Reconsidering Research Support in EU Enlargement and Neighbourhood Policy in a Time of Geopolitical Transformation

The European Union’s global policy on research and innovation aims to reduce disparities in innovation across regions, foster talent development, and boost global innovation capacity, especially in the context of green and digital transitions. Recent policy updates have broadened participation opportunities for countries in the Eastern Partnership, as well as those in Asia, Africa, and Latin America. Beyond these practical goals, such policies also function as subtle tools for advancing European and democratic values, encouraging integration, and reinforcing the EU’s position in global geopolitics—an aspect that is often overlooked. This strategic dimension has become even more critical due to Russia’s ongoing war against Ukraine, the rise of hybrid threats, and intensifying global competition. This research demonstrates that the EU’s efforts to support and develop research ecosystems—particularly in Eastern Partnership countries—through academic collaboration, access to international expertise, and digital interaction, are evolving into a strategic yet under-theorized component of EU enlargement and neighborhood policy. By comparing the situations in Ukraine, Georgia, and Moldova, the study examines how geopolitical shocks, restrictions on mobility, socio-economic challenges, and disinformation campaigns affect integration into the European Research and Education Area. In Ukraine, the war has severely disrupted academic mobility, especially for male students and researchers. While public support for EU membership remains strong and trust in the EU is high, more than half of Ukrainians do not identify as Europeans. The EU is seen as a source of opportunity, but not as a leader in education, science, or innovation, which could undermine efforts to promote shared European values. Georgia’s path toward European integration is complicated by political instability, social polarization, and economic difficulties, leading to declining public support for the EU and limited awareness of its values. Nevertheless, Georgian youth involved in mobility programs tend to have a positive view of the EU. In Moldova, economic constraints limit fair access to global research and education, and public opinion is split between support for integration and persistent skepticism, much of which is fueled by disinformation and Russian-influenced narratives that exploit socio-economic fears. These cases reveal that, despite generally high support for European integration, identification with Europe and trust in the EU’s leadership are inconsistent and susceptible to hybrid threats. The sustainability of European integration in candidate and partner countries—and the unity of the broader European region—depends heavily on the EU’s ability to maintain robust research and academic cooperation. Such support acts as a form of external governance and soft power, strengthening democratic resilience and mitigating geopolitical risks. Traditional tools like research funding, mobility programs, and collaborative partnerships help preserve European identity and values during times of crisis, reinforcing the EU’s image as a global actor.