dc.description.abstract | Since over a decade the EU is holding accession negotiations with the Western Balkan countries
and monitoring their compliance with the Union’s core values like democracy, the rule of law
and human rights. At the same time, its own member states, namely Hungary and Poland have
been seriously undermining these very principles. How does this affect the current enlargement
process? This contribution argues that due to systemic differences there are more chances at the
moment for the EU to uphold rule of law by its enlargement policy than by the mechanisms it
has at hand to deal with violations by its member states. Due to a more flexible approach, the
Commission constantly reviews its strategy and adapts it to the specific needs of the countries
and outer circumstances. A case study comparing the accession process of Montenegro, a
current applicant, and Slovakia, part of the Eastern enlargement in 2004, shows that today’s
negotiations and monitoring indeed are stricter, more diversified, and with an higher focus on
the respect for the rule of law. However, this change cannot be directly traced back to the rule
of law crisis, and thus needs further research to fully understand the Commission’s motivation
behind its enlargement strategy. | |