Europeanisation and convergence in practice – in neutral or in reverse?

Jonathan Scheele

The first seminar, on Monday 14 January, focused on the state of convergence in the region in practice; is it in neutral or reverse? The panel of speakers, Kalypso Nicolaïdis, Dimitar Bechev and Jonathan Scheele, laid a good foundation for the rest of the series, which will look at future prospects.

Key ideas which emerged included:

• the current crisis in Europe means that the EU, in promoting convergence, needs to go much deeper into addressing the structural obstacles to reform in the region, but at the same time should be more humble in its prescriptions for specific reforms.
• convergence tends to be seen in terms of accession to the EU, but there is a historical continuity with efforts, going back to the 19th century, by the periphery in SE Europe to join "the centre" (represented by Western Europe).
• the demand for convergence in the region is mediated by national elites so as to preserve their advantages as far as possible; they seek modernisation, but not at any cost and not too quickly.
• much has in fact been achieved in the Balkans; there is more stability and little ethnic violence. But economic integration has made the region more vulnerable to external shocks; while recovery in the Euro zone is necessary for the Balkans to grow again, it will not be sufficient on its own. And periodic elections do not on their own ensure real democratic accountability, so that Brussels is still seen as a legitimate counter-balance to poor quality national governance.
• within the region there is no perceived realistic alternative to convergence towards the EU by accession. But enlargement in the region is no longer, for the EU, the geo-strategic imperative that it was in 1993 up to 2004.

As a result, if convergence (= EU accession) does not move forward at a steady pace, to what extent does this pose risks for political stability in the countries of the region? If the goal of convergence provides a common agenda for opposing political groups, what else will preserve that stability if the goal begins to be seen as unattainable in a realistic timescale?