The EU and the President of the EU Commission Ursula von der Leyen are very keen on Ukraine becoming a member of the Union.   According to a report in Politico—a news agency that claims to be a survey of opinion across EU leaders and  top officials—she has come up with an innovative way of doing this in present circumstances. 

From its inception,  an accepted and clear  policy of the Union has been that no state with disputed borders could be considered for membership—and certainly no country in a state of  war over borders—which was a perfectly sensible approach. 

  This is about to change, however, according to this  report:  

“EU governments questioned Commission President Ursula von der Leyen about efforts to break the deadlock over bringing new nations into the bloc at a meeting in Brussels on Friday, according to diplomats who took part in the discussion or were briefed on its content.  She set out a variety of options and models that the EU is considering, they said.  Among them was the idea of “reverse enlargement”:

“It would be a sort of recalibration of the process — you join and then you get phased in rights and obligations”, said an EU official familiar with the content of the discussion. 

“So there would be a rethinking of how we do accession based on the very different situation we have now compared to when the Commission established accession criteria”…” (10.2.2026). 

The report goes on to list the  “five  steps” that are being considered to have Ukraine become a member.  But what should the primary and most important first step be—i.e., what Ukraine are we talking about?  

The assumption is that the whole of Ukraine will join the EU:  but of course this is a delusion and so it’s not spelled out!  

If it is the non-Russian Ukraine that is in question, then the current position of the obvious, de facto, division of Ukraine is being accepted.  But that fact on the ground cannot be contemplated in European discourse, so the reality of the situation is ignored and delusion reigns supreme!

 The first of these steps is “Getting Ukraine ready for membership“, and we are told by Ms Leyen  that: 

“For its part, Kyiv says it’s ready to do the work required.  “We will be technically ready by 2027”,  Zelensky said on Friday. “You are talking about the end of the war and simultaneous security guarantees. And the EU for us is security guarantees”…”

Candidates for membership  used to undergo very strict  criteria for membership, which took some years.  These comprised— 

—full alignment  with the EU as  a functioning democracy, 

—synchronising economic standards, 

—establishing an independent judiciary, 

—introducing anti-corruption measures 

All these were non-negotiable factors, which had to be introduced before candidate countries could benefit from  membership. 

I recall that there used to be about 50 such criteria in total!

But it appears that all these safeguards have been set aside:   Ukraine can join without pre-conditions—even while War is raging!  

The existing procedure for membership may now be reversed and states  can first become members and later they can qualify for membership!  Just call it reverse enlargement  and hopefully that will make sense!! 

Ursula has made so many  successful innovations that her making up another one as she goes along should come as no surprise.  You could call it the à la carte approach to EU governance!  

Her innovations can be described as a veritable coup in  the institutions of the EU.  Chief among her constitutional innovations by diktat is having  herself accepted as leader of the EU—a move which is contrary to its basic structure.  It can be described as unconstitutional.

The real qualification for EU membership, under her  leadership, is the level of Russophobia in the applicant states:  and this is so obvious that it does not need to be spelt out.  

The EU once gloried in being a vehicle for peace in the world:  now it has become a vehicle for war. 

The next step is to  “Create EU membership-lite”. 

That is to create two classes of EU membership:  one of these is to be a member in form, but not a member in reality.  This is explained as follows:  

“The idea is not to lower the bar, but to create a politically powerful message to countries whose accession is held up because of war or opposition from capitals like Budapest — not just Ukraine, but also Moldova and Albania, among others” (ibid).

 So, in extending membership to Ukraine, consideration has nothing really to do with the realities in that country, or  consideration of the interests of  Ukraine, or its qualification for membership.  In all previous instances a considerable acclimatisation process has taken place, which harmonises the laws of the candidate country with European norms.

Instead of going that tried and tested route,  it is now proposed to send a political signal— ‘a message’ encouraging others to get ready to appear on the à la carte  membership menu!

Step three is “Wait for Orbán’s departure“.  And if that does not work, it’s onto step four:  “Play the Trump card“. This delusionary scheme is predicated on the surmise that:  

“With EU accession for Ukraine by 2027 written into a draft 20-point proposal to end the war, the hope is that Trump may call Budapest to get a deal done.  Zelensky hinted at this hope on Friday…” (ibid).

And pigs will surely fly!

  The idea that Trump would make such an intervention is another delusion—but the reader will have to count up the total number of delusions in this single sentence, taking into account the number that are in that 20-point document—which is now redundant  and which Trump treats with contempt!

Step five is:  “If all else fails, remove Hungary’s voting rights”! 

However it appears that—  

“The EU has no intention of making that push yet, assuming that doing so would play into Orbán’s hands ahead of his April election.  But capitals are gauging support for using the tool if Orbán is re-elected and continues to obstruct EU decision-making.  Such a move is “absolutely possible,” a third diplomat said”…”(ibid).

As Orban  is not likely to adopt “the empty chair” approach of de Gaulle, will we have a scenario where a Member State attends but cannot vote?  

Logically there should be  a step six of expulsion:  but that cannot happen as there is no mechanism for expelling a Member State!

So the EU may  inevitably face a situation that  would be beyond embarrassing for it and its much vaunted values about ‘democracy’—a value which must surely ensure the right to an equal vote for each Member State.  

Perhaps Orban  should start wearing a muzzle to highlight the ludicrous situation of the dogmatic liberals/illiberals currently in charge in Brussels!

Jack Lane