Western Balkans

EU eastern enlargement is a historical success. However, up to the date this statement doesn’t seem so undisputable. The Europeanization of the newcomers from the Eastern and Central Europe is under suspicions. The enlargement policy „new approach“ to the Western Balkans is based mainly on the reforms on the implementation of the conditionality, but it doesn’t change significantly the conditions for the influence of the member states on this implementation itself. The dynamics of the national interests of the member states in fact has the formative effect on the enlargement policy. Therefore, the research of this dynamic is important for the improvement of enlargement policy. Bulgarian case seems suitable for this research agenda. The statement that there are no patron member state for Bulgarian accession is widespread in the academic literature. From this point of view, the research on EU member states influence on the Bulgarian accession will be useful by the findings for the parameters of this influence. This article present result of the content analisys of 37 interviews with key participants in Bulgarian accession process. This results give the possibility for answers of the questions – who, how much, when, how and why support/resist Bulgarian membership, as well as for the answer of more general questions – how the dynamic of EU member states interests is reflected to the Bulgarian way to EU membership and therefore on the quality of the result.

The enlargement of the European Union (EU) is an absolute priority for most of the member-states and the EU institutions, as it is seen as the main guarantor of peace, security and stability on the continent. At the same time, reaching a consensus regarding the enlargement policy towards the countries from the Western Balkans turns out to be particularly difficult. In response to the challenges in the efforts to reach an agreement, the European Commission has published a new “enlargement methodology”, according to which the candidates will not only need to synchronise their legislations with the EU standards, but they must show real results and reforms. This declaration by itself proves the existence of a recognised problem with the current approach to enlargement and the need for a radical change due to its unsuitability. The fragile consensus on this new agenda also shows that the enlargement policy has yet to be developed, changed and improved. In this context, the lessons learnt from the Eastern enlargement become particularly valuable.