From projection to introspection: enlargement discourses after the ‘big bang’ accession

Debates on European Union (EU) enlargement offer a window into the broader dynamics and motivations underpinning the European integration process. Whereas the Central and Eastern European accession was hailed as a historic ‘reunification’ of Europe and a demonstration of the EU’s transformative power, scepticism towards any further widening of the EU has since been mounting among elites and the broader population alike. In light of the growing involvement of member states in EU politics, we analyse enlargement discourses in the national parliaments of France, Germany, Poland, and Hungary between 2004 and 2017. We focus in particular on discourses related to democracy. Against the backdrop of democratic backsliding in several recent member states and stagnating democratisation in the current candidate countries, we examine how debates in different member state parliaments frame the issue of democracy in the context of enlargement. We draw on an original dataset of statements made in national parliamentary debates and employ frame analysis to distinguish the main discourses prevalent in our four selected countries. Our empirical analysis highlights three distinct discourses: normative discourses focus on the EU’s soft power and its moral obligation towards candidate countries; institutional discourses emphasize the EU’s absorption capacity and the need for internal consolidation; and pragmatic discourses focus on strict conditionality and enlargement as a stabilisation tool. Overall, our findings point to a shift from a confident focus on the external projection of EU values and practices towards a more introspective orientation emphasizing institutional efficiency and the quality of democracy. In this sense, changing discourses on EU enlargement reflect a broader change in the nature of European integration and a growing divergence of member state perspectives on this process.