The magnificent ten: A coalition of the willing to drive the EU’s next enlargement

Summary: “The Magnificent Ten – A Coalition for Europe’s Future”

The European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR) article “The Magnificent Ten: A Coalition of the Willing to Drive the EU’s Next Enlargement” presents a bold and actionable roadmap for advancing EU enlargement. With Ukraine’s potential membership now a geopolitical necessity—both for Kyiv’s post-war stability and Europe’s long-term security—the EU must act decisively. The article argues that a “Team Enlargement” coalition of ten key member states can break the current deadlock by designing a new, credible, and politically sustainable accession framework tailored to today’s challenges.

Key Insights and Takeaways

1. The Geopolitical Imperative for Enlargement

The case for EU enlargement has never been stronger. Ukraine’s membership is widely seen as essential to any lasting peace settlement, and both the US and Ukraine itself are pushing for accession as early as 2027. Yet, the EU remains unprepared, struggling with internal divisions, public skepticism, and institutional inertia. The risk of inaction is clear: failing to integrate Ukraine, Moldova, and the Western Balkans would leave Europe vulnerable—economically, politically, and strategically.

Security: A larger EU, anchored in democratic values and rule-of-law institutions, would strengthen Europe’s defense against Russian aggression and Chinese influence.
Economic Stability: Integrating new members would expand the single market, boost trade, and enhance economic resilience.
Strategic Autonomy: A united, enlarged EU would be better positioned to reduce dependence on external powers and assert its global leadership.

2. The Current Debate: Three Models, No Consensus

The European Commission has proposed three potential pathways for enlargement:

Status Quo: Continue the existing merit-based accession process, with its strengths (rigor) and weaknesses (slowness).
Enhanced Gradual Integration: Allow candidate countries to access specific EU policies and benefits progressively, before full membership.
Phased Integration (Reverse Enlargement): Grant new members limited political membership (e.g., seats in EU institutions without voting rights) before full integration.

However, member states have rejected reverse enlargement as unworkable, while enhanced gradual integration remains the most viable option. The most influential proposal to date is German Chancellor Friedrich Merz’s letter, which suggests associate membership for Ukraine—a status that would give Ukraine a presence in EU institutions (without voting rights) while retaining the goal of full membership. This model could bridge divisions between those prioritizing speed (security maximalists) and those insisting on conditionality (principled conditionalists).

3. The Politics of Enlargement: Overcoming Fragmentation

Enlargement is not just a technical process—it is a political challenge that must address public skepticism, far-right opposition, and external interference. Key concerns include:

Migration: 40% of EU citizens cite uncontrolled migration as their top concern regarding enlargement (higher in Austria, Denmark, France, and Italy).
Rule of Law: There is broad agreement that merit-based conditionality must remain the foundation of enlargement, but disputes persist over how quickly candidates should meet standards.
Economic Burden: Fears that new members (particularly Ukraine) will strain EU budgets, especially the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), remain a major hurdle.
Sovereignty and Identity: Populist and far-right narratives frame enlargement as a threat to national identity and EU cohesion, rather than a strategic investment.

The rise of transactional politics—exemplified by Trump’s return to power and the growing influence of far-right parties linked to MAGA-style movements—further complicates the debate. External powers, including the US and Russia, are actively undermining EU conditionality by engaging with illiberal leaders in candidate countries, eroding the very standards required for accession.

4. The “Magnificent Ten”: A Coalition to Drive Change

To break the deadlock, the ECFR proposes a “Team Enlargement” coalition of ten key member states, grouped into three clusters based on their priorities and constraints:

Cluster	Member States	Primary Logic	Key Concerns	Role in Coalition
Principled Conditionalists	Denmark, Germany, Sweden	Merit-based accession, rule of law	Institutional dysfunction, backsliding	Provide legitimacy and governance credibility
Conditional Sceptics	Austria, France, Italy, Netherlands	Pragmatic, nationally driven support	Migration, fiscal burden, economic disruption	Support if reassured on safeguards
Security Maximalists	Lithuania, Poland	Urgency driven by Russian threat	Russian aggression, geopolitical vacuum	Maintain momentum and urgency
Outlier	Hungary	Transactional, domestically constrained	Domestic backlash, anti-Ukraine narratives	Passive enabler (best-case scenario)

Common Ground:

Merit-based conditionality is the unifying principle—no member state opposes it, though interpretations vary.
Safeguards and reversibility (e.g., suspending accession if a candidate backslides on rule of law) are widely supported.
No access to EU funds before full membership is a red line for many, particularly regarding Ukraine’s agricultural potential.
Migration management must be addressed through transition periods and Schengen safeguards.

5. A Four-Step Plan for 2027

The “Team Enlargement” coalition should follow a structured timetable to deliver a new enlargement framework:

Develop the “Merz Letter” into a Full Concept (By October 2026)
- Germany, supported by security maximalists (Poland, Lithuania) and principled conditionalists (Denmark, Sweden), should refine Merz’s associate membership proposal into a comprehensive framework.
- The concept must address:
  - Merit-based conditionality (rule of law, democracy).
  - No access to EU funds before full membership.
  - Safeguards and reversibility (e.g., suspending accession if standards are violated).
  - Migration controls (transition periods, Schengen opt-outs).
- Conditional sceptics (France, Austria, Italy, Netherlands) should provide input to ensure the framework addresses their domestic concerns.
Shape a New Narrative on Enlargement (By Late 2026)
- Member states must engage domestic audiences through:
  - Parliamentary debates, media campaigns, and civil society outreach.
  - Evidence-based analysis from think tanks to counter disinformation.
  - Business and economic stakeholders highlighting the benefits of enlargement.
- Tailored messaging for each cluster:
  - Principled conditionalists: Emphasize rule of law, credibility, and responsible enlargement.
  - Conditional sceptics: Highlight economic safeguards, migration management, and fiscal prudence.
  - Security maximalists: Stress defense, resilience, and Ukraine as a security asset.
Secure European Council Endorsement (October–December 2026)
- The coalition should formalize the new framework in the General Affairs Council ahead of the October 2026 European Council.
- Each cluster should leverage its strengths:
  - Principled conditionalists underscore the framework’s credibility.
  - Conditional sceptics reassure cautious governments on migration and economic impacts.
  - Security maximalists make the geopolitical case for urgency.
- The December 2026 European Council should adopt political conclusions endorsing the framework.
Implement the Framework (2027)
- Apply the new framework to Albania, Moldova, Montenegro, and Ukraine to demonstrate its effectiveness.
- Montenegro’s accession treaty will serve as the first test case, building confidence among skeptical member states.
- Candidate countries must also actively engage in narrative-building to counter anti-enlargement sentiment in the EU.

A European Call to Action

The article’s central message is clear: EU enlargement is not just possible—it is necessary. But success depends on political will, strategic communication, and a flexible yet credible framework that addresses the concerns of all member states. The “Magnificent Ten” coalition offers a pragmatic path forward, combining urgency (security), responsibility (conditionality), and inclusivity (domestic engagement).

Why This Matters for Europe’s Future

Security: An enlarged EU would strengthen Europe’s defense posture, particularly against Russian aggression. Ukraine’s accession would anchor Kyiv in the European security architecture, reducing the risk of future conflict.
Economic Strength: New members would expand the single market, boost trade, and enhance Europe’s economic resilience. Ukraine’s agricultural and industrial potential could benefit the entire bloc.
Geopolitical Leadership: A larger, more united EU would be better positioned to compete with the US and China, shape global norms, and assert its strategic autonomy.
Democratic Resilience: Enlargement would reinforce democratic values across the continent, countering the rise of authoritarianism in candidate countries and within the EU itself.

The Stakes of Failure

If the EU fails to act:

Ukraine may remain in a state of limbo, vulnerable to Russian pressure and unable to fully rebuild.
The Western Balkans could drift toward instability or external influence (e.g., Russia, China, or Turkey).
Populist and far-right forces will gain ground, framing enlargement as a threat to European stability rather than a strategic opportunity.
Europe will lose credibility as a global actor, unable to deliver on its promises or defend its interests.

Conclusion: A United, Enlarge, and Stronger Europe

The “Magnificent Ten” coalition represents a unique opportunity to unlock EU enlargement in a way that is strategic, credible, and politically sustainable. By combining German leadership, French pragmatism, Polish urgency, and Scandinavian rigor, Europe can design a framework that balances speed with responsibility, security with conditionality, and ambition with public support.

The time to act is now. 2027 could be the year Ukraine and other candidates take irreversible steps toward membership—but only if the EU seizes this moment. The alternative is a fragmented, hesitant Europe, ill-prepared for the geopolitical challenges of the 21st century.

For a stronger, more sovereign, and more secure Europe, enlargement is not an option—it is a necessity. The “Magnificent Ten” must lead the way.

A Team Enlargement coalition of EU member states can drive the changes needed to bring Ukraine and others into the bloc.