'EU can conduct accession negotiations with a country at war'

Minister of State, important decisions on the EU's future will be made at the European Council at the end of the week; they concern enlargement and internal reforms. But Viktor Orbán could blow up the agenda ...

It would not be the first time that Viktor Orbán tries to play games with the entire community for his purposes. His behavior is highly lacking in solidarity. The other 26 Member States agree that Russia's attack on Europe's peace order is a major threat. We know that the best way to counter Putin is to jointly put up a clear stop sign and to provide Ukraine with resolute support, financially, militarily and in humanitarian terms. It is very important to offer Ukraine a clear EU perspective and back it up with action. Only Orbán is undermining this course. This leads to anger and a lack of understanding in all 26 capitals. This is not how we work together in the EU. Consensus and cooperation are very important to us in the EU as a community of values.

The EU has committed to enlargement but has also emphasized the importance of internal reforms. Do the two go hand in hand, or should there be reforms first and then enlargement?

The accession of new members and the reform of the EU are going hand in hand. This was explicitly stated by the heads of state and government at the informal Council in Granada. This principle is to be reiterated at the upcoming European Council. We as the EU must remain capable of reform, just as we expect many reforms from the candidate countries. We have laid this down in the so-called Copenhagen criteria. We, the EU, must guarantee our willingness to accept new members.

What does that mean?

Our goal is a bigger and stronger Union. To achieve this, we must maintain and improve our ability to act. We need the Council to make decisions more quickly. We want that individual countries are no longer able to block the Community. We want fewer vetoes. But we also need to talk about protecting European values. How can we improve our rule of law instruments, making them more effective? Beyond that, however, it is also about institutional reforms. For example, how big should the European Parliament or the European Commission be in the future?

Concentrating on 'more capability to act'

You are talking about more capability to act, previously there was talk of deepening. Deepening sounds more like a federal state. Strengthening the capability to act sounds like "carry on as before," only "better."

Deepening is a term that is no longer frequently used in the reform debate today. It dates back to the time of the last convention almost 20 years ago, for which I was rapporteur in the Bundestag. That was about going deeper. Today, instead of debating "more" or "less," we are concentrating on the goal of a stronger, more capable EU.

And what does more capability to act mean?

We should first discuss our goals as a European Union: We want to be a geostrategic player who is perceived as powerful and can act confidently vis-à-vis China and Russia. We want to act with sovereignty, even if there is a change of government in the USA. We want to help climate neutrality achieve a global breakthrough. And then we have to ask ourselves what instruments we need to achieve this. This approach will take us further in the EU than repeating the buzzwords of the last 20 years.

In which areas does Germany advocate qualified majority voting?

We are striving to extend majority decisions in the common foreign and security policy, in tax policy and on technical issues relating to enlargement policy. We coordinated this with France at an early stage. Since then, we have continued our work in a Group of Friends of the Foreign Ministers. We are now eleven member states that have identified three specific areas that we want to get out of unanimity.

Departure from unanimity

How should the departure from unanimity work in concrete terms?

For me, it is crucial that we use the flexibility of the Lisbon Treaty. The Lisbon Treaty allows individual policy areas to be transferred to decision-making with qualified majorities without amending the treaty. The keyword here is the so-called passerelle clause.

Do you want majority decisions in all foreign policy?

That is our vision. Of course, we are also thinking about mechanisms that provide a safety net: If an issue in the core national interest of a Member State is severely affected, then it should be possible for us to deal with it at the highest level.

What happens next?

I see positive momentum. Many member states are not currently open to treaty changes. But they emphasize that the Lisbon Treaty is suitable for enlargement. I hear this repeatedly: "The Lisbon treaty is enlargement proof." Then let's make use of the existing opportunities! Our aim is for the Belgian Council Presidency to draw up a reform framework starting in January. This should define concrete objectives and an implementation schedule. Ultimately, we need unanimity in the European Council for the desired changes.

Lack of majority for convention

The Parliament is calling for a convention. That is also in the coalition agreement. Yet little is heard from Germany about this, why?The coalition stands behind its agreement. A convention is and remains a good goal. I keep bringing up the convention, but I see little enthusiasm among my colleagues in the Council. That is why we are working on achieving EU reforms by other means.

Ukraine is already a candidate country. The German government and others want negotiations to begin. Orbán is against this ...

26 EU member states are in favor of taking the next step on Ukraine's path to the EU and opening accession talks. Ukraine is showing an enormous willingness to reform. I expect the European Council to take this decision this week.

'26 countries are ready'

Would it be a compromise to postpone the decision until the March Council?No, I don't see that. That would send the wrong signal to the Ukrainians. 26 member states are ready. The Commission has established that Ukraine has fulfilled the agreed criteria. The Commission proposes that the decision be taken now and that negotiations begin in March. That is the right way.

Is it possible to conduct accession negotiations with a country that is at war and has an unresolved border?

We are already making very concrete preparations for Ukraine's accession. Amid Russia's brutal war of aggression, Ukraine is undertaking impressive reform efforts. Take media law and judicial reforms. The prospect of accession is vital for the people of Ukraine. It gives them the hope of a life in the EU, a life in peace, freedom and security. Ukraine is deeply determined to implement the reforms demanded. Yes, we should conduct accession negotiations with Ukraine. Markus Grabitz