolitical awakening, the EU has opted to reactivate its prime instrument of regional influence – access to the EU members ‘club’ – rather than explore other association alternatives. By doing so, and by proposing accelerated integration timeframes, the EU is giving greater weight to the geopolitical factor in its relations with the Western Balkan states and the Association Trio (Ukraine, Moldova and Georgia).

This workshop aims at developing a set of visions for the EU’s political agenda towards the countries of the Western Balkans, and the Association Trio. Víctor Burguete, Senior Research Fellow in the area of Global Geopolitics and Security at CIDOB (Barcelona Centre for International Affairs), presented the main drivers affecting EU enlargement identified in the project, including public opinion, politics, economics, social and demographic trends, security concerns, external interference and bilateral disputes. After the focus group and plenary discussion, Dipl.-Pol. Julian Plottka, Scientific Senior Project Manager at IEP Berlin, provided concluding remarks on the visions for the EU’s political agenda towards the region.

Key takeaways:

• Enlargement is a key strategic security imperative, in the face of reports identifying potential Russian aggression also targeting some Member States in the coming years. Not integrating the candidate countries would increase future risks, as by 2035, Europe may face a broader crisis context, also within NATO. This should push the EU to strengthen its own capabilities, resilience, and defence, but will also require a deeper understanding of joint security between Member States and candidate countries.
• When it comes to bilateral disputes in the Western Balkans and the Eastern Partnership, the success of the enlargement process itself could help decrease the significance of existing conflicts, as in the case of Transnistria.
• Public opinion is essential both in the candidate countries as well as within the Member States, and more should be done to communicate the benefits of enlargement to EU citizens. There is a need for a more coherent approach to strategic communication, also from the side of EU institutions. 

While the process should remain merit-based, to achieve our collective goals by 2035, a two-tier accession model or transition period could be considered, given that full compliance with all requirements may not be immediately feasible for countries like Ukraine, fighting for their survival.

Overall, credibility and political will remain the key to moving the process forward, not just by 2035 but already by 2028. Montenegro’s positive example could be crucial in maintaining momentum in the region, while Iceland’s accession could strengthen support for enlargement in the Member States.