Will Ankara return to the European table through gradual membership? | policy

Ankara- Brussels is moving towards a new approach to the issue of expanding the European Union through a proposal that grants candidate countries gradual membership acquired in stages, starting with limited participation without full voting or veto rights, according to what was reported by Anatolia Agency.

This proposal aims to overcome the Hungarian veto that is blocking the accession of Ukraine, Turkey and other countries, in a shift described as a reformulation of the philosophy of European expansion from the principle of “full membership or “no membership” to a more flexible model based on phased integration within the European system.

Brussels is moving towards adopting a “two-tier membership” formula as a solution to overcome the dilemma of expanding the European Union, so that the candidate countries in the first stage join as partial members without the right to vote or use a veto, with full membership gradually being granted after the required political and economic conditions are met.

Override the veto

This model aims to integrate candidates into the Union’s institutions and programs from the early stages, while at the same time moving towards reforming the European decision-making mechanism, by adopting qualified majority voting instead of consensus, especially on issues of foreign policy and expansion, thus reducing the ability of any single country to disrupt decisions by using the veto.

The initiative enjoys support from the countries of Northern and Eastern Europe, Austria and Sweden, which see the expansion of the Union as a strategic priority in light of the escalating geopolitical challenges, as the Russian war on Ukraine has revived the conviction of the necessity of accelerating the accession of the eastern neighboring countries to ensure the security and stability of the continent.

But the expansion path faces repeated opposition from some capitals, most notably Budapest, where Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban repeatedly used his veto to disrupt Kiev’s accession, claiming that it is “not yet ready,” while other countries fear new economic competition or a threat to their security interests.

In the face of these obstacles, interim membership is proposed as a practical solution without the need to amend the Union’s treaties, as any constitutional amendment requires unanimous approval and faces objections from countries such as France, the Netherlands, and Hungary. The new approach therefore proposes that new members temporarily waive their veto power until broader institutional reforms are implemented, rather than compromising the rights of existing states.

In this context, Anton Hofreiter, Chairman of the European Affairs Committee in the German Parliament, said that “the new members must temporarily waive their veto until the necessary reforms are completed,” stressing that “the accession system without full voting rights will keep the union able to work even if it expands.” He added that the Western Balkan countries welcomed the proposal and considered it “a constructive and workable plan to gradually integrate it into the European system.”

Although the debate within the Union is currently focused on Ukraine and the eastern neighboring countries, Turkey remains the country most affected by the new shift in European expansion policy. Ankara, which was granted official candidate status in 1999 and began membership negotiations in 2005, is still described as the “eternal candidate” after its path was effectively frozen for more than a decade, due to political differences and issues related to human rights and democracy.

The expansion dilemma

On the official level, Ankara welcomes any initiative that revives its accession file to the Union, but in return, it has reservations about any alternative formulas that detract from its strategic goal of full accession. Turkish officials have repeatedly stressed that full membership remains a firm strategic option in the country’s European policies.

President Recep Tayyip Erdogan had stressed that “the common interests between Turkey and the European Union should not be subject to futile plans proposed by some members,” referring to European calls to establish a special partnership with Ankara as an alternative to full membership, a proposal previously adopted by France.

On the other hand, the Union links any progress in the Turkish file to Ankara’s commitment to democracy and human rights standards, which are areas that – according to European Commission reports – have witnessed a noticeable decline in recent years.

Political analyst Murat Toral believes that the idea of ​​”gradual membership” seems in principle applicable, but it faces profound political and institutional complications within the European Union. He explained to Al Jazeera Net that the Union finds itself facing a double dilemma. On the one hand, it does not want to close the door to the candidate countries at a sensitive geopolitical moment, and on the other hand, it fears expanding its membership before reforming the decision-making mechanism that has become paralyzed by the rule of consensus.

Toral believes that the success of the proposed model depends on its ability to achieve a balance between political realism and strategic ambition, so that it allows the candidate countries to gradually integrate economically and politically without establishing classism within the union.

He added that the current political environment gives the idea additional momentum in light of an increasing European desire to revive the expansion project after years of stagnation, especially with the escalation of security threats. However, he pointed out, on the other hand, that French, Hungarian and Dutch reservations may make implementing the plan in the near term difficult without deep internal settlements.

Turkish caution

For his part, political analyst Cenk Sirajoglu believes that Ankara may view the proposal as a new opportunity to revive its European accession process, which has been frozen for more than a decade, after the momentum of the idea of ​​full membership within the Union declined.

He explained to Al Jazeera Net that the Turkish government will seek to invest in any political window that can bring it back to the dialogue table with Brussels, especially in files of a practical nature such as trade, energy, modernizing the customs union, and facilitating the granting of visas, as realistic channels of cooperation that achieve tangible economic and political gains for both parties.

But Sirajoglu pointed out at the same time that Ankara deals with the idea of ​​interimity with caution and suspicion, as it realizes that this model may turn into a diminished membership or a permanent state of political waiting that will keep it a partner of the Union without becoming a full member of it, which means emptying the idea of ​​accession of its content.

He concluded by saying that the Turkish government will adopt a pragmatic and flexible approach based on taking advantage of phased integration opportunities without compromising on the final goal, stressing that Ankara will treat the idea as a tool to re-engage with the European Union, not as a permanent alternative to full membership.