Brussels – In the long and drawn-out wait for the publication of the EU’s pre-enlargement reforms – which are still not on the horizon, pending “the right moment,” as EU sources familiar with the matter told The New Union Post – early indications emerge from public remarks by Commissioner for Enlargement Marta Kos.
“The pre-enlargement reviews concern the Treaties, the budget and the decision-making process,” Commissioner Kos said during her latest structured dialogue with the European Parliament’s Committee on Foreign Affairs (AFET). A key issue highlighted in her exchange with MEPs is the need for strengthened safeguard clauses in the context of new Accession Treaties, which should be “credible, effective and capable of being applied if serious shortcomings arise after accession,” she added.
After months of delays, the growing emphasis on a “new generation” of Accession Treaties and on the mechanisms needed to prevent backsliding on the EU’s core principles suggests that the Commission’s proposal on pre-enlargement reforms is increasingly evolving into something more closely linked to the accession of new members than to a broader reform of how an enlarged Union should function.
Already on the day of the 2025 Enlargement Package, Commissioner Kos told MEPs that stronger safeguard clauses could allow the EU to ensure that “positive dynamics” in the rule of law, democracy and fundamental rights are maintained even after the accession of new countries, avoiding backsliding on commitments. “The lesson learned from 2004 is that we need safeguards that ensure new members stick to the rules and that the integrity of our Union is preserved even 5, 10 or 20 years down the line,” she confirmed before the same parliamentary committee a few months later.
Safeguard clauses in Accession Treaties are nothing new, as they have always been included to some extent in the legal framework between the Union and current members. However, “the scale of enlargement, the political context and the lessons of past enlargements” are raising questions within the Commission about “how these instruments should evolve,” Commissioner Kos warned.
No “Trojan horses” and a new methodology
“We have to make sure that we do not get Trojan horses into the EU,” Commissioner Kos reiterated, reviving her signature expression first used in autumn 2025 in an interview with the Financial Times. The backsliding on the rule of law in Viktor Orbán‘s Hungary, years after its 2004 accession, has left an indelible mark in Brussels.
As the Commissioner responsible for enlargement policy made clear, “this is not about creating additional criteria for new members,” but rather about ensuring more effectively that, “if a country goes backwards on our fundamentals” – namely respect for democracy and the rule of law – “the safeguards must bite hard,” in order to protect the entire Union and citizens’ trust in it.
This could involve specific provisions in Accession Treaties during the transitional period, allowing for the suspension of certain rights if the rule of law in new member states is undermined. However, what the Commission firmly opposes is the creation of first- and second-class membership through the limitation of voting rights for new members.
In other words, even if these safeguard clauses are “special,” new members “will not even feel them, if they comply fully and follow all the rules and values.” Montenegro is the candidate to watch closely, as it is currently working towards closing all negotiating chapters, and “its Accession Treaty should be the first of a new generation of Treaties,” Commissioner Kos pointed out.
Moreover, the Commission intends to come forward with the financial package for Montenegro “before the summer,” providing “very concrete insights” into the budgetary implications for the Union arising not only from Podgorica’s accession but from all candidates involved in the process. “Whatever we do now with Montenegro will be a catalyst for all,” Commissioner Kos said.
While safeguard clauses in the Accession Treaty are not a brand-new concept, “they are now connected to the pre-enlargement policy reviews,” which will more broadly cover how the EU should prepare itself “institutionally, politically and financially,” the Commissioner responsible for enlargement policy recalled.
It is in this context that discussions on overcoming the unanimity rule are taking place, recently reinvigorated by Viktor Orbán‘s electoral defeat in Hungary. Commissioner Kos echoed Ursula von der Leyen‘s view that the Commission would be “happy” to see a shift towards qualified majority voting (QMV), “especially in the field of foreign policy.”
As regards the Commission, the number of its members would increase following the potential accession of new countries to the Union. However, “the present EU Treaty already allows for a smaller number of Commissioners” – equal to two-thirds of the number of member states – provided the 27 government agree.
Finally, there is the thorny issue of the overall revision of the EU accession policy. According to two EU sources familiar with the matter, member states are ready to “kill off” any far-reaching revision. Commissioner Kos continues to stress that the current methodology “is made for peacetime, not for times in which we should deliver quickly,” especially considering that it is broadly the same as that used “40 years ago, when Portugal and Spain joined the EU” in 1986.
She recalled that three possible scenarios had been put forward: the status quo, enhanced gradual integration – granting access to selected EU programmes and policy areas before formal entry into the Union – or so-called phased integration, also referred to as ‘reversed membership’.
The second scenario – enhanced gradual integration – “is where we have the most possibility” of success, with the discussion centring on one key question: “Is it possible that, if a country is fulfilling all the requirements in one specific area, it could also be integrated into this area, gaining certain rights?” The model suggested by Commissioner Kos is the current cooperation with some third countries, such as Norway, Switzerland, Iceland, and Liechtenstein within the Schengen Area framework. “They can participate in the Council, but cannot take any decisions,” she explained, suggesting something similar for candidate countries in other policy areas.
Waiting for the pre-enlargement reforms
What the European Commission will publish is a communication – a soft law instrument setting out a strategic approach but carrying no legally binding force. As already anticipated, the proposal on the pre-enlargement reforms will focus on what can already be done under the current Treaties, and on those areas where a broad consensus is emerging.
Available tools include the passerelle clauses – legal mechanisms that allow a shift in decision-making procedures without a formal Treaty amendment, such as moving from unanimity to qualified majority voting. Policy reviews will cover strengthening sectoral policies, values, and the budget. Building on the communication, the Commission will engage with the Parliament and the Council to determine to what extent it will be possible to make progress with the co-legislators.
Marko Makovec, Head of Cabinet to Commissioner Kos, confirmed that “we will not propose anything that goes against the core principle of the EU, which is equality.” This means that any safeguard clauses in the new Accession Treaties should not “in any way limit the voting rights or other rights of new member states.”
Another issue to be taken into consideration is how the current EU enlargement methodology, introduced in 2021, has been held hostage by the “bilateralisation” of the EU accession process, Makovec warned. This refers to situations in which bilateral issues raised by individual member states can “bring to a halt a process intended to drive reforms,” in particular due to the legal practice – not enshrined in the EU Treaties – of requiring unanimity in the Council at all of the roughly 150 intermediate steps of the accession process.
