Reuters Notes Vucic's Realism on EU Enlargement

Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic said there should be no expectation of a major European Union enlargement in the coming years, while insisting that the European path still remains the best option for the Western Balkans. He made the remarks on July 8 during an appearance on the evening news of Radio Television of Serbia, where he spoke about the negotiating clusters, relations with Montenegro and the direction of Serbian foreign policy.

The Reuters news agency carried the assessment and highlighted what it described as Vucic’s realism about the future of the Union. The message is not new in substance, but it is new in the sense that the president repeated, before both domestic and foreign audiences, that membership will come neither quickly nor easily, and that there is no euphoria over short deadlines.

What Vucic actually said

On the broadcast, Vucic said Serbia remains committed to the European path, but that it is wrong to promise citizens miracles. One should not, he specified, expect a large wave of enlargement in the coming years that would take in several countries of the region at once. Instead, the president said the work must be done patiently, through the opening and closing of negotiating clusters and chapters.

The president had voiced the same position earlier, at a conference of parliament speakers from candidate countries in Belgrade, where he spoke about the slow pace of enlargement. The consistency of that message, from behind closed doors to the television studio, shows this is not a passing mood but a calculated position that tries to avoid the disappointment carried by unmet promises.

Foreign Minister Marko Djuric stressed that the European path is one of the key points of Serbia’s foreign policy. With that, the state leadership holds to the line that Brussels remains a strategic goal, even when the deadlines are uncertain and when a debate is under way within the Union itself over how ready it is to admit new members.

Why realism instead of promises?

Part of the answer lies within the Union. The enlargement process has been slow for years, and several member states openly show reluctance to admit new countries before internal reforms. In such an environment, promising early membership would be politically risky, because any slippage of the deadline would look like a defeat. Realism, in that calculation, is a safer currency than enthusiasm.

There is a domestic dimension too. For part of the public, the European path is a measure of the seriousness of reforms, while another part approaches it with skepticism after years of delay. The message that there are no miracles tries to address both sides at once: those seeking progress are given a direction, and those in doubt are given an admission that there is no easy road.

The opposition usually answers this approach by arguing that the slow pace is not only a consequence of Brussels, but also of insufficient domestic work on the rule of law. The government, for its part, insists that the commitment is clear and that chapters are opened as conditions allow. Between those two readings stands the same fact: no one, in Belgrade or in Brussels, is naming a date of entry.

One question cannot be avoided. If a major enlargement really will not come soon, is realism a responsible way to prepare citizens for a long process, or does it merely pre-justify every further delay?