Yet even in the best of times, expanding the E.U. to include Ukraine and others would be a complex, costly and politically perilous process. Trying to move that forward in the midst of war multiplies the difficulties.
Among the immediate challenges: An E.U. country, Slovakia, just backed the party of a pro-Russian populist in elections. Ukraine and its western neighbors have been arguing over the trade of grain. And Ukraine’s slow progress on the battlefield has raised fear of a frozen conflict — and increasing war weariness in Europe.
In a sign of how the needs of Kyiv may be slipping on the European agenda, this week’s gatherings have been partly overshadowed by the conflict between Azerbaijan and Armenia, tensions between Serbia and Kosovo and disagreement over how to address migration.
On the eve of Thursday’s talks, President Biden convened a call with key allies to reassure them that, yes, the United States still supports Ukraine, despite the fact that Congress passed a short-term government funding bill that did not include funding for the embattled country.
European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said Thursday that she is “very confident” of U.S. support for Ukraine. “What the United States is working on is the timing,” she said as she entered the venue in Granada.
European officials and diplomats have in recent weeks shrugged off questions about American support for Ukraine, insisting that Republican leaders will, in time, accept their theory that Ukrainian victory is core to U.S. interests, in part because of the message it sends Taiwan on territorial integrity.
But with U.S. politics in shambles after the ouster of House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, it has become harder for Europe to ignore the possibility of a shift in the country’s stance and what that might mean for Ukraine’s prospects on the battlefield and beyond.
In Granada on Thursday, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky acknowledged “the events in America — the political storm that is gathering momentum.” But he declared: “I’m confident in America. These are strong people, strong society, strong institutions, strong energy of democracy.”
He encouraged European leaders to push ahead, to embrace Europe’s “independent power potential,” while also working “to defend our values and our common space of freedom with the U.S.”
In meetings on Thursday and Friday, European leaders are considering how to bring more countries closer, including a potential expansion of the E.U. from 27 to more than 30 members, potentially drawing in Ukraine, Moldova and Georgia, as well as several countries in the western Balkans.
Joining the E.U. is a years-long grind. A prospective member’s entire political and legal system is studied, assessed and then slowly brought into compliance with a rather big rule book in Brussels.
A raft of countries — Serbia, Montenegro, North Macedonia, Albania and Bosnia — have been in membership talks for years. Turkey, which applied to join in 1987, remains a candidate, technically, despite the fact that its prospects look — at best — slim.
Over the past year, Ukraine has been working closely with E.U. officials to undertake reforms that would start to bring it in line with what is required. In December, the E.U. will decide whether to open accession talks with Kyiv.
The challenge in Brussels will be equally complex. The prospect of bringing in Ukraine and other new members has renewed questions about how the bloc runs at 27 members, as well as how it would run with Ukraine and others in the fold.
“It is vital that we contemplate the future dynamics of our Union, our policies and decision-making, among others, to ensure the EU’s continued success,” Charles Michel, president of the European Council, wrote in a letter to leaders ahead of Friday’s informal summit.
If Ukraine joined, it would become the E.U.’s fifth-most-populous nation and its poorest per capita by a wide margin, drawing subsidies away from other members.
A recent disagreement between Ukraine and its E.U. neighbors, including Poland, foreshadowed the challenge of one day bringing a major grain exporter into the single market.
Some also wonder whether and how the E.U. can welcome new members when it is struggling, very publicly, with current members like Hungary and Poland. In a much larger bloc, with more members and an even broader set of interests, what mechanisms will be available to deal with outliers?
“To me, it’s not only a question of what to do about the people that want to come in,” said Camino Mortera-Martinez, head of the Brussels office of the Center for European Reform. “It’s also what to do about the people who are in and not necessarily complying with rules.”
Then there’s the question of timing. Michel, the European Council president, has said he wants Europe to be ready for the new members by 2030. Some doubt that is possible.
“The target date of 2030 is not realistic,” said Teona Lavrelashvili a policy analyst at the European Policy Center, a think tank focused on European integration. “It’s political commitment.”
“I think it’s important to have the political commitment,” she continued, “but we should be careful not to over-promise. … We have to use this time to see what is feasible and what is not feasible.”
