In France, where the farming sector has huge clout, the political consequences would be daunting. The same applies to countries that have been prominent cheerleaders for Ukrainian accession. Poland, for example, whose president Andrzej Duda in 2022 called for Ukraine to benefit from a fast-track membership process, went on to ban some Ukrainian agricultural imports a year later. Warsaw took action after a glut of cheap grain provoked vociferous protests by its farmers, and demanded the commission expand those curbs into other products this summer. “Ukraine has not even entered the EU yet, and already it has damaged the single market,” notes a second EU diplomat. When it comes to regional funding, a note prepared by the Brussels Institute for Geopolitics think-tank for the pre-summit breakfast meeting laid out the high stakes. The majority of the current accession candidates, including Ukraine, have a GDP per capita, measured by purchasing power parity, that is below Bulgaria, the EU member with the lowest income. “The logic of cohesion policy is that funds would need to be retargeted at the union’s new members, to the disadvantage of current beneficiaries, unless more EU revenues were to be raised,” the policy paper notes. In other words: “Either the pie grows, or each gets a smaller slice.” Western capitals are keen to draft concrete financial impact studies in time for the October summit so they can make clear to all member states the tangible impact on their current budgets. Calculating exactly what Ukraine’s entitlement would be is impossible given the uncertainties about the shape of its postwar economy after the conflict finally ends. But if Ukraine was plugged into the current 2021-27 cohesion budget, it would jump to the top of the list of recipients, dwarfing Poland’s €77bn allocation, calculates Zsolt Darvas at the Bruegel think-tank. Another informal estimate prepared by the EU Council suggests that Ukraine’s entry would make France a net payer into the CAP, and Poland would swing from the largest net recipient of EU funds to an overall net payer. “If you’re in an office at the top of the commission, you can either double the EU budget or make everyone swallow sacrifices,” says the second diplomat, adding that the EU’s own research, if made public, would make for sober reading and highlight how painful the decisions ahead will be. Coalitions and chaos An even bigger issue than the money, argue some Brussels officials, is how the EU would ensure it can continue to function. Persisting with unanimous decision-making on foreign or taxation policy would become more difficult in an expanded EU, given the possibility that a single state can wield its veto and block any proposal it dislikes — a power often used by Hungary. In addition, big states accustomed to readily assembling blocking minorities on votes — where EU rules permit so-called qualified majority decision-making — would find it more challenging to assemble large-enough coalitions of like-minded member states. Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskyy, left, and European Commission president, Ursula von der Leyen, greet each other during the EU-Ukraine summit in Kyiv in February Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskyy, left, and European Commission president, Ursula von der Leyen, during the EU-Ukraine summit in Kyiv in February © Ukrainian Presidential Press Office/AP The idea of fundamental reforms to EU decision-making raises the prospect of whether treaty change would be needed to accommodate an expanded membership. But diplomats perceive little support for reforming the treaty in most capitals, given fears this would open a Pandora’s box of additional demands. “There is zero appetite in most member states to do the reforms via treaty change. And, in fact, quite a lot can be achieved without any treaty change being needed,” says van Middelaar. The Brussels Institute for Geopolitics argues that the existing EU treaty already offers pathways to significant changes to governance. For example, no amendments would be required to reduce the number of commissioners from one per member state to two-thirds. The so-called passerelle clause permits vetoes to be bypassed in some cases. France is taking an expansive view of the changes that would be needed, arguing that the EU made a mistake by not streamlining its procedures when it absorbed 10 new members. Laurence Boone, Europe minister, says Paris wants a wide-ranging debate on possible options. “We are in open mode,” she adds. This could include novel ways of enlarging, including a phased process when new members receive certain privileges before others, according to Boone, who insists France is committed to EU enlargement and not trying to delay the process. But alongside any EU decision in December to begin accession negotiations with Ukraine and other candidates, Paris wants the union to also commit to reform. Combine harvesters of Continental Farmers Group agricultural company harvest wheat on August 4 2022 in the Ternopil region of Ukraine A wheat field last summer in Ukraine’s Ternopil region. Admitting the country, with an agricultural sector that employs 14 per cent of its population, would be a game-changer © Alexey Furman/Getty Images This includes reviving a longstanding French vision of “variable geometry”, the idea that different groups of EU member states should integrate more closely on different policies, while avoiding a two-tier Europe. “If some countries do not want exactly the same thing, how do we cope with that?” asks Boone. She envisions a process of differentiation being “very gradual and progressive”. Boone’s argument hints at the anxieties among member states over how enlargement of the EU will play out domestically. Social implications For the EU, the accession of Poland and Hungary, who remain in entrenched stand-offs with the commission over their compliance with legal standards, has been a scarring experience. As one EU diplomat observes, some existing capitals will insist on seeing extremely robust safeguards in new member states to protect the rule of law and judicial independence. Steps to strengthen enforcement of single market rules would also be required, the diplomat warns. Further questions surround the timelines under which existing member states would agree to open themselves up to freedom of movement from new members. Then, of course, are the security implications of absorbing a country like Ukraine, with its conflict with Russia, as well as Balkan countries that remain hotbeds of ethnic tension. “We saw such a backsliding in Poland and Hungary. And this means that we are now applying much stricter laws for the accession countries when it comes to the rule of law, checks and balances, system, independence of judiciary, anti-corruption measures and media,” says Vera Jourova, the EU’s commissioner for values, adding that accession talk are far more demanding than they used to be. Truck drivers queue at the Rava-Ruska border checkpoint on the Ukrainian-Polish border in April Trucks queue at the Rava-Ruska border checkpoint on the Ukrainian-Polish border. Poland would swing from the largest net recipient of EU funds to an overall net payer © AFP via Getty Images For now, even as the EU starts work on what might be required to make it happen, Ukraine’s membership remains hypothetical. While visiting Kyiv in May, commission president Ursula von der Leyen, admitted that “some might think it is impossible, improbable or too distant to talk about a free and peaceful Ukraine in the European Union.” But, she added, “Europe is about making the impossible possible.” Some diplomats do not share her optimism, and have doubts whether it will ever come to fruition. Privately, they refer to the prospect as an “if” not a “when”. Still, EU officials consistently emphasise the strikingly rapid progress Ukraine is managing under president Zelenskyy, meaning that many see an increasing likelihood that it will gain the green light for accession talks before the end of the year. “They are doing a pretty remarkable job in wartime conditions,” says a third EU diplomat. “There will be an awful lot of internal work to ensure we have our own house in order.” The reality, stress some officials, is that accession would likely be a drawn-out process, with candidates being granted progressive sectoral integration over time, gently easing them towards membership. The destination is clear. Now, work has begun to figure out the route. “I know it looks like a huge mountain,” says Boone, “but we are trying to take the south face with good shoes rather than the north face with flip flops.”