2023-12-15 19:43:39
Despite the lionization of Viktor Orban, despite the big words of the EU leaders, the case of Ukraine’s accession to the European Union is something extremely difficult and presupposes disruptive changes within the Union. And it is not only Ukraine, but also the rest of the Eastern European countries.
The Italian La Repubblica makes some very important points in the shadow of the episodic Summit which was baptized as historic. History of the first step of Ukraine’s accession process, which was not accompanied by approval of the very important aid package to the war-torn country.
And the conclusion? Everything should change, from agricultural policy and preparation of budgetsuntil unanimity in decision-making. After all, if we are only talking about Ukraine, we are talking about a country with a population of 40 million and a territory of enormous dimensions.
Radical reforms and changing balances
The disastrous scenario is, in 2030, the European Union will have 35 members, only for Ukraine to have about 200 billion eurosto be unable to make any decision due to the absolute absence of unanimity, to be faced with the great dissatisfaction of a large part of the population of since Kiev will have “emptied” the funds for its agricultural sector and development. And of course will now border Russiawith the possibility that at some point the mechanism will have to be activated that foresees the obligation of all to defend a member country in the event of an attack by a third country, without even having a common foreign policy and with the risk of involving NATO as well.
To avoid all this, radical reforms and a political order with leaders able to see what the next generations will need are needed.
In fact, the accession of Ukraine to the EU – Repubblica estimates – can be compared to the fall of the Berlin Wall and the creation of the European Union as we know it today, the arrival of the euro and the enlargement to the East in 2004.
In the background – writes the Italian newspaper – a promise was made to Ukraine for its inclusion in 2030. Few believe that this is possible. It may take more years. There is another scenario that cannot be ruled out: that Ukraine will end up like Turkey, i.e. it will become the disappointed candidate.
The burden on the Commission
From the technocratic side, the burden for the accession negotiations in principle falls on the Commissionwho has to carry out a huge task: he will have to comb through all the legislation of Ukraine to identify those points that are not compatible with European regulations and laws. So far Kiev has limited itself to reforming the Constitutional Court and securing minority rights, while making a chaotic start on the huge issue of corruption. All the rest of the legislation essentially needs to be rewritten. A titanic task from a bureaucratic, political and legislative point of view by the Ukrainian state in the midst of war.
But what should be done from the side of the EU? not to sink under the weight of Ukraine, a country that should “recreated” after the end of the war, but also of the other 7 countries that will follow and that cannot wait any longer in the waiting room if Kiev joins), namely the Balkan countries, Moldova and Georgia.
First of all, Common Agricultural Policy of the EU, historically the first item in the European budget, fundamental for the political and social stability of the continent, will collapse. Only Ukraine, with its accession, will be entitled to 95 billion euros, while a 20% correspondingly will be the cuts in subsidies for the other countries. Kyiv will still collect 61 billion from the cohesion funds, for infrastructure and development. In the end the vast majority of member states will end up collecting less from Brussels than they pay. This in itself upsets the balance.
The Common Agricultural Policy and allocation of funds from the Cohesion Fund must change. First of all with the enlargement of the budget, as the allocation of only 1% of the GDP of the member countries will no longer be sufficient. In short, European leaders should agree to increase their spending and rewrite the criteria for the allocation of funds. Another titanic project, if you consider the disputes that already exist for a few hundred million euros…
Finally, there is also institutional dimension of this enlargement: if already, with 27 members, taking decisions by unanimity is so difficult, with 35 members it will be impossible. The European Union will have to reform its treaties to avoid “non-governance”, a challenge that leaders have for years avoided for fear of getting involved in endless negotiations and for every party that will be in the texts.
The specter of the Ukrainian bankruptcy on March 1
There are, however, not a few who estimate that Orbán’s veto of the financial aid package may be more important than Solz’s trick that took the Hungarian prime minister out of the room in order to achieve unanimity on the issue of accession negotiations.
The important thing about it, as Reppublica notes, can be summed up in one date, the March 1st. And this is because the Ukrainian coffers without international aid will be empty in three months and on that day, as Brussels and Kiev estimate, the country will declare bankruptcy.
The 50 billion included in the budget discussions is therefore vital for Volodymyr Zelensky and his country, and for this reason an emergency Summit is expected to take place in January.
There is also an asterisk for the developments in the USA, as the country expects a huge economic package from there too, which, however, is being moved away due to the impasse in Congress.
Where will the money be found?
In the middle of the night the president of the European Council confirmed that the commitments will be met, firstly because the funding will be finalized by March and secondly because at the beginning of 2024 the leaders of the E.U. they will intensify the effort to convince Viktor Orbán.
However, if the ties between Budapest and Moscow are not severed, they will have to be sought different solutions. In fact, out of the 50 billion to Ukraine, 33 are loans and the guarantees in case they are not repaid or for the interest should be included in the European budget.
Therefore these are loans granted directly by the EU. The alternative is to collect the amount from the market in the form of a bond and how the 26 countries of the EU. (ie without Hungary) will be guarantors of the loan. A very complicated process, but doable.
But how can the remaining 17 billion be transferred to Kiev and recovered? In this case the 26 partners will have to collect them from themselves their own quota budgets. This process can have direct effects on national budgets and cause reactions in public opinion. In Italy, for example, a few billion will correspond to an already empty fund.
However, the risk of Ukraine collapsing for economic reasons and not from Russian strikes does not offer any complacency to the European Union.
In this light there is one more important side effect. Of the additional 22.5 billion in the budget, 17 will be transferred to Ukraine, but the remaining 5.5 billion was supposed to go to sectors related to migratory. The Commission had pledged 12 billion in this direction, which was later reduced to 8 billion. Little if you consider that these are resources that must be used in the next four years for the immigration sector as a whole and not only for the Mediterranean.
Germany and the so-called “frugal” countries that talk about victory have hit the brakes on extra spending, with the exception of Ukraine. The hard poker that Orban has played lately has only just begun. Yesterday the Hungarian Prime Minister got 10 billion from the Commission in funds that had been frozen because his country did not comply with a series of rules. But it was enough for the “green light” and the start of negotiations for Ukraine’s accession to the EU. Now he has started asking for more, namely the remaining 21 billion that remain frozen.
In the midst of all this, the European elections are approaching…
#cost #Ukraine #countries