Double Disappointment: A Multilevel Framework for Understanding EU Enlargement Stagnation

This paper introduces Double Disappointment, a mid-range analytical framework for understanding why European Union (EU) enlargement repeatedly stalls despite formal political support. Building on a companion systematic review of 347 peer-reviewed articles (1990–2024), the author identifies a key explanatory gap in the literature: while frameworks such as the external incentives model and rhetorical action/entrapment offer invaluable insights, none sufficiently account for the reciprocal breakdowns of trust and commitment between EU and candidate countries. In response, this article develops the Double Disappointment framework, grounded in a relational approach to Europeanisation, and conceptualises enlargement stagnation as a multilevel cycle of commitment erosion. The model identifies five key actor levels—public opinion, candidate-country elites, member-state elites, EU institutions, and external actors—and maps specific mechanisms of commitment erosion across them. Using both frequency analysis and cross-tabulated evidence from the review, the article reconstructs negative-feedback loops—such as under-resourcing triggering reform fatigue, or symbolic compliance provoking veto threats— that illustrate how mutual disappointments cascade and reinforce one another. Mini-case vignettes of Ukraine, Georgia, Moldova and Serbia demonstrate how these loops unfold empirically. The paper concludes by proposing testable propositions for future research and outlining empirical strategies—including comparative case studies, public-opinion time-series, and cross-national regressions. Rather than offering a new grand theory, the Double Disappointment framework functions as a conceptual bridge: it synthesises insights from competing paradigms while providing a diagnostic tool for identifying where and why enlargement loses momentum. It also highlights policy interventions that may help break these cycles and rebuild mutual credibility.