The Whys and When enlarging EU to the Western Balkans

The EU enlargement process is a work-in-progress topic and a difficult puzzle to be solved. But what this paper tries to propose is a simplified model that builds onto answering two main questions, that of why and when enlargement occurs. Considering the Western Balkans case, this paper has argued that both, the rational incentives of economic interest and reducing negative externalities of non-enlargement as well as constructivist/sociological incentives are by no doubts an important facilitator in the process of enlargement on both, demand and supply side. They may lead to different forms of institutionalization among the two parties, such as the Stabilization and Association Agreements Western Balkans is experiencing. This is still not sufficient enough for finalizing enlargement process, that is, signing the accession treaties. The motivations alone are insufficient to complete enlargement process since they may lead to other forms of cooperation but not full membership. The lengthy process of integrating Western Balkans into EU is the best argument in favour of such claim. In order to complete the process, adjustments at both demand and supply side are needed. For the final outcome of enlargement to come (signing accession treaty) the applicant states have to adjust to (comply with) the EU requirements while EU itself has to adjust (transform) its institutions to be capable of functioning when the new countries are being accepted. In the contrary, if the EU is not being ready to accept new countries (capacity issue) and/or if the candidate countries do not accomplish (at least) the Copenhagen criteria (the case of the Western Balkans) the enlargement process may be postponed till the necessary and/or sufficient conditions are fulfil. In the contrary blocking or delaying tactics may be a way to postpone the process till the needed transformations are achieved. The experience of the previous enlargement (lately with Bulgaria, Rumania or Turkey) is the best argument