Yes, but clearly a pro-Russian government currently is a huge even decisive black mark on accession. No getting round that.
Serbia knows this and the gov is trying to tie itself to Montenegro, Albania and N Macdedonia in accession, but that is not working
Any support for Russia should put a stop to any possibility of a country joining the EU for a very long time.
Serbia should not be seen as a viable candidate.
β¦order to qualify.
Plenty of programs extends benefits to applicants even though they havenβt fully joined.
Once a country has joined the EU no longer has any effective mechanism to ensure that they continue to improve.
If a country weakens the EU by joining or puts the EU at risk. Then they shouldnβt be allowed to join.
If we weaken the EU then there will soon be nowhere to join.
Applicants get plenty of benefits long before they join.
One of the biggest benefits comes from them having to actually improve inβ¦
No one is closing the door but adding countries just to add them makes no sense.
2 or 3 more Hungaryβs and the EU is done for.
No one in EUR will benefit from the EU being weakened by weak members that are not ready.
We have the accession criteria for a reason.
Exactly.
In my opinion it should be one of the biggest benefits of the EUβ¦to ensure that countries do better for the benefit of all Europeans.
Quality not quantity, strength not numbers.
Everyone benefits from a stronger EU even countries that might have to wait before they join.
The expulsion mechanism that I seek should of course be in place for all membersβ¦new and old.
The question is⦠do we want a strong EU or simply an EU with the highest number of MSs?
β¦and?
The rules have changed since Spain joined.
Of course the applicants need to adhere to these rules. We have enough examples of what happens when a country (or several) donβt abide by these rules.
I honestly canβt remember.
This is a short election period (3-4 w).
Also there are only a limited number of votes a year on this issue.
You canβt have a vote when the parliamentarians are not in parliament. Everyone is in their local area trying to get re-elected.
β¦used.
Joining the EU isnβt easy. It is not supposed to be.
No one benefits from a destabilised EU.
I hope that no country is allowed to join before they 100% fulfil the Copenhagen criteria.
The EU doesnβt need more members. We need better members.
We shouldnβt allow any new members until we have successfully added an ironclad expulsion clause with a clear set of rules as to when it MUST beβ¦
Iceland is a country with a long standing democratic tradition and a developed economy.
Montenegro is a completely different story.
In a short 3-4 week election period , I definitely would expect that there will be very few laws passed.
*β¦releasedβ¦
β¦lost power.
Starting wars and removing the last remnants of US democracy is not a distraction. It is the end goal/steps towards the end goal.
What worries me is that the US might be successful in starting World War III.
It also deeply worries me that so many think that the US can simply vote away their fascist government.
The Epstein files, to the extent that the missing ones still exists, will not be relased until the fascist GOP has
Oil prices have sky rocketed, saving the Russian economy, for now.
security. It threatens Greenland, Denmark, Canada, Europe & is no friend of Ukraine, which it is trying to make cede territory to the aggressor Russia. It is not Spain, England [the Fox News person meant the UK], the EU or Europe that has betrayed the US, rather it is the US that has betrayed them.
Personally I am rather more worried that the US has been providing intelligence to Russia about Ukraine β¦
Nevertheless the US is at war. Itβs illegal not because Congress did not declare war. Itβs illegal because itβs in flagrant breach of the UN Charter (the consent of Congress would have made no difference on this point).
Exactly why Scotland π΄σ §σ ’σ ³σ £σ ΄σ Ώ needs independence within the EU to rid itself of this corrupt, archaic state and its exceptionalism and class ridden elite.
One party wants sex with the other party but with no commitment/contribution and after having been the reason for a very bad break up.
The other party has plenty of other better and safer opportunities.
True.
We need to be far more vigilant when accessing applicants.
β¦and they are a far safer bet that any other candidate/potential candidate out there.
The only other country of the same caliber is Norway.
Possibly; but between its longstanding EEA membership, which means it is already aligned on SM law, and the fact that there have already been three years of active negotiations on joining, Iceland is starting from a much more advanced position than the UK.
It's reasonable to say that Iceland is about as good a candidate as Europe could hope for
It seems to soon to add any new members except for Norway and Iceland (if they apply).
We bodged the last enlargement and that is why we now have to constantly deal with Hungary, Slovakia etc.
β¦last time, it might severely damage or even destroy the EU.
We already have some very shaky members. We certainly donβt need more.
If it applies it will be levels above all the other candidates.
Iceland and Norway are the only countries we can allow in without fearing another Hungary, Slovakia etc.
We need an expulsion clause before the other applicants can be allowed into the EU.
If we rush this enlargement like we didβ¦
2010 could (should) have been an opportunity to actually shake up the electoral system and become a normal democracy, instead we ended with Cameron and Clegg, two terribly unserious politicians and from then on weβve just become less and less serious
