Thewesternbalkans.
This is an occasional free analysis from Thewesternbalkans. If you would like to have access to every Thewesternbalkans in-depth analysis please subscribe to the paid version of our site.
The renewed momentum around EU enlargement, especially concerning the Western Balkans, comes amid heightened geopolitical instability and external pressures in the region. Both the European Commission and key EU member states like Germany and France recognize the urgency of integrating these countries more deeply into the European orbit. However, they diverge on how this should be done.
After the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the EU and NATO interest in the European integration of the Western Balkan countries has reawakened. In the corridors of power in Brussels, there has been talk of a gradual or phased integration of the countries in order to resolve the contradiction between geopolitical considerations and the lack of readiness of the candidate countries for EU membership. The differences between the terms used – gradual integration and phased integration – are not very clear and their use is often confused. From publications by European experts and documents of the EU and its member states, it can be concluded that the difference between gradual EU integration and staged integration for the Western Balkans lies primarily in the structure, timeline, and political expectations of how candidate countries move toward full EU membership.
European Commission: Gradual Integration
The Commission remains wedded to the classic, technocratic enlargement model, rooted in legal conditionality and gradual adoption of the acquis communautaire. This framework is linear and binary: countries either meet the criteria and become full members, or they remain candidates. Building on the 2020 revised enlargement methodology, EU administration insist that gradual integration allows aspiring EU Member States to progressively integrate into selected policy areas, either before or after achieving EU membership. The European Commission made proposals for gradual integration in two key policy areas: transport and labour mobility. At the same time, the EU can strategically deprioritise more sensitive areas that might otherwise obstruct progress in the accession process.
By adopting this approach, the EU aims to accelerate the reform processes in Western Balkan candidates by gaining early access to specific pre-membership benefits.
The concept of the gradual EU Integration could be defined as a long-standing approach where candidate countries progressively meet EU accession criteria (Copenhagen criteria) and adopt the EU acquis step-by-step, typically through chapters opened and closed over time.
The rationale is: preserving the credibility of the accession process, avoiding the creation of “second-class” memberships, protection of the institutional integrity of the EU.
This model assumes that political transformation is best achieved through slow, disciplined convergence, with membership as the ultimate reward. Its key feature is strict conditionality – progress is tied to political, legal, and economic reforms, and no institutional benefits until full accession. The focus is on convergence, with emphasis on aligning fully with EU standards before gaining substantial access to institutions or decision-making. The week points are that the process is often too slow, creating frustration and disillusionment, it is vulnerable to enlargement fatigue within the EU and with limited tangible benefits for the candidates along the way.
German-French Proposal (2022/2023 onward): Staged Membership
Berlin and Paris propose a phased membership model, where candidate countries are gradually integrated into core EU policies and institutions, long before achieving full membership. This includes access to the Single Market, EU programs, and even observer roles in EU decision-making.
Staged integration (also called “phased membership” or “gradual accession with interim rewards”) could be defined as a newer and more flexible approach gaining traction in policy discussions, whereby countries integrate into the EU in stages, with incremental rewards (access to programs, funding, partial decision-making) before becoming full members.
Key features are: clear, intermediate milestones; states can enter successive stages of integration (e.g., access to Single Market, observer status in institutions); performance-based progress: based on merit, but avoids “all-or-nothing” dynamics; reversible: backsliding on reforms could mean being downgraded a stage. A more visible incentive is that the economic and political benefits appear earlier in the process and they increase the public support for reforms by showing tangible gains.
Rationale: respond to geopolitical urgency (Russia, China, Turkey influence in the Balkans); reflect domestic fatigue with full enlargement among EU citizens; create tangible incentives early in the process to sustain reforms.
Gradual vs. Staged Membership
Staged membership is a political solution to a political problem: how to keep the Western Balkans on a European path, anchored in the EU’s orbit, while full membership remains distant and uncertain.
Staged integration is an evolution of gradual integration, designed to address the credibility gap and slow pace of enlargement, especially in the Western Balkans. While gradual integration sticks to a rigid framework, staged integration seeks to make the process more political, engaging, and resilient — both for the EU and for the candidate countries.
The European Commission maintains the traditional, legalistic path to enlargement. The German-French proposal advocates for a more political, flexible model, with interim rewards and reversibility.
The symbolic message of the staged integration is “You’ll join when ready”, and of the gradual integration – “You’re already becoming part of us”.
While not in open contradiction, the proposals represent different philosophies: Commission is focused on technical compliance, while Berlin and Paris are pushing for a geopolitically driven, dynamic process.
Road ahead
The next enlargement will be different from previous ones. The accession process has been revised and negotiations are now restructured along six clusters instead of 35 individual chapters and candidate countries can phase into individual EU policies and programmes. The recent reform of the enlargement process might have had an impact on the technical level, but has not created strong political momentum within the EU’s enlargement policies.
For the next enlargement to happen, a „regatta“ approach would need to be taken, which better comply with the merit-based principle, instead the „en bloc“ option.
Regarding the accession process itself, discussions will continue on „accelerated“, „gradual’“or „staged“ accession in greater detail or another concept will be developed. The principles, that should guide future enlargement strategies and their connection to EU reform, will certainly be systematized, including most important „Fundamentals first“ principle, „Geopolitical considerations“ principle, „Conflict resolution“ principle or the „Qualified Majority Voting“ principle.
