They would have to unanimously agree to get rid of unanimity, I somehow doubt that’s gonna happen :””)
Makes sense.
Would be nice to keep it long enough for Ireland to have a veto over UK’s eventual return though. Just for the craic.
This is never going to happen. EU member states simply have no interest to give up veto powers in these issues as they are a great bargaining chip.
Also, it is quite clear that Bulgarian veto is just a convenient excuse for other EU members states that oppose enlargement to hide behind. Macron was very clear that there will be no enlargement any time soon, at least until EU reforms itself which could take decades at this point.
I think that the EU should be more straight forward and honest with WB countries and say that EU enragement is dead and that it wouldn’t be coming back any time soon. Then we can start taking about other formes of partnerships that can be beneficial for both parties.
At this point the 2003 Thessaloniki summit declaration & promises give you more the impression of a EU PR campaign rather than a trustworthy framework to be honest.
Yes the one country VETO must go in most cases but this article is full of false equivalences and quite honestly – bullshit.
>The Bulgarian veto has nothing to do with economic and democratic principles governing the EU enlargement process. They are about the nationalistic bullying of Skopje by Sofia. Similar policies normally have no place in relations between EU member states.
Bulgaria wants
1. Protection for ethnic-Bulgarians (which are a traditionally discriminated group) in NM’s ethno-based constitution. Such is offered to Serbs, Turks, Albanians etc… There should be no problem at all if there was no institutionalized hatred towards Bulgarians that NM politicians keep exploiting.
2. For North Macedonia to follow the treaty it signed in 2017
That is all.
It isn’t nationalistic bullying. Currently there is widespread parliamentary support for the French proposal which seeks a lifting of the VETO for guarantees North Macedonian will be held to account later to fulfil its promises… It couldn’t get passed today as the government is in the midst of a literal (and successful for the moment) parliamentary coup.
Most importantly the article neglects to mention that this proposal was vehemently denied by North Macedonian politicians which means they just wanted to be let in on false promises.
I think we’ve already seen why adding states on such grounds is not a good idea.
> these Bulgarian identarian policies
> the nationalistic bullying of Skopje by Sofia
Whoever wrote this article shouldn’t write any more articles on the Balkans. He has no idea what he is talking about.
It’s an Albanian article. What do you think it will say when they are angry? It’s a pity for them, but North Macedonia just shows it doesn’t want to make reforms, they just expect to be let in so they have access to those sweet sweet money.
7 comments
They would have to unanimously agree to get rid of unanimity, I somehow doubt that’s gonna happen :””)
Makes sense.
Would be nice to keep it long enough for Ireland to have a veto over UK’s eventual return though. Just for the craic.
This is never going to happen. EU member states simply have no interest to give up veto powers in these issues as they are a great bargaining chip.
Also, it is quite clear that Bulgarian veto is just a convenient excuse for other EU members states that oppose enlargement to hide behind. Macron was very clear that there will be no enlargement any time soon, at least until EU reforms itself which could take decades at this point.
I think that the EU should be more straight forward and honest with WB countries and say that EU enragement is dead and that it wouldn’t be coming back any time soon. Then we can start taking about other formes of partnerships that can be beneficial for both parties.
At this point the 2003 Thessaloniki summit declaration & promises give you more the impression of a EU PR campaign rather than a trustworthy framework to be honest.
Yes the one country VETO must go in most cases but this article is full of false equivalences and quite honestly – bullshit.
>The Bulgarian veto has nothing to do with economic and democratic principles governing the EU enlargement process. They are about the nationalistic bullying of Skopje by Sofia. Similar policies normally have no place in relations between EU member states.
Bulgaria wants
1. Protection for ethnic-Bulgarians (which are a traditionally discriminated group) in NM’s ethno-based constitution. Such is offered to Serbs, Turks, Albanians etc… There should be no problem at all if there was no institutionalized hatred towards Bulgarians that NM politicians keep exploiting.
2. For North Macedonia to follow the treaty it signed in 2017
That is all.
It isn’t nationalistic bullying. Currently there is widespread parliamentary support for the French proposal which seeks a lifting of the VETO for guarantees North Macedonian will be held to account later to fulfil its promises… It couldn’t get passed today as the government is in the midst of a literal (and successful for the moment) parliamentary coup.
Most importantly the article neglects to mention that this proposal was vehemently denied by North Macedonian politicians which means they just wanted to be let in on false promises.
I think we’ve already seen why adding states on such grounds is not a good idea.
> these Bulgarian identarian policies
> the nationalistic bullying of Skopje by Sofia
Whoever wrote this article shouldn’t write any more articles on the Balkans. He has no idea what he is talking about.
It’s an Albanian article. What do you think it will say when they are angry? It’s a pity for them, but North Macedonia just shows it doesn’t want to make reforms, they just expect to be let in so they have access to those sweet sweet money.