First anniversary of the enlargement to EU-25
A good day for Europe. Those were the words I used to describe May 1st 2004 when, with the enlargement of the European Union, European history and European geography, 60 years after the end of the war, finally reconciled. Enlargement is proof that the attraction of the European project is still very much alive. It was thereby also one more vindication of the ideals harboured by the founding fathers of European integration.
There was nevertheless a lot of scepticism and even fear a year ago. This was true on both sides, within the EU-15 but also in the new Member States. Twelve months later, slowly but surely even the biggest doubters have to accept that far from a threat, enlargement represents for both sides an opportunity. Some of the most sceptic back then, even count among the most enthusiastic today. It is gratifying to witness how many of the questions asked received a positive answer, how many apprehensions have been overcome.
A year is obviously too short a time to pass final judgement on the success of the enlarged Union. But already today, we can observe similar effects in the new Member States as we could back in the 1980s, after previous enlargements. Bar one, all new Member States will grow faster in 2005 and 2006 than the EU-25 average, continuing the trend. The new members have become one of the main growth engines of the European economy. Like the citizens of other new Member States before them, those in central Europe and the Mediterranean sea recognise enlargement first and foremost as a reason for hope, as an opportunity to help build tomorrow in their homeland rather than to be left looking with envy at those who have succeeded on the same road before.
In the fifteen old Member States, many doubts were directed towards enlargement. Some have been answered, others persist. Even though it is highly regrettable and most of the time overly simplistic, one cannot deny that especially in economic debates, the interests of the new members are often pitched as rivalling those of the old members. Yes, enlargement has in some areas accelerated structural changes. But it would be erroneous to blame enlargement for the existence of structural change, as would be the believe that such change could be avoided. Enlargement is just an additional proof for what we also knew before: reforms are necessary and unavoidable. This is, by the way, not only true for the EU-15. The challenges faced by the new Member States are in the end very similar.
As acting president of the European Council, I can of course not ignore the changes enlargement brought to the EU-Institutions. New sensibilities are voiced in the Council, new viewpoints are brought into the debate, new geographical but also historical perspectives are added to it. There can be no doubt that the search for compromise turns out to be more demanding but also that the debates have grown more enriching.
At the same time, I cannot help but being prone to a certain nostalgia when old and cherished habits are being lost. When I first participated in a Council meeting, in 1982, we were ten. In one day, it was possible to have a comprehensive exchange on all major topics on the agenda. Today, such open debates are impracticable. The EU won’t be able to avoid exploring new methods of work in order to find different ways to sound out each other as well as find agreement. The traditional "tournée des capitales" by which presidencies used to prepare European Councils is no longer feasible.
Overall, looking back on the last twelve months, I’d say that it started off with a celebration, had us live through some difficult days and some long nights but gave us also pride for having succeeded in finally replacing the divisions of Yalta by the union of Europe. It might not always have been effortless, but it definitely made for exciting times.
May 1st 2004 was a good day for Europe. I am convinced that for all Europeans, both in the new and the old Member States, there are many more good days to come.