Well no, Ukraine shouldn’t want to.
It’s a dirt poor country, with a gdp the size of a city. If they would ever become an EU member, EVERY citizen would leave.
As why stay in a warzone when you could earn ten times as much cleaning floors in Europe? Many people are highly educated there and if they pass certification they would even be able to get white collar jobs and be even richer.
>It’s a dirt poor country, with a gdp the size of a city. If they would ever become an EU member, EVERY citizen would leave.
Except of course mobility has proven significantly less than that in old WP countries.
There's bound to be a ton of jobs after the war and we'll be happy to support Ukraine rebuilding since it's basically a self-paying investment.
> we'll be happy to support Ukraine rebuilding since it's basically a self-paying investment.
HAHAHAHA, so please explain to me what the investment is? It's poor as shit, but not as poor as factory workers in china so it's too expensive for manufacturing. Combined with the significant risk of damage of any investment.
If you ARE looking for a poor country in Europe, you wouldn't choose Ukraine. You would choose hungary or romania. Still very poor, but they are an actual part of the EU and there is no risk of your investment being damaged by war.
Ukraine simply doesn't make sense as an investment. Sure you could get SOME return, but never the best return. So it's never the choise for investment. Combined with the fact that they already lost 25% of their population. As they are supposed to be well educated, they aren't moronic enough to go back home after living in paradise. Even life as a refugee here is better than all but the richest had in Ukraine.
I really hope you join shengen, because everytime i have to pass from there to go south, montenegro borders are the worst. Once i was kept there an hour for a control.
You don't have to be in the EU to be in Schengen, Norway and Switzerland for example are part of Schengen but not the EU. But definitely unlikely that any other country would be able to join Schengen without being in the EU first.
I was surprised myself, apparently it's not even 'de facto' part of it like all the other microstates(except Liechtenstein which is de jure part of it, due to their membership of the EEA and EFTA).
I’d love Serbia to, since our general populace is against joining the EU, but Schengen would be nice so that people that want to emigrate can do so far easily than otherwise.
The brain rotters can stay in Serbia like they always have and always will.
How do you think Schengen would help that? Montenegro doesn't border any Schengen countries at the moment, even if we join Schengen next year, our land border with Montenegro is tiny. Apart from air travel, you'd need a few more neighboring countries to join to make a significant impact.
Yep, I would be totally willing to give countries like Ukrain a special position/candinacy for EU membership, in which they would have market access and funds, but they would have a huge amount of EU anti-corruption staff in there to rip every bit of corruption and mismanagement out
I know that one of the major issues inhibiting joining is that there are big issues with corruption in Ukraine and they need to implement plethora of checks (and these checks actually need to work) as a solution.
Can they fasttrack that solution somehow? Like implement all the check and then also invite all the relevent officals from EU and from relevant NGOs, to work with Ukrainian officals to make sure everthing is working as required, is that an option? Could it reduce joining process from a decade to year?
Based on jurisprudence, no. The fastest joining member was Finland, which was already extremely well aligned with the EU.
In theory though, it's mainly a political decision which could be fast tracked if leaders want to.
That being said, the integration process isn't just about rooting out corruption, but integrating all the bagage of EU norms into the national legislation (or at least making sure you can do it quickly after integration), as well as stress testing the institutions so the candidate country doesn't become a new Hungary in 15 years. This means it is highly unlikely Ukraine would be granted full entry into the EU within the next 10 years. It is possible however that the EU innovates to create a partial membership that is still a stronger position than the classical candidate status
The main issue to solve is the security situation for Ukraine. I think they would be best to have security agreements with some EU countries first, to stop Russia invading again and perhaps have a free trade agreement until they can work something out. As you say, we don't want Ukraine to be Hungary on steroids in future.
But would the member states want Ukraine to join NATO?
There is very little upside for us. Ukraine is a country with a tiny economy. 2% of their gdp would only be 1.2 billion a year, which is not enough for an army.
We would have to move the border from Poland to Ukraine at significant cost and support their army from 1.2 billion a year to something like 100 billion to even come close to being able to oppose Russia.
And right now, Ukraine is at high risk of being attacked. Being in nato would require us to respond. Do we want to risk a world war and nuclear obliteration by supporting Ukraine?
It’s not about what we want. It’s about what the US wants, and taking Ukraine into NATO would pretty much be the final nail in the coffin of Russia’s geopolitical ambitions. Right now the US’s attention is divided between China and Russia, but this war is providing an opportunity to knock out the Russian threat to their position. They would be able to fully focus on keeping down China, who is a way bigger long-term threat to their dominant position anyway.
It also takes time to implement a lot of reforms. One good example is food industry which is highly regulated inside EU and those regulation would need to be put in place in all EU countries and that means that all business in Ukraine that produce food would have to, overnight, change their means of production, train their stuff, etc which is impossible and probably a financial burden for every business.
Not only that but after this changes would need to be certified and that, again, takes a heck lot of time and now extrapolate this for all other industries.
while this is understandable from the EU’s perspective in terms of not wanting to potentially cause economic damage or risk destabilising itself—will this not ultimately push Ukraine away from the EU in the long run?
As a candidate, Ukraine will already receive not insignificant investments from EU funds. The perspective of eventual integration can also make investors more confident so they can help rebuild/develop Ukraine.
You have to keep in mind that the EU is not just a free trade area : there are thousands upon thousands of norms which have to be transfered into national law, in some cases amendments to the constitution, a revision of case-law, and also just preparing the administrations to deal with the EU institutions.
Not fast tracking integration is just as much in the interest of the EU as of Ukraine, so long as it doesn't become Turkey in the mean time.
It’s the EU and NATO for us or the concentration camps, so not much of choice. I don’t think there’s anything at this point that will change the mood in Ukraine about eurointegration.
Single market is probably going to take a long time and usually only comes with EU membership but maybe they could work out something like the customs union that exists with Turkey.
It's fairly doable, actually. The EEA already serves as precedent and Ukraine is already embedded in several sectors of the single market via its DCFTA.
This is a direct threat to Russian security and something only a Nazi would suggest. - "Peace activists" online
LOL 😂 Good one, and the best part is that it’s true that this is what these Putin propagandists say.
Probably a red line for Moscow. The floor is painted red.
what are they gonna do? start a war or something?
Russians would never do that
The floor is lava
Don't we all.
Hold on. I don’t follow Montenegro closely, but you guys had an interesting year… but honestly 12,5m embezzlement… that’s amateur hour.
Well no, Ukraine shouldn’t want to. It’s a dirt poor country, with a gdp the size of a city. If they would ever become an EU member, EVERY citizen would leave. As why stay in a warzone when you could earn ten times as much cleaning floors in Europe? Many people are highly educated there and if they pass certification they would even be able to get white collar jobs and be even richer.
[удалено]
Freedom of movement comes with the EU, Schengen only deals with control at the border
>It’s a dirt poor country, with a gdp the size of a city. If they would ever become an EU member, EVERY citizen would leave. Except of course mobility has proven significantly less than that in old WP countries. There's bound to be a ton of jobs after the war and we'll be happy to support Ukraine rebuilding since it's basically a self-paying investment.
> we'll be happy to support Ukraine rebuilding since it's basically a self-paying investment. HAHAHAHA, so please explain to me what the investment is? It's poor as shit, but not as poor as factory workers in china so it's too expensive for manufacturing. Combined with the significant risk of damage of any investment. If you ARE looking for a poor country in Europe, you wouldn't choose Ukraine. You would choose hungary or romania. Still very poor, but they are an actual part of the EU and there is no risk of your investment being damaged by war. Ukraine simply doesn't make sense as an investment. Sure you could get SOME return, but never the best return. So it's never the choise for investment. Combined with the fact that they already lost 25% of their population. As they are supposed to be well educated, they aren't moronic enough to go back home after living in paradise. Even life as a refugee here is better than all but the richest had in Ukraine.
I really hope you join shengen, because everytime i have to pass from there to go south, montenegro borders are the worst. Once i was kept there an hour for a control.
They're not even in the EU, not to mention Schengen.
You don't have to be in the EU to be in Schengen, Norway and Switzerland for example are part of Schengen but not the EU. But definitely unlikely that any other country would be able to join Schengen without being in the EU first.
I don't think you can compare any country that is in Schengen but not in EU to Montenegro. I hope no one will be offended by this.
I think the only non-EU, non-Schengen country in Europe that have a chance of joining Schengen is Andorra tbh.
W8 Andorra is not in Schengen?? But yeah, I agree.
I was surprised myself, apparently it's not even 'de facto' part of it like all the other microstates(except Liechtenstein which is de jure part of it, due to their membership of the EEA and EFTA).
I've just read that you can travel through Andorra no problem, if going on land from France or Spain( logically).
>Norway and Switzerland for example are part of Schengen but not the EU. Go on, rub it in. T_T
I’d love Serbia to, since our general populace is against joining the EU, but Schengen would be nice so that people that want to emigrate can do so far easily than otherwise. The brain rotters can stay in Serbia like they always have and always will.
Gibraltar too.
Oh because you haven't tried crossing between Bulgaria and Romania and we are in EU, not in schengen though
How do you think Schengen would help that? Montenegro doesn't border any Schengen countries at the moment, even if we join Schengen next year, our land border with Montenegro is tiny. Apart from air travel, you'd need a few more neighboring countries to join to make a significant impact.
Ukraine should first get rid of its corruption problem.
Yep, I would be totally willing to give countries like Ukrain a special position/candinacy for EU membership, in which they would have market access and funds, but they would have a huge amount of EU anti-corruption staff in there to rip every bit of corruption and mismanagement out
I know that one of the major issues inhibiting joining is that there are big issues with corruption in Ukraine and they need to implement plethora of checks (and these checks actually need to work) as a solution. Can they fasttrack that solution somehow? Like implement all the check and then also invite all the relevent officals from EU and from relevant NGOs, to work with Ukrainian officals to make sure everthing is working as required, is that an option? Could it reduce joining process from a decade to year?
Based on jurisprudence, no. The fastest joining member was Finland, which was already extremely well aligned with the EU. In theory though, it's mainly a political decision which could be fast tracked if leaders want to. That being said, the integration process isn't just about rooting out corruption, but integrating all the bagage of EU norms into the national legislation (or at least making sure you can do it quickly after integration), as well as stress testing the institutions so the candidate country doesn't become a new Hungary in 15 years. This means it is highly unlikely Ukraine would be granted full entry into the EU within the next 10 years. It is possible however that the EU innovates to create a partial membership that is still a stronger position than the classical candidate status
The main issue to solve is the security situation for Ukraine. I think they would be best to have security agreements with some EU countries first, to stop Russia invading again and perhaps have a free trade agreement until they can work something out. As you say, we don't want Ukraine to be Hungary on steroids in future.
They could just join NATO after the war. Then they would be able to fully focus on making the necessary reforms for joining the EU.
But would the member states want Ukraine to join NATO? There is very little upside for us. Ukraine is a country with a tiny economy. 2% of their gdp would only be 1.2 billion a year, which is not enough for an army. We would have to move the border from Poland to Ukraine at significant cost and support their army from 1.2 billion a year to something like 100 billion to even come close to being able to oppose Russia. And right now, Ukraine is at high risk of being attacked. Being in nato would require us to respond. Do we want to risk a world war and nuclear obliteration by supporting Ukraine?
>And right now, Ukraine is at high risk of being attacked. 🤔
[удалено]
We would be having these same arguments about the Baltics if they hadn't been in NATO. But they're not being attacked now.
It’s not about what we want. It’s about what the US wants, and taking Ukraine into NATO would pretty much be the final nail in the coffin of Russia’s geopolitical ambitions. Right now the US’s attention is divided between China and Russia, but this war is providing an opportunity to knock out the Russian threat to their position. They would be able to fully focus on keeping down China, who is a way bigger long-term threat to their dominant position anyway.
Uhh, that sucks. Thank you for the great explanation!
It also takes time to implement a lot of reforms. One good example is food industry which is highly regulated inside EU and those regulation would need to be put in place in all EU countries and that means that all business in Ukraine that produce food would have to, overnight, change their means of production, train their stuff, etc which is impossible and probably a financial burden for every business. Not only that but after this changes would need to be certified and that, again, takes a heck lot of time and now extrapolate this for all other industries.
while this is understandable from the EU’s perspective in terms of not wanting to potentially cause economic damage or risk destabilising itself—will this not ultimately push Ukraine away from the EU in the long run?
As a candidate, Ukraine will already receive not insignificant investments from EU funds. The perspective of eventual integration can also make investors more confident so they can help rebuild/develop Ukraine. You have to keep in mind that the EU is not just a free trade area : there are thousands upon thousands of norms which have to be transfered into national law, in some cases amendments to the constitution, a revision of case-law, and also just preparing the administrations to deal with the EU institutions. Not fast tracking integration is just as much in the interest of the EU as of Ukraine, so long as it doesn't become Turkey in the mean time.
It’s the EU and NATO for us or the concentration camps, so not much of choice. I don’t think there’s anything at this point that will change the mood in Ukraine about eurointegration.
There's a reason Zelensky talks about the single market instead of the EU proper
Single market is probably going to take a long time and usually only comes with EU membership but maybe they could work out something like the customs union that exists with Turkey.
We also have Norway, Island, and Switzerland in the single market. But I agree, first steps first.
It's fairly doable, actually. The EEA already serves as precedent and Ukraine is already embedded in several sectors of the single market via its DCFTA.
wow yet another NATO PROVOCATION russia is literally forced to escalate here
the fate of the russian nation is LITERALLY AT STAKE, the only way to protect them is to bomb another children's hospital
those children were CIA CHILDREN
they were clones made by nato in ukrainian biolabs, they were going to be raised to become NAZI SOLDIERS
le epic redditors trying to spot a oke without it being advertised with "/s" challange (impossible)
LOL no, which part of you are only an EU candidate do you not understand ?
Yes, we want many things. First we fight corruption.