FROM MERIT TO MIGHT: RETHINKING EU ENLARGEMENT IN LIGHT OF TÜRKIYE AND UKRAINE

Since its beginning, the EU has framed enlargement as a normative project that embodies its commitment to democracy, human rights, and the rule of law. Candidate status was awarded to countries that met the Copenhagen criteria and had adopted the required reforms to align with EU standards. However, the geopolitical reality of the 2020s, most notably Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine, necessitates a major reassessment of thisnormative model (Schwarz, 2025). It can be argued that enlargement has increasingly become a tool of geopolitics, shaped by security, energy resilience, and institutional stability.

This shift in priorities is especially visible in the accession trajectories of Türkiye and Ukraine, which are examined here as case studies due to their strategic significance, geopolitical context, and comparable size, despite differences in population and economic capabilities.1Türkiye, historically a critical NATO allyand an official EU candidate since 1999, exemplifies the normative model’s limitations when strategic importance collides with internal reforms and ideological divergence. Ukraine, by contrast, demonstrates how geopolitical urgency—in this case, the threat to the European order—can override conventional progression logic.

Comparing these two countries is not new in the enlargement literature. Earlier studies, such as the monograph EU Accession Prospects for Turkey and Ukraine: Debates in New Member Statesedited byPiotr Kaźmirkiewicz (2006b), noted that Türkiye appeared institutionally closer to EU membership than Ukraine, which at the time remained outside the accession framework. Yet, the situation has shifted dramatically. While Türkiye’s candidacy hasstagnated, Ukraine’s accession process has accelerated since 2022 despite war and institutional fragility. This reversal underscores the EU’s transition from conditionality-driven integration to strategic, security-oriented expansion. Moreover, despite Türkiye’s larger size, both countries pose comparable challenges to the EU’s absorption capacity, as admitting either would necessitate extensive institutional reforms, particularly regarding unanimity in decision-making.

https://janusnet-ojs.autonoma.pt/index.php/janus/article/view/272/1076