Following the Russian invasion of Ukraine, EU enlargement has regained prominence on the EU agenda. I examine the politicisation of enlargement and arguments for and against enlargement in two debates in the European parliament conducted in November 2023. This is done with a postfunctionalist outlook, expecting that polarisation on the subject will shape along the identity axis. I find that the two debates lack polarisation and can thus not be seen as very politicized. In accordance with postfunctionalist integration theory, I do however note that most traditional and authoritarian parties oppose enlargement. Previous research shows that a member of the European parliament’s nationality also affects positions on enlargement, in combination with the cultural axis. When also taking this into consideration, the understanding of what shapes opinions on enlargement is refined. The argumentation analysis of the debates shows that opinions that favor enlargement in the debates often stem from a geopolitical urge of positioning the EU against Russia. Opinions that argue against enlargement are mostly concerned about the own country’s payments to the EU budget. This finding leads to a suggestion that more research should be done on how the status as net contributor or net beneficiary to the EU budget shapes opinions on enlargement.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:UPSALLA1/oai:DiVA.org:uu-520628 |
| Date | January 2024 |
| Creators | Martinson, Sofia |
| Publisher | Uppsala universitet, Statsvetenskapliga institutionen |
| Source Sets | DiVA Archive at Upsalla University |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Student thesis, info:eu-repo/semantics/bachelorThesis, text |
| Format | application/pdf |
| Rights | info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
Page generated in 0.0024 seconds