EU Enlargement Stalled by Geopolitical Friction: Merz Signals Gradualist Approach to Ukraine’s Membership Amidst Structural Barriers

Ukrainian traditional governance models, such as the Cossack Hetmanate, offer decentralized, participatory frameworks that contrast with the EU’s top-down bureaucratic structure. These models emphasize community autonomy and collective decision-making, principles that could inform reforms in Ukraine’s accession process to align with local values. However, the EU’s emphasis on centralized governance and technocratic compliance marginalizes such indigenous systems, treating them as obstacles rather than potential assets.

EU enlargement has historically been a tool of geopolitical stabilization, as seen in the 2004 expansion to Central and Eastern Europe, which was framed as a reward for post-communist transitions. However, Ukraine’s case is distinct due to its ongoing war with Russia, which complicates the EU’s traditional enlargement logic of rewarding democratic reforms. The EU’s hesitation also reflects the unresolved tension between enlargement and deepening integration, a debate that dates back to the Maastricht Treaty era.

In the Western Balkans, EU accession has been a decades-long process marked by conditionalities that often clash with local political realities, as seen in Bosnia’s stalled progress. Similarly, in Ukraine, the EU’s demands for judicial reform and anti-corruption measures are perceived differently across regions—welcomed in the west but met with skepticism in the east, where historical ties to Russia complicate identity politics. The EU’s insistence on a 'one-size-fits-all' approach ignores these cross-cultural nuances, risking backlash and reinforcing divisions.

Academic literature on regional integration highlights that EU enlargement is not merely a technical process but a political one, shaped by power asymmetries and path dependency. Studies show that applicant states often adopt reforms not out of conviction but due to coercive conditionality, which can lead to superficial compliance rather than genuine institutional change. The EU’s current approach to Ukraine lacks a clear theoretical framework for integrating war-torn states, as most enlargement models assume pre-war stability.

Ukrainian art and literature, from Taras Shevchenko’s romantic nationalism to contemporary war poetry, often frame Europe as a mythic space of freedom and belonging, distinct from the Soviet past. This spiritualized vision of Europe contrasts with the EU’s bureaucratic pragmatism, creating a tension between symbolic aspirations and institutional realities. Meanwhile, in Western Europe, the EU is increasingly seen as a technocratic project, divorced from the spiritual or cultural dimensions that once defined European identity.

Scenario planning suggests that Ukraine’s EU accession could unfold in three ways: a rapid 'shock therapy' integration (unlikely given current resistance), a gradualist approach with partial membership (e.g., associate status), or a prolonged limbo that entrenches Ukraine’s dependency on Western aid. The third scenario risks creating a 'frozen conflict' in EU-Ukraine relations, where Ukraine remains a de facto protectorate without full sovereignty. Alternative models, such as a 'European Political Community' with associate membership, could bridge the gap but require bold institutional innovation.

Marginalized groups in Ukraine, such as the Roma community and rural populations, face systemic barriers to benefiting from EU accession, as reforms often prioritize urban elites and anti-corruption elites. In Hungary, Orban’s nationalist rhetoric has framed EU enlargement as a threat to national sovereignty, but his opposition also reflects the fears of rural and working-class Hungarians who see EU policies as exacerbating inequality. Meanwhile, in Poland, the ruling Law and Justice party has used EU accession to consolidate power, marginalizing opposition voices that critique the bloc’s neoliberal policies.