Strasbourg, 16/11/2005 (Agence Europe) - The debate held by the European Parliament during Tuesday's night session on the enlargement strategy presented by the European Commission on 9 November (EUROPE 9065) has revealed that the MEPs, and the political groups themselves, are torn between: - on the one hand, their desire to maintain a tangible European perspective for the Balkan countries, which may prove necessary to bring peace, democracy and reform to this region, which is crucial for the future of the EU; - on the other, the need to consolidate the EU after the wave of accession of 2004 and that planned for 2007 (Bulgaria and Romania), to apply very strict accession criteria and to seek the vital support of the citizens for any plans for further waves of enlargement. By way of introduction, Commissioner Olli Rehn once again ran through the main points of his document: enlargement is "one of the strongest political instruments of the European Union", the "soft power" by which Europe can move forward democracy and promote stability and economic prosperity, particularly in central and eastern Europe and in the Balkans. "The main element of our strategy is the consolidation" of what has already been achieved and of commitments already taken towards the candidate and aspiring countries, "but we must be very careful before we take any new commitments", Mr Rehn warned. The countries which are already on the road to accession must fulfil "stringent criteria", and communication with the citizens on the objectives and advantages of enlargement must be improved, the Commissioner added, reiterating the three "Cs" of his strategy (consolidation, conditionality, communication). On Turkey and Croatia, Mr Rehn simply repeated the main conclusions of the progress reports of 9 November: a mixed report for Turkey (with deficits most notably in the concrete implementation of reforms in the rule of law and human rights), and a more favourable report for Croatia. As for the Balkan countries, "our message is that the European Union is maintaining their accession perspective on the medium and longer term", but this is clearly conditional upon each of these countries (Albania, Serbia and Montenegro, Bosnia-Herzegovina and FYROM) respecting all the accession criteria, Mr Rehn pointed out.
Speaking on behalf of the EPP-ED group, the president of the committee on foreign affairs of the EP, Elmar Brok (CDU), acknowledged the "success" of the enlargement policy in terms of promoting democracy, stability and prosperity in central and eastern Europe, but he warned against any "automatism" in the continued process. After the accession of 10 new members in May 2004, the imminent arrival of Romania and Bulgaria and the opening of accession negotiations with Turkey and Croatia, the EU needs "consolidation", said Mr Brok. For the time being, the EU's general enlargement strategy is not sufficiently clear; however, it is extremely important for the EU and its citizens to know where the Union is going, he stressed. Mr Brok also called for the EU to think more about the possibility of allowing certain countries (such as Turkey) European perspectives which fall short of actual accession. Unfortunately, such initiatives are not to be found in the Commission's report, he said. Speaking on behalf of the PES group, Jan Marinus Wiersma of the Netherlands spoke in support of the Commission's policy based on the three "Cs". In the Balkan countries, it is, nonetheless, clear that enormous problems subsist (corruption, crime, democratic deficit, the functioning of the rule of law, economic problems, etc) and that only the countries themselves will be able to resolve these issues. All that the EU can do is to offer a European perspective and to set the framework within which these measures can be taken, but the reforms and working itself must be done on the ground, Mr Wiersma stressed. It is certainly incumbent upon the government and their populations to carry out the task of preparing for the strict standards of the EU, but it is important that from the word go, the citizens have the certain knowledge that their efforts and sacrifices will be rewarded at the end of the process, said UK Liberal Sarah Ludford. Her ALDE group colleague, Istvan Szent-Ivanyi of Hungary, voiced several expectations of the Balkan countries: that they leave the "tragic past" of the war behind them, that they hand Radko Mladic and Radovan Karadzic over to the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia in The Hague, that they establish genuine ethnic peace and step up their regional cooperation in order to prove that they are ready for future European integration. Dutch Green Joost Langendijk regretted the fact that too many EU politicians are hiding behind the concerns and fears of many European citizens about enlargement. In so doing, they are forgetting that enlargement has been one of the great success stories of the European Union, he said. We can no longer move backwards and the EU must prepare itself to welcome other Member States, but it goes without saying that these will have to fulfil strict criteria, said Mr Langendijk. His compatriot Camiel Eurlings (EPP-ED) also highlighted the absorption capacity of the EU: the consolidation of the Union before the last 10 new Member States arrived should have happened in 2000 with the Treaty of Nice; however, we prepared the EU insufficiently while going ahead with its expansion. It is now important to give the EU a budgetary framework which is adequate for the years to come, and to rally the European citizens to the enlargement policy, said Mr Eurlings. On this last point, he said: we must reply to those who are raising unfounded and unjustified fears about enlargement, but we must not confuse these with people asking for an appropriate balance between the enlargement and the consolidation of the EU. The lack of support to enlargement from the population also stems from the fact that the political decision-makers tend to stress the problems and dangers (many of which are justified) related to the accession of new members, whilst forgetting to mention the numerous advantages and benefits which also results, said Austrian Social Democrat Hannes Swoboda. Margie Sudre (EPP-ED, France) said: "the Commission and the Member States are in the grip of some kind of frenzy to open up the European Union". She feels that it is "under American pressure" that the EU is accelerating the enlargement procedure like it is, "even though Europe has no Constitution, no budget, just plenty of serious internal problems". This view was echoed by her compatriot from the same group, Françoise Grossetête, who called upon the Commission to show "more realism and transparency" in discussions on future waves of enlargement. Decisions on future enlargement must no longer be taken "on the quiet, at inter-governmental meetings", she said. Ms Grossetête, who is against Turkish accession, also called upon the EU to "take the result of popular consultations" and the fears of the citizens on successive waves of enlargement duly into account. "Our ministers must listen to their fellow citizens" and not "cave in to pressure from the American government", which is campaigning strongly in favour of the European integration of the Balkans and Turkey. For the Balkans, Ms Grossetête called for a "proper break" before getting the EU ready to welcome them. CDU MEP Doris Pack, on the other hand, said that the Commission's strategy for the Balkans was "fundamentally fair". Without an accession prospect for the Balkan countries, it will be very difficult to bring peace and reform to this region, said Mrs Pack, who is president of the EP Delegation for relations with South-East Europe. This does not, however, detract from the fact that the Commission must rigorously verify the accession capacity of each of these countries before putting forward dates for the opening of accession negotiations, she stressed.