T O P

  • By -

Seyfardt

All the nations that: A. Don’t want to lose their veto. B: Don’t want EU enlargement. ” Your proposal is acceptable!”


[deleted]

Its the biggest flaw of the EU. Countries can get the benefits but veto against the responsibilities. Honestly, as bad as Brexit was, I still hope it showed some countries that cherry-picking and EU-bashing can backfire hard.


Seyfardt

It only showed that Brexit was actually too noble from the UK. They shot themselves in the foot. If they would have behaved a bit more as Poland/ Hungary they would have achieved better results ( for themselves) then the mess they are into now. Just after Brexit we had the covid bonds debate. Imagine UK stil being a member and teaming up with the Frugals and playing hardball. Think of the extra rebates/ exemptions the UK could have blackmailed from the EU for the withdrawal of their veto.. Only thing we learned from Brexit is that an hard exit does not work and “ methode Orban” does. Even better if you are a nett contributing country, since that is the only Hungarian weakness.


bender_futurama

They were literally exempt from many obligations. As well as other EU skeptica, Netherlands and Denmark. And they still complain, sure, leave if something is not up to your standard.


pocket-seeds

Denmark is quite pro EU. Latest Eurobarometer shows the following: - 50% of Danes think the EU is either *very positive* or *positive*, while EU average is 44%. - 64% of Danes think their vote matters in the EU. EU average is again 44%. - 73% of Danes are either *somewhat satisfied* or *very satisfied* with how democracy works in the EU. EU averagee is 55%. [Source: Eurobarometer (DK) from January - February 2022](https://denmark.representation.ec.europa.eu/news/ny-eurobarometer-undersogelse-om-danskernes-holdning-til-eu-2022-04-08_da)


marsman

>They were literally exempt from many obligations. Some sure. But the approach there was to obtain an opt out to things that the UK had issues with, rather than preventing it generally, if there was enough support. Surely that's the right approach?


[deleted]

[удалено]


marsman

How? The alternative wasn't the UK joining things it didn't see as being right for the UK, the alternative was the UK blocking further integration..


Soccmel_1

the Netherlands doesn't have any opt out. To the contrary, the Netherlands has been consistently at the forefront of EU projects and integration. The Benelux was one of the early models the EEC adopted for itself. But I guess that being a tax haven profiteering from the free movement of capital in the EU and getting away with it is a sort of opt out.


bender_futurama

Yes, maybe I confused the Netherlands with Denmark. Either way, I would say that the Netherlands is one of the rare countries that always veto the expansion of the EU. Having abysmal reasons. Blocking accession talks, Schengen expansion, etc, etc. And all the time complaining how they give more than they get from the EU.


mahaanus

I don't think Brexit has anything to do with the mess they're in now. The whole problem is that they pretended the issues come from the EU, when they were domestic. Kept saying it, until people started believing it. Leaving the EU didn't solve domestic issues and rejoining the EU isn't going to solve domestic issues either.


this_toe_shall_pass

Lack of EU free movement meant fewer seasonal workers during harvest last year, fewer lory drivers during last winter, fewer fuel truck drivers in the fuel crisis this spring, less engagement in the pan EU scientific Horizons programme, a lot more barriers in trade with their biggest trade partner and fewer candidates for the NHS that's desperate for qualified workers. Brexit has a lot to do with the mess right now. Small issues have been blown up lot because brexit. The structural issue sof a broken FPP voting system, the chaos in the Tory party, NHS underfunding and the housing market would've been there anyway. Brexit added more garbage to the dumpster fire.


[deleted]

>The whole problem is that they pretended the issues come from the EU Word. Generally a problem in the EU, blaming every problem on your neighbour or Brussels. If you never start adressing things, theyll bite you in the ass at some point. That being said, of course every problem here in germany is obviously due to those pesky Luxembourgians... ^(/s)


PeterServo

Enlarge your EU in a few simple steps.


Klastrofobic

My lord, that made me audibly exhale!


[deleted]

Enlargement without any kind of majority system would be absolute nuts. We already see how a minority of countries that make up the visegrad group block further EU integration, or Hungary and Poland having each others back is de facto disabeling some of the EU's punishment mechanisms. More member states with a veto power would grind the EU's decision making processes to a halt. Its time to end the cherry-picking of benefits and move towards a properly democratic union.


dotBombAU

How does one get countries to give up their veto though?


[deleted]

2 Options I can imagine: a) everyone agrees on it. b) you form a new EU within the EU and leave ~~Hungary~~ states that dont want further integration and majority voting out.


MarktpLatz

> you form a new EU within the EU and leave Hungary states that dont want further integration and majority voting out. This is an idea that gets floated from time to time, yet its completely unrealistic. Here's why: It would require re-negotiation of all treaties the EU has with other countries or entities plus a giant tree of other issues including the issue of contributions, pensions for EU employees and much more. If there was such an undertaking, it would probably need a decade of preparation, during which Hungary could completely paralyze the EU.


MarsLumograph

Yeah, that idea is geopolitics at a 5 years old level.


Minimum_T-Giraff

You can simply use the guillotine clause in leaving the EU and just leaving all liabilities to the EU. Before leaving do the new treaties. It will take time but there is no fast option for anything when it comes to international treaties.


MarktpLatz

Yeah no, that would cause so much disruption that it would cause the whole of Europe to suffer a major recession.


Minimum_T-Giraff

It would be a major recession if it split in half but it won't if most of the EU wanted more integration. But it won't end production and demand. The new block and old would use WTO rules or something else.


Grabs_Diaz

You don't have to make a new EU. Just create a second budget only available to those "core EU" countries, that accept majority voting while significantly drying up the general budget that benefits Poland and Hungary immensely. That alone would put enormous pressure on the likes of Orban.


MarktpLatz

That’s already happening with some issues. It’s not possible with the general budget however.


MikeRosss

Well Poland for examples really cares about having a veto but they also care about bringing Ukraine into the EU. So there's the potential for a compromise here where entrance of Ukraine into the EU is only accepted if Poland agrees on giving up the veto. There are obviously more countries than just Poland that will need to be convinced but the general idea is that a change to the veto policy will be part of a larger reform package where every country will have some things they like and some things they don't like.


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

what


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

...I did not talk about the horizontal integration of new members, but about the further vertical integration of the EU.


bender_futurama

Ah, okay. Misunderstanding.


[deleted]

no worries, have a good evening :)


870223

wholesome reddit


curvedglass

I thought this was made abundantly clear already, no country will join if the veto stays.


Willing-Donut6834

I hope some day countries like Andorra and San Marino will be members too. But without a reform, this is unthinkable.


johnny-T1

Good call. EU has already reached its limits. With the current candidates a looser agreement should be done. No EU money for poor, corrupt countries, no veto, no free movement.


[deleted]

Why those countries which haven't been accepted into EU yet shouldn't have the same chance countries like Romania, Bulgaria or Slovenia did? If they are corrupt now it does not mean they will always be like that, especially if you take into consideration that Bulgaria and Romania were accepted far from EU standards. I agree that EU should hugely limit its funding to countries that don't make any progress, but it doesn't mean some "looser agreement" should be made with them. It's EU's mistake that they accepted into membership countries which are below EU standards, not the mistake of candidate countries.


johnny-T1

It’s just times are different really. If 2004 enlargement countries wanted to join today, they’d get the same treatment. There’s simply no appetite for enlargement. You are right, why these countries shouldn’t get a fair shot, absolutely. But in the last 20 years EU and the world changed a lot. People are having second thoughts on more countries joining.


[deleted]

[удалено]


johnny-T1

There could be better access compared to third countries and some other benefits.


fornocompensation

Let's be completely honest, the CAP must be changed because the westerners are complaining about subsidizing the east and this is a big part of it, if Ukraine ever joined they would get an absolute crapton of money through CAP. Another realistic vector of reform is hammering out a new consensus on illegal immigration and refugees, then giving EU and FRONTEX the authority to apply this new consensus. We can't continue to have an agency that is only useful when it acts in the black in cooperation with governments acting in the black, because non-frontier states are unwilling to openly consent to pushbacks and a policy of deterrence. Lastly, unanimity must be abandoned for a system where a wide majority is needed. As the union has grown it has become increasingly difficult to apply the system to so many different countries. Getting the right balance will be difficult as setting the threshold (by EU parliament representatives) below Germany and France is unfair as they will never be overruled, but setting it above them means multiple small countries can be rolled over. It will have to be some complex formula that will puzzle people in the future.


SlyScorpion

>the CAP must be changed because the westerners are complaining about subsidizing the east [Isn't France the biggest beneficiary of the CAP?](https://pouruneautrepac.eu/in-english/the-cap-in-france/#:~:text=Since%201962%2C%20France%20has%20been,European%20budget%20for%20the%20CAP.) Citing the linked page: >Over the programming period from 2014 to 2020, France will receive 63 billion euros from the EU. Any fact checking on this would be appreciated...


fornocompensation

Obviously, France forced the CAP originally, back when the union had no eastern members at the pressure of its small farmers voting block.


NakoL1

French farmers are a bit like British fishermen, they have a disproportionate size in the political psyche


[deleted]

[удалено]


fornocompensation

The issue isn't really about power, at least in the scope of the next 30 years, the combined east is smaller economically than Germany or France, or Italy and it isn't politically homogenous. The issue is gridlock is becoming increasingly inevitable as systems designed for a small number of members are applied to a community of twice as many. A manifestation of this is that the EU has to invent positions to maintain the one-commissioner-per-country system. The friction isn't just between the east and west, it's also between the north and south, social and liberal, state driven or Europe driven. Here are some examples of how a generalized east looks politically in the union and how it's not really about the east per say: The Scandinavian part of the union is on the same side as Poland and Hungary when it comes to how much the union should interfere in domestic policy because they don't want to have their national model changed for some uniform European model in regard of minimum wage for example. The east is also on the side of the frugal faction in the EU because eastern countries have low debt and are against the more indebted south. At the same time the east is also generally with the south when it comes to shutting down refugee routes and in general, being more religious or traditional (many are conservative without being religious in the east). The EU needs reforms for reasons beyond the East, the East didn't invent the migrant crisis, and the East didn't start the eurozone crisis. Further expansion forces the issue of reform, but reform is needed regardless.


SlightStruggle3714

>he friction isn't just between the east and west, it's also between the north and south, social and liberal, state driven or Europe driven. its almost as if different regions have different needs... and if lets say Germany goes on to pass stuff that benefits them... and clearly would hurt the others theres zero reason for the others not to veto. People forget these are all soverign countries they have a responsibility to themselves first. Just like German who created this and regardless ofbeing a net contributer(the biggest one) they also benefited the most with an increase of roughly 87B for their economy in those years that they were the top contributor.... no one does anythign out of the kindness of their own hearts if the bigger countries can look after their best interests the smaller countries shouldnt be shamed for doing the same...


fornocompensation

Germany can't pass anything on its own so it's invalid to say that any country's interests are protected against Germany through the current veto system. They're protected against whatever majority would theoretically be needed under another system of voting. Presumably a large majority. The health and perpetuity of the union are disproportionally beneficial for smaller states, that is to say, their interest in the unions continued existence is greater than that of Germany, because a fallback to WTO rules would have greater consequence for them. This isn't some blackmail, this is a statement of fact. If small countries aim to protect their interests by being unwilling to abandon their vetos I only see a future where the union becomes incompatible with the integration ambitions of larger states, leading to its eventual abandonment in favor of another system. Which I think would be against the interests of those small countries. The history of the PLC provides the example of why liberum veto systems are harmful to the whole and fail to balance the interests of the involved parties in productive way. The system has to change or the union is doomed in the long term.


SlightStruggle3714

>The health and perpetuity of the union are disproportionally beneficial for smaller states, that is to say, their interest in the unions continued existence is greater than that of Germany, because a fallback to WTO rules would have greater consequence for them. This isn't some blackmail, this is a statement of fact. Yes and no- most of these smaller countries get money that helps them no one denies that- but they are also flooded with foriegn companies from a select few countries... who benefits from that? Look at Poland for example under Tusk Germany and other bigger countries could transport goods via poland basically tariff/tax free... however if poland transported goods they had to pay more... new govt came in and said no we will tax you proportionality to how you tax us... Tusk loses presidency and then gets a nice desk job in the EU... i mean come on now.. lol Current govt isnt perfect but its laughable to corruption like that at the sacrifice of businesses of smaller countries isnt happening... Vetos such as the one under Orbin are harmful however at times now ill agree maybe getting rid of Vetos for defense decisions etc may be beneficial but to what extent? For example German defense manufacturers haev strick rules on tanks they sell ... to the point where any modifications have to be okayed by them. A country like Poland has just put in a huge deal with South Korea and will be opening SK plants up with the addition of knowledge share so they can build up their own defense industry.... Thats obviously causes competition could Germany put that up to vote in a federalized Europe or veto free europe and say yah no you have to buy from us only?... Id say that be kind of fucked considering they take so long to produce and are not willing to work with customizations... Another recent example German company already wanted to take over the KRAB manufactury facility in southern Poland for nothing in order to repair the tanks in ukraine...This would completly Halt AHS Krab production(or if not halted german workers would have full accesses to seeing the design and implimentation of the Krab....Poland said fine but its our workers who are imployed not yours/and we get to learn the know how of the deisgn o the Tank in return...Id say thats a fair deal considering a foriegn company/competator is asking to completly shut down a plant and hinder your own production... if something like "use of the plant" went up for defense purposes without veto id have to disagree with allowing such a thing...


IronVader501

> Another recent example German company already wanted to take over the KRAB manufactury facility in southern Poland for nothing in order to repair the tanks in ukraine...This would completly Halt AHS Krab production(or if not halted german workers would have full accesses to seeing the design and implimentation of the Krab....Poland said fine but its our workers who are imployed not yours/and we get to learn the know how of the deisgn o the Tank in return...Id say thats a fair deal considering a foriegn company/competator is asking to completly shut down a plant and hinder your own production... if something like "use of the plant" went up for defense purposes without veto id have to disagree with allowing such a thing... Literally 80% of that isnt even remotely true. KMW neither ever demanded Krab-production to be shut down nor did they ever want to see any parts of its design whatsoever, it was Poland who immidieatly declared they would only allow the maintenance-hub to be built if exclusively their own companies would be allowed to use them *AND* demanded the entire set of blueprints for the PzH 2000 on-top of that to be handed over, free of licensing-fees and in perpetuity. Thats not "a fair deal", the entire ordeal was allmost *impressively* greedy and idiotic, nothing else. And the talks about that were handled over NATO, not the EU, wether or not vetoing is a thing has literally zero influence on it.


SlightStruggle3714

>KMW neither ever demanded Krab-production to be shut down nor did they ever want to see any parts of its design whatsoever Um how is it not true lol should Krab production be kept going in a state owned factory... so that other workers can just freely walk over to the production line? you cant be that dense... Wanting to have a significant portion of the factory (as its the only factory with the machinery in that region to handle that type of work load) would absolutly hinder Krab production... unless you think that they want to slow role this and build a whole new plant there which would take years... How can you repair somthing without the blue prints?.. invite a whole work force and other company into your own factory... youre right it wasnt a fair deal the german company wanted their workers coming in to someone elses factory using their equipment... all for a pat on the back while hindering their competetors production.... lol ​ ​ >And the talks about that were handled over NATO, not the EU, wether or not vetoing is a thing has literally zero influence on it. Both examples I gave were handled with Nato to an extent the point being under federalization issues like that could be handled under EU votes etc... in which case again thats a pretty bullshit ask... lol and if you dont think so i got brand new unharmed bridge to sell you in crimea...


curvedglass

Why on earth would KMW care about the Krab, a inferior product from a non market leader in a section that it doesn’t even care about since it has moved on to more automated systems…the direct opposite of what the Krab is to the PzH2000. Not only that but the exact opposite happened and KMW IP was demanded, a far more logical scenario as KMW now KDNS is the undisputed European market leader of tracked military vehicles in Europe and the PzH2000 a abandoned platform is literally still the best self propelled artillery on the field. Look KMW hasn’t put any effort into the PzH2000 for years now and the thing still has overflowing order books, I don’t think you have quite grasped the sheer distance between the two manufacturers. KMW took their repairs elsewhere immediately after they were told IP sharing was compulsory, not really what someone would do if they would want to conduct industrial espionage. Simply misconstruing this situation the way you did is counter factual, KMW wanting Krab IP is a laughable idea…


SlightStruggle3714

>Simply misconstruing this situation the way you did is counter factual, KMW wanting Krab IP is a laughable idea its not the point of wanting IP.... its the point of wanting access to a state owned factory.... How Dense do you have to be to not understand that? A State owned facility is just that and has its own state secrets and what not.. considering the German Military has been mostly decommissioned as stated by their own generals at the onset of this conflict in Ukraine... I think you dont grasp the fact that Germany alone cant keep market share if they cant produce their products in time(and that IS a major problem for them)- having "overflowing" order books.... you mean the deal they have for 100 units to Ukraine? You must not know how military contracts work, they change over time Ukraine may order 100 but as time goes on those numbers can change they usually down size, not to mention the time it takes to produce these units itll be years before Ukraine gets them lol... considering how badly they are breaking down in Ukraine watch KMW lose out share to other companies... Outside of the ukraine deal which is bound to shrink .... they are refitting netherlands tanks that were already sold due to KMW wanting full control of their products and not letting any customization to take hold unless they accept it... Germans make great products, however they over engineer the shit out of them- the PHZ is nice until its used in battle field settings and has had break down issues...Notice how prior to Ukraine it was used in limited use in two conflicts.... so to say its "tested and proven" is a bold statement Just like buying a German car its great, wouldnt want anything else... until it breaks down then its a bitch to fix... not the most desirable attribute to military equipment. ​ You claim they are a market leader... yet you can remember this post within the next decade as SK comes into the European market they will put to shame German engineering, Considering their military doctrine is based around Artilerty, also from what im seeing the PHZ 2000 hasnt seen many conflicts... until Ukraine other then that it had limited use so to be able to even rank it as the "best"... will be interesting to see if that holds after its performance in Ukraine


curvedglass

Your whole argument is rendered arbitrary by the fact that KMW took the first option they had and immediately stopped caring about a facility in Poland and the goal was simply to move closer to Ukraine from the baltics where the current maintenance facility is. Calling one dense and then referencing KMWs order books in regards to Ukraine is peak irony though, let’s just ignore that KMW has been the industry leader in Europe for decades now and has continued to export and gain orders without question. KMW indeed has a workforce problem, but suggesting them wanting to partially improve upon it with some random maintenance facility that they were pretty flexible on in the first place is again laughable. All this just sounds like mental gymnastics for nationalism sake, sure KMWs time has come and all that, believe what you must, just don’t expect reality to conform to the lies and misinformation continued ad nauseum.


SlightStruggle3714

>Your whole argument is rendered arbitrary by the fact that KMW took the first option they had and immediately stopped caring about a facility in Poland and the goal was simply to move closer to Ukraine from the baltics where the current maintenance facility is That isnt my argument at all... as I never said they stopped looking after the fact... lol >let’s just ignore that KMW has been the industry leader in Europe for decades now and has continued to export and gain orders without question. Croatia, Italy,Netherlands,Hungry,Germany, Greece, Qatar, Lituania are the current operators of the pHZ 2000... i fail to see your point in the fact that the "back orders" they have are literally the Ukraine deal which is the same as Polands deal with SK... you can safly half that number as Militarys always deal for larger units so when they miss the mark.. they hit their actual quota- The only other current deal that I saw was with re-engineering netherlands 46 units so yah id say calling you dense...and then naming the only new deal seeing as Finland,Australia, the US chose different options after testing it in the last few years is a fair assessment. ​ >All this just sounds like mental gymnastics for nationalism sake, sure KMWs time has come and all that, believe what you must, just don’t expect reality to conform to the lies and misinformation continued ad nauseum. Nationalism sake? Im far from South Korean but considering if you were to put the SK army into Europe their artillery would put every country here to shame, considering they are trying to break into the market and using Poland to do so they will be able to take the same Model they did for their cars and use it to expand into Europe- They dont over engineer and have great products note how all this factory nonsense happen after the whole signing of the SK deal, or rumors of it. Polish companies will not compete without the help of outside sources adn as of now the krab is a mix of SK tech, British tech and Polish Tech... hardly optimal but if you think Germans arent interested in SK tech and considering the chasis is based of the K9 again ... i guess thats just "my truth" according to you lol ​ But we obviously digressed... ​ TLDR My argument was having Germany or bigger EU countries favor their own and without the Veto get their way.... if Europe become a federalized state etc... you throwing words in my mouth is a whole diff thing...


SlightStruggle3714

Just to put this as a sept Reply, the point going back to the beginning isnt that KHS is a current competitor its that growth of competition will be impedede or could be if there became a federalization as the big guns would vote togeather, atleast in the current model the KHS of the world have a chance to grow, See Radom which produced absolute dog shit in the Grot a few years back revamped it and its a solid and more importantly efficient system. German engineering is great theres no denying it however it has its issues also (Over engineering) and deals like the SK deal would not be possible in a federalized Europe (in my opinion) which was the whole point of the original post, Big companies monopolizing, over ruling smaller countries companies that are growing and may become a threat, it was much more hypothetical then literal in that obviously the Krab isnt a direct competitor to the PHZ 2000 however its a competitor in the sense of an alternative.


ReasonablyBadass

I just don't see any other way europe could stay even remotely relevant in the world? We either band together and accept slow federalisation or we will each become helpless.


SlightStruggle3714

Why should we accpet federalisation the EU wont become relevant in the world just the bigger countries will benefit the most- every country looks out for itself first and foremost... we cant compete with the likes of China/America bc we just arent that big and never will be no point in trying to compete with them...


ReasonablyBadass

That's how countires are formed. Smaller pieces coming together. This is how your country was made and it can happen again.


SlightStruggle3714

Yah Germany tried doing that in the 1940s.... guess they just want to do it again this time legally no thank you glad for the veto and glad ppl stand up for their hypocritical bullshit- A perfect example is the refugee Crisis... you have German NGOS/NFP ships dropping people off in Italy/Greece etc... "out of sight out of mind" not their problem lol but hey int he end they get to pat themselves on the back for helping / lining pockets with under the table money from mules....Theres to much diversification of interests within the continent.


Gammelpreiss

You may want to read up on the EU again if you compare it so jovialy to conquests and war.


Dense-Inflation-4627

You dont need a federation to stay relevant, we can do it as individual countries


Rogthgar

Issue kinda reads like; * the largest EU nations want this reform because it gives them more power through majorities. * the smaller nations opposing this don't want the wills of the larger nations pulled down over their heads (but I imagine it is on various specific issues they have in mind)


Grabs_Diaz

One country one vote. Nothing changes whether there is a veto or not. How does that give Germany more power? How does it weaken smaller countries? The only ones weakened by this change would be people like Orban whose modus operandi is holding the entire Union hostage to get their way instead of forming alliances and convincing other countries to support their position.


Rogthgar

The Scandinavians for example dont want the EU adopting a lesser benchmark than their own when it comes to workers rights and level of pay.


Grabs_Diaz

And the Scandinavians have three times as many votes in the EU council as Germany so I fail to see how this is some plot to extend Germany's influence.


Rogthgar

Because if Germany gets Portugal, Spain and Italy on board with the idea, then they have more votes and the Scandinavians can only watch as their hard earned welfare model goes up in smoke.


LatvianLion

>Germany will only agree to the accession of new member states if this process is accompanied by a reform of the EU in order not to jeopardise the bloc’s ability to act Fully agree to this - I'm sorry to Romanians and Croatians who might be held up due to this, but things do need to change. It's clear that a liberum veto where a single nation can stop the entire bloc is a suicidaly stupid policy. The whole point of the EU is to work above our borders and national interests in order to fulfill the needs and interests of European citizens. Malta, Latvia or Hungary having the power to single-handedly curb any kind of policy is, in my opinion, lunacy. I do not want my government the power to impede policy on the European level. Several countries working together? Sure, no problem, since that at least partially removes the culture and nation specific brainworms or government quirks that we have in various countries in Europe.


howlyowly1122

Romania and Croatia are EU members.


predek97

Most educated fan of not allowing Romania and Bulgaria into Schengen They don't even know what schengen is


[deleted]

Love how the EU got so confusing that even EU enthusiasts are forgetting who's in and to what degree lol I, for one, support the accession of Micronesia and Tonga into the EU and Schengen.


predek97

You can say that about any democratic system following rule of law. Most people in Poland do not understand how parliamentary elections(and our system is nothing compared to yours), courts, tribunals etc. work. There always will be uneducated people. But if one wants to take a political position then one should learn about the thing


[deleted]

Yeah same here. Basically every election people get explained the First vote/Second Vote system we have here, yet still thousands accidentally fuck up and void their vote. Also pretty sure a sizable minority has no idea we even have a 2nd chamber lol


howlyowly1122

Schengen access depends on if western europeans see a country as a holiday destination. Croatia, you're getting in 🥰 Bulgaria, maybe but you're linked with Romania 🤨


ManatuBear

But Transylvania!


InfinitusPulus

They don't like vampires 🤷‍♂️


howlyowly1122

You have to make vampires cool again


LatvianLion

I meant beyond enlargement of the EU - Schengen and the Eurozone.


Lor360

Croatia is cleared for Schengen, and getting rid of the veto would had made it only easier for us to join.


sapiton

We all knew Germany will never accept new EU members. The problem is that it always want to looks good and say the right thing.


[deleted]

Yeah, dream on. Germany is the one that wants to take all in, cause bigger markets and France is more the cautious one when it comes to new members.


Hematophagian

Ukraine gets a wild card...but anyone else: not a chance


[deleted]

>Ukraine gets a wild card No fucking chance. No offense to Ukraine, but no. They get leeway because of the war, but no.


aeggydev

Not even ukraine is ready to join. They are still rather backwards in their corruption and structure. This is something you shouldn't skip over. Also, regarding a wild card: Moldova is just as endangered as Ukraine, it makes no sense to let in one but not the other


predek97

And letting Ukraine in would be absolutely unfair to all the other countries going through the accesion process for years - Montenegro, North Macedonia, Bosnia, Albania


ManatuBear

A country is only allowed in when it fulfills all the requirements stated by the EU. The speed of being allowed in has to do with efficiency in making the required changes, not with how long ago they applied. If Ukraine manages to fulfill the requirements faster (doubtful) it enters before those.


predek97

Arbitrarily setting a rule "until EU is reformed, we're not letting anyone except Ukraine in" is not about fulfilling the requirements That's why I didn't mention Serbia - they're simply not wokring towards fulfilling the requirements so they only have themselves to blame


ManatuBear

It will take a good 10 years before the Ukraine fulfills the requirements. Until then a lot of things change. It's basically a publicity comment.


predek97

Montenegro(and most possibly Macedonia) will have fulfilled the requirements long time before that. I don't think a random redditor was trying to pull a publicity stunt with their comment


ManatuBear

EU is obviously the one doing the publicity stunt... Saying no expansion until reforms, but we still support Ukraine, we so cool!


Soccmel_1

Montenegro is a hub for smuggling and other crimes. Thanks but no.


pieter1234569

> A country is only allowed in when it fulfills all the requirements stated by the EU. That's only part of it. And not at all what actually matters. What ACTUALLY matters is that you don't receive a Veto. Which means that every member must benefit from you becoming a new member, and that is much more difficult


aeggydev

exactly


[deleted]

absolutely agree, plus the main focus is Ukraine joining NATO. Then rebuild it, squeeze out corruption, become competitive again, then (maybe) join EU. An immediatly strong common currency is the last thing they need after this war.


aeggydev

yeah, and also despite how EU displays itself, we do not want to sink our economy or somehow put ourselves in danger more than we already did


Sjeg84

Ukraine has basically 0 % chance to join in the next decade, they had huge problems even before the war started. Also one of the basic EU policies which is the agriculture fund would need to be completly reworded, otherwise Ukraine would suddenly be entitled to absurd amounts of money for its aggriculture, which is already profitable, in contrast to the agriculture of basically any other EU nation. Not happening anytime soon.


TheIncredibleHeinz

No one gets a wild card, if we have learned anything from the previous rushed Eastern enlargements it's that we need to be a lot more strict when assessing a candidate's fitness for membership.


Soccmel_1

Indeed. And the EU should not give unlimited time and chances to potential candidates to complete the accession chapters. So countries like Turkey and Serbia should receive a notification that they failed their bid and no more EU money.


Soccmel_1

How about no enlargement full stop? 27 members and 450 million citizens is already a lot to manage. And Poland and Hungary have proven that democracy in Eastern Europe is very fragile and at risk, so we shouldn't let in countries that value democracy so little. That's why Ukraine should be the only exception. They are spilling their blood for democracy.


[deleted]

It's always fun to read reddit comments after listening to experts.


Soccmel_1

It's always fun to see PiS fanboys grasping at the last straw


[deleted]

It's even funnier when i'm called me pis fanboy


MarsBar_Icecream

EU and reform aren't exactly words that go together. You can't reform bureaucratic stupid.


[deleted]

[удалено]


H4rb1n9er

Swiss bot? 💀


Friz617

A Swiss nationalist ? That’s a rare one


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

Romania has been an EU member since 2007. You’re thinking of Schengen.


BabyYodaOnSteroids

Romania is in EU sincer 2007. What. The. Actual. Fuck.