Poland, Slovakia, and Czechia are generally supportive of EU enlargement, both eastward and southward toward the Western Balkans. However, politicians emphasise the importance of candidate countries meeting the necessary criteria. Ukraine acknowledges the long road ahead but asserts that every step toward EU membership is a step further from Russia’s sphere of influence.
By Aleksandra Krzysztoszek (EURACTIV.pl), Ondřej Plevák (EURACTIV.cz), Natália Silenská (EURACTIV.sk) and Yana Sliemzina (Gwara Media)
POLAND
Poland is among the most pro-enlargement EU countries. Of the candidates seeking to join the bloc, Warsaw prioritises the newest: Ukraine and Moldova.
This approach stems not only from a sense of solidarity with its southeastern neighbor and the ambition to strengthen its position within the EU by advocating for Kyiv’s interests but also from the looming Russian threat.
Support for Ukraine’s EU accession has been a consistent feature of both the former nationalist Law and Justice (PiS) government and the current pro-EU coalition led by Donald Tusk, which replaced PiS after the 2023 elections.
Tusk said that Poland would use its upcoming EU presidency to promote Ukraine's accession talks and cooperate with Ukraine to ensure it meets all the necessary conditions for progress.
However, when outlining the priorities for Poland’s EU presidency in his January speech to the European Parliament, Prime Minister Tusk made no mention of enlargement. Instead, he focused on various aspects of EU security.
The presidency’s priorities, listed on its official website, mention enlargement only in relation to potential challenges facing European agriculture.
While this suggests that the Polish Presidency places greater emphasis on security, defense, and migration management than on enlargement, it does not imply opposition to new EU members. Tusk reaffirmed that Poland would support Ukraine’s Euro-Atlantic integration but stopped short of rejecting the accession of Western Balkan countries.
On the contrary, in 2024, he stated that Poland would support Serbia and other Balkan countries in their EU aspirations, despite some foreign policy differences. "There are no misunderstandings or issues in EU-Serbia relations that we cannot solve, or that should hinder EU enlargement," Tusk said during his visit to Belgrade in October.
Poland’s ruling coalition, like PiS, generally supports enlargement. MEPs argue that the EU must keep candidate countries close while ensuring they are fully prepared for membership.
Left-wing MEP Robert Biedroń (S&D) told Euractiv Poland, “I am fully in favor of enlargement. It is in Poland’s interest that the EU is larger, stronger, and more effective. In these uncertain times, we need new allies, and nothing unites us more than belonging to the European community.”
“I believe it is in our interest to keep all candidate countries within our orbit. This applies even to those where democratic processes and pro-European reforms are struggling. If we turn a blind eye, hostile powers will take advantage,” he added.
MEP Bogdan Rzońca (PiS, ECR) emphasised the need for a “well-thought-out, responsible enlargement process based on clear criteria.”
“I support enlargement because it strengthens the stability, security, and economic development of our continent,” he said. “At the same time, the EU needs revitalization—new members, especially from the Western Balkans, can bring fresh energy, economic, and political dynamism to the community.”
"Deeper European integration is in the interest of both the EU and Poland," MEP Łukasz Kohut (EPP). However, he pointed to Ukraine's accession as a potential challenge for Polish agriculture, suggesting that Kyiv’s integration should be carefully managed. "Undoubtedly, integration with Kyiv is a priority after the war ends," Kohut stressed.
When asked about the pace and order of future enlargement, both Biedroń and Rzońca agreed that this should depend on the readiness of candidate countries.
"Adapting to EU legislation is not easy. The EU itself must be ready for enlargement. I trust that leaders of Member States and EU institutions will make the necessary efforts," Biedroń said.
Rzońca warned, "A political decision on enlargement should not precede the readiness of candidate countries to meet their obligations. The EU must maintain its ability to function effectively, so every accession must be carefully prepared and preceded by a thorough assessment."
He further cautioned that failing to integrate emerging countries could create a geopolitical vacuum that powers like China and Russia could exploit. "The absence of a clear EU perspective allows these states to engage financially in the region, often with political conditions attached," he added, pointing to China's investments in the Balkans, and Russia’s influence in Moldova and Ukraine.
“The EU cannot allow strategically important countries to fall under the influence of authoritarian regimes,” Rzońca concluded.
Kohut pointed to Iceland as a potential candidate for quicker EU accession, citing a referendum on membership.
“As the European Parliament’s shadow rapporteur on relations with Iceland, I am hopeful for a positive outcome and swift resumption of negotiations,” he said. “Iceland’s EU membership would strengthen the security of both the EU and Iceland.”
The Polish party most skeptical of EU enlargement is the far-right Confederation. MEP Anna Bryłka (Confederation, PfE) believes the enlargement process should be halted until significant changes are made to the EU’s functioning.
“There is too much flawed legislation and too many poor strategic decisions to begin another major enlargement at this time,” she told Euractiv Poland. “The EU must reconsider the legitimacy of its current form, which is unattractive to candidate countries and harmful to member states.”
Regarding the pace and order of enlargement, she argued that it would be better for candidate countries to form common blocs and negotiate with the EU collectively. “This was a major flaw in Poland's own accession process,” Bryłka added.
UKRAINE
76% of European respondents to the Eurobarometer survey conducted in 2024 “agree that Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is a threat to the security of the EU.” That is part of the reason why the EU's attitude towards enlargement changed with Russia’s all-out invasion of Ukraine.
At the same time, 74% of people in Ukraine supported joining the EU last year, and, according to Kyiv International Institute for Sociology’s survey, joining the Union matters the most for Ukraine’s long-term security, economic prospects, and future of the country’s democracy.
Support for EU accession hasn’t been a matter of popular public—or political—discourse since Euromaidan, the ousting of President Viktor Yanukovych, Russia’s occupation of Crimea, and the start of its war on Ukraine. Similarly, the same applies to EU enlargement, not only because Ukraine is a candidate country.
“If Moldova becomes a part of the EU first, it won’t be bad for us at all,” Liubov Zharova, Doctor of Economics at the Ukrainian-American Concordia University, told Gwara Media. “Perhaps the issue with Transnistria will be resolved then. The more stable our borders are, the better it is for us.”
In January, Marta Kos, European Commissioner for Enlargement, said that the first and sixth chapters in the negotiations on Ukraine's EU membership could be opened in 2025 (with Hungary blocking the first negotiation cluster later). Zharova believes that ensuring compliance with the EU rules and regulations can make Ukraine more stable, democratic, and transparent.
For Ukraine, even going step-by-step through each negotiation cluster means getting out of Russia’s sphere of influence, Zharova believes. The rise of far-right parties and populists in Europe does not necessarily counter this, even though it certainly does not make things easier.
“If we won’t be encouraged to change, we will be eager to freeze and do nothing,” Zharova said. “Negotiation clusters will force us to change. I don’t think we’ll join the EU in the next five years, but complying with regulations would allow us to slowly expand our trade and economic relations with the EU countries,” she added.
Going through the clusters would also defeat the arguments about non-compliance of Ukrainian products waged by protesters in Poland and Romania who organised blockades on the Ukrainian border. “If we fulfill the demands, we won’t give them the opportunity to exclude us from trading and social and other forms of international cooperation,” the experts hopes.
While joining the EU is largely undebated in Ukraine and political parties often “use it as a part of their identity,” the image they present—and the image people in Ukraine see when they imagine their country becoming a EU member—might not correlate with what the EU really is. “We align with the EU because we view it as the path opposite to Russia, and our understanding is formed by this [dichotomy,] not by EU’s real politics and reforms,” Vladyslav Starodubtsev, historian of Central and Eastern Europe and left activist, said.
“In many aspects, the EU tries to close itself off from the world and be a rich countries club. At the same time, the EU presents itself as a definite moral power and representative of the region. But the countries at EU borders become excluded from making decisions that impact them and become buffers’ for the EU—or zones for EU’s trade expansion,” Starodubtsev stressed. “In democratic countries, the obvious response to that is: nothing about us without us,” he pointed out.
For the EU itself, he said, enlargement, the acceptance of Ukraine—and other candidate countries—means an “opportunity to have a bigger international, moral, economic and regulatory power—and a chance to avoid stagnation and change power balance [in the region].”
Zharova added that the pace of EU enlargement now will depend not only on whether or not the integration of a new country is smooth but also on the new policies of US President Donald Trump. “If he’ll support local manufacturers and restrict the supply of European products to American markets, Europe will have to sell them somewhere,” she noted.
As for a new individual approach to each candidate country’s accommodation to the Union, “the approach was always individual and will become even more so because the acceptance of the new members demands the consensus of existing ones,” according to Zharova. “The evolution of regulations and social, economic, ecological demands and guarantees to the population makes the consensus even more difficult to find,” the expert said.
CZECH REPUBLIC
The Czech Republic has traditionally been one of the main advocates of further enlargement of the EU, seeing it as a key process for ensuring stability, security and prosperity in Europe. And this is not just rhetoric.
“Beyond how the enlargement process is supported by other countries with similar priorities, Czechia has been proactive in recent years within the EU Council through non-papers focused on the possibilities of gradual integration of countries applying for EU membership,” said Jana Faktor Juzová, Senior Research Fellow at EUROPEUM Institute for European Policy.
According to her, the candidate countries perceive Czechia as a trustworthy partner from which even constructive criticism is not taken as negatively as when it comes from the “old” Western EU countries. At the same time, Czechs are critical of those EU member states that block the enlargement process because of bilateral disputes.
Even so, she believes there is room for improvement. “At the European level, Czechia could be more active in ,persuading’ EU countries that are not typically positive about further enlargement,” Faktor Juzová said.
MEP Markéta Gregorová (Pirates, Greens/EFA), whose party is currently in opposition, also welcomes the Czech government's approach.
“It seems to me that [Czechia] has a positive but cautious approach to enlargement, based on its own experience, which was not so long ago,” the MEP said.
Czechia joined the EU in 2004 as part of a large “wave” of 10 countries. Now, according to European Affairs Minister Martin Dvořák (STAN, EPP), Prague is open to both “waves” and to admitting countries one by one. But he said it was important that each candidate “meets the necessary criteria and accepts the EU values”.
According to Faktor Juzová, this is what is typical for the Czechs – they stress that the enlargement process should be led by the performance of individual candidate countries and should adequately respond to the progress of each country in the required reforms.
As to whether to admit Ukraine and Moldova to the EU first, or rather the Western Balkans, the expert believes that Czechia is one of the few EU countries that is truly striving for a balanced approach to European integration of both regions.
But this does not mean that Czechs do not perceive the different realities of the two regions.
“Ukraine is a specific case – although Czechia has supported it for a long time, we cannot forget the fact that it is still in a state of war and does not control its entire territory. Although it is implementing reforms in record time and is trying, it still does not meet all the conditions, especially the economic ones. We are in favour of this, but Ukraine still has a long way to go,” Dvořák said.
MEP Gregorová sees it similarly. “Although the desire and urgency to support Ukraine and Moldova in particular is understandable, at this moment it is more pragmatic and beneficial to support the Western Balkan countries first,” she said. Countries such as Northern Macedonia, Albania and Montenegro, she said, are simply further along in the process.
In any case, Czechia sees the EU enlargement as something to bring primarily positives – strengthening security and regional stability, new business opportunities or economic growth of the Czech economy.
“At the same time, however, it is necessary to take into account challenges such as harmonisation of legislation or ensuring cohesion between member states,” minister Dvořák recalled. Another challenge is to him the enlargement process itself, which is complex and requires “searching for more efficient decision-making mechanisms”.
Faktor Juzová believes that there is political consensus in Czechia (among all parties around the political centre) on the importance of further enlargement in terms of long-term stability and prosperity in Europe, despite the potential short-term economic and political costs.
She also offered insight into the views of the Czech population. Opinion polls show that the society is divided on the issue of further enlargement and is among the more sceptical ones within the Union. At the same time, it shows that people are not very well informed and do not have an overview of the issue of enlargement.
“It could be concluded that Czech public opinion is rather a blank canvas and it will depend on the political representation how it will take up this topic and whether it can convincingly portray enlargement as an opportunity rather than a risk,” concluded Faktor Juzová.
SLOVAKIA
Although the approach of Robert Fico’s fourth government differs significantly from its predecessors in many areas, when it comes to EU enlargement, it strives for a “balanced stance” – whether regarding the EU expansion to the East (Ukraine, Moldova) or the South (Western Balkan countries).
As explained by Tomáš Strážay, director of the Research Center of the Slovak Foreign Policy Association (SFPA), the government’s official statements do not indicate any prioritisation of specific candidate countries.
Despite its often controversial or anti-Ukrainian rhetoric, Fico’s government continues to unconditionally back Ukraine’s EU accession, even differing from its EU-sceptic ally, Hungarian PM Viktor Orbán, who recently questioned why is Slovakia even supporting Kyiv’s membership.
Strážay attributes Fico’s government’s approach to a simple „pragmatism.”
“They understand that if Ukraine is integrated, it will inevitably lead to economic growth. And that economic growth will also become tangible in the eastern regions of Slovakia, which have long lagged behind,” the expert pointed out.
Even if Fico, due to his conflicts with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, were to focus more on supporting the integration of the Western Balkans, it would not be an ideal strategy for him. As Strážay noted, Slovakia has an “unresolved issue” in this region – Kosovo.
Slovakia, along with four other EU countries, does not recognise the country. Moreover, as of this year, it no longer even has a consular office there, a development Strážay does not see as positive.
“Maintaining dialogue with Kosovar representatives and various sectors of society is essential because without Kosovo, the integration of the Western Balkans into the EU will remain incomplete,” he explained.
The three political parties that responded to questions from EURACTIV Slovakia – the liberal opposition parties Progressive Slovakia (PS/RE) and Freedom and Solidarity (SaS), as well as the ruling party Hlas-SD (NI) – generally reflect Slovakia’s “balanced stance” on EU enlargement.
None prioritised a specific country’s accession, except MEP Branislav Ondruš from Hlas-SD, who named the Western Balkans as his priority but stressed this was his personal view, shaped by years of involvement in the region.
However, all agreed that the primary criterion for accession must be the candidate country’s fulfilment of the agreed-upon conditions and its strategic ambition to be part of the European value system.
“More important than speed or the number (of new member states) is the transparency of the process and an equal approach to all candidate countries,” said Hlas-SD MEP Ondruš, stressing that these countries must feel that “the EU treats them fairly.”
In this regard, the parties also acknowledged the statement by Enlargement Commissioner Marta Kos, who said that a large-scale EU expansion is unlikely in the near future and that new members are more likely to be accommodated separately.
Juraj Krúpa from SaS pointed out that this follows the EU’s approved strategy, which is based on a merit-based approach.
“All member states agreed to this approach. The experience with Georgia confirms that it is the right one,” he said, referring to the pro-Russian government in Tbilisi, which is steering the country eastward against the will of its citizens.
When asked whether they see EU enlargement as more of an opportunity or a source of problems, the parties leaned toward the earlier.
MEP Ľubica Karvašová from PS stated that enlargement is clearly an opportunity for both the EU and candidate countries” and “has always been a foreign policy priority for Slovakia”.
She also cited Strážay’s argument about the potential economic benefits for eastern Slovakia, which borders Ukraine and forms an “external EU border.”
With Ukraine’s EU accession, the region could experience economic growth and infrastructure development, similar to what happened in eastern Austria when neighbouring countries joined the Union.
“This is a major opportunity that Slovakia must not squander," she emphasised, while also criticising Fico’s government for choosing conflict with Kyiv instead of fostering cooperation.
SaS’ Krúpa agreed that EU enlargement is “a great and attractive opportunity” for candidate countries and has a stabilising geopolitical effect.
However, he also cautioned that it can bring challenges. That is why, in his view, it is crucial that new member states share the fundamental values on which the EU is built.
“Cautious approach from the EU is justified, given that countries like Slovakia and Hungary have abandoned these values and are now seen as problematic,” he said.
Ondruš from Hlas-SD added that the EU must ensure that enlargement does not become a source of new problems and that such risks should be mitigated during the accession process itself.
Strážay and Karvašová also emphasised that the enlargement process is closely linked to the EU’s internal reforms.
“In the past, every major reform of the Union was accompanied by the admission of new members. I believe this should remain the case today,” concluded PS MEP Karvašová.
The project is co-financed by the governments of Czechia, Hungary, Poland and Slovakia through Visegrad Grants from the International Visegrad Fund. The mission of the fund is to advance ideas for sustainable regional cooperation in Central Europe.
The project is supported by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Korea.
