Identifying the problem- 2004 EU Enlargement, from ontological Security to Insecurity

Introduction

The economic and political climate in post-communist countries prior to 2004 was generally defined by very high unemployment rates, high inflation, and the ongoing recovery from the centrally planned communist economies  (Henderson 2024). The admission of Poland, Czechia, Hungary, the Baltic states and Slovakia into the structures of the European Union in 2004 (EU) was largely viewed as the answer to these problems and the final step to the successful post-communist transition (Navrátil and Lovec 2024: 8). Yet today, Slovakia, Czechia, Poland and Hungary, despite being deeply embedded in the Western structures, namely the EU, seem to be strongly deviating from norms and rules that are core to the union. To provide legitimacy and an academic lens to the regional issues that are very often discussed within our households, workplaces, and nearly all social settings, this article offers a fairly simple academic concept that makes this complex historical argument easy to grasp. Using the new interdependence approach (NIA) and the concept of ontological (in)security, this article argues that the cause of this radical deviation away from these norms and rules dates back to the 2004 EU enlargement. 

Rule overlap

According to the NIA, the 2004 EU enlargement process was marked by significant rule overlap as the European Union had to accommodate a wide range of diverse political, economic, and normative social structures within the candidate countries. This overlap of regulatory frameworks between the EU and the candidate countries created a complex environment where multiple sets of rules, both at the EU and national levels, coexisted, sometimes contradicting each other. This essay argues that, in order to maintain cohesion and successfully integrate these countries, the EU adopted a more flexible admission policy, allowing candidate countries to meet the entry conditions without fully addressing underlying structural issues, such as systemic corruption and the unjust treatment of minority groups.  

The consequence of this was that the public debate in Slovakia, Czechia, Poland, and Hungary, became focused on instrumental reasons for joining the EU, primarily the anticipated economic benefits (Schlenker 2012). Citizens and political elites alike viewed EU accession as a solution to pressing problems, such as unemployment and economic stagnation (ibid.). The potential for increased foreign investment, access to the common market, and financial assistance from the EU was emphasized by political elites, leading many to support EU membership, with a fairly short-term economic lens (Mokrá and Kováčiková 2023: 363-364). Structural issues, such as gender and ethnic discrimination, largely remained unchanged, with the most significant progress being that these issues are now “at least being discussed” (Henderson 2024). However, issues of mutual assistance, responsibility, and normative unity within the alliance, were not articulated. 

As previously mentioned, instrumental reasons played a significant role in shaping public opinion on EU membership, prior to the accession in Central and Eastern Europe (Schlenker 2012). These instrumental reasons, which were primarily based on expectations of economic prosperity and development (ibid.), overshadowed the normative political and cultural implications of joining the EU. Many citizens in  the post-communist countries have not fully grasped the extent to which EU membership would require not only economic reforms, but also significant political, legal, and social changes. The focus on economic benefits meant that the broader implications of EU membership, which are materializing today, were often downplayed. These include the potential for sovereignty conflicts, cultural integration, and the adaptation to EU norms and values. 

EU as Ontological Insecurity

The narrow focus on economic incentives thus heavily contributed to the emergence of ontological insecurities in the post-accession period. Ontological security refers to the need for individuals or states to maintain a stable sense of identity, and predictability, in their environment (Kinnvall 2004: 746). When this sense of stability is disrupted, it can lead to ontological insecurity, where individuals or societies feel uncertain about their identity and place in the world (idem.: 742). This often manifests itself through a strengthening nationalistic current, reactivation of historical narratives, social conflict, and the subsequent instrumentalization of these feelings by elites (idem.: 742-749).

The instrumental approach to EU membership, primarily focusing on economic benefits, meant that many citizens did not fully account for the long-term implications of integration into a supranational body like the EU. As a result, when economic benefits failed to materialize as expected, or when citizens began to feel the pressures of conforming to EU regulations and cultural norms, their sense of ontological security was threatened. This was particularly true for segments of society that felt disconnected from the political elites who had championed EU membership as a solution for their country’s respective problems. The Russian invasion of Ukraine had deepened this perception of ontological insecurity, as it brought with it, something that many people viewed as a new, and threatening, dimension of EU membership. 

Current Examples

In Hungary, Prime Minister Viktor Orbán has skillfully exploited ontological insecurities to consolidate his power and push back against EU influence. Orbán has consistently framed the EU as a threat to Hungarian sovereignty and traditional values, often depicting Brussels as an overreaching authority attempting to impose liberal values on Hungary (Körömi 2024). By emphasizing national identity and cultural distinctiveness, Orbán has positioned himself as the defender of Hungary's autonomy against what he portrays as the EU's intrusive demands. 

This rhetoric resonates strongly with segments of the Hungarian population who feel that the promises of economic prosperity through EU membership have not fully materialized, particularly in rural areas and among those “left behind” by globalization. Orbán's government has leveraged these sentiments to justify policies that challenge EU norms, such as restrictions on media freedom, judicial independence, and civil society (De Búrca 2022; Pollet and Roussi 2024). The cultivation of ontological insecurity has thus become a key strategy for Orbán, allowing him to maintain domestic support while resisting EU pressures for political and social reforms.

Similarily, in Slovakia, the instrumental focus on EU accession helped lay the groundwork for the recent re-emergence of Robert Fico, who has capitalized on these ontological insecurities. Fico has recently reasserted his position as a defender of Slovak national sovereignty and identity, often portraying the EU as an external force imposing unwanted political and cultural changes on the country (Reuters 2024). He has leveraged the fears and uncertainties of those who feel that Slovakia has lost control over its political and cultural destiny, due to its EU membership. 

By tapping into these deep-rooted insecurities, Fico has successfully mobilized segments of the population that feel alienated by the post-accession political order. For these groups, the initial instrumental reasons for supporting EU membership, such as promises of economic prosperity, have given way to feelings of cultural and political subordination. Fico's political rhetoric has therefore found resonance among those who view the EU as a threat to Slovak identity, rather than a partner for socio-economic and political integration.

Key Takeaway

The rule overlap during the 2004 EU enlargement process allowed the post-communist countries to enter the EU with a predominant focus on instrumental reasons, particularly economic benefits (Schlenker 2012: 102). However, this narrow focus did not prepare the population for the broader political, and cultural, challenges that would come with membership in a supranational organization like the EU. As economic expectations have failed to meet the realities for certain segments of the population, ontological insecurities related to national identity and sovereignty have emerged. Politicians, like Robert Fico and Viktor Orbán, have effectively instrumentalized these insecurities, reshaping Slovak and Hungarian political landscape and leading to its deviation from core EU norms, rules, and democracy as it is. The failure to adequately address the broader implications of EU membership at the time of accession, has thus contributed to the current tensions between Slovak and Hungarian national identity and their position within the European Union, a trend that can be observed in other post-communist countries as well. This essay argues that a purely technocratic, top-down approach is insufficient for achieving the full integration of states into Western structures. The EU's lack of attention to underlying structural and societal issues in its new member states has exacerbated challenges in their alignment with EU norms and values. Instead, greater emphasis should be placed on fostering close cooperation with civil society organizations (CSOs). In countries with limited democratic experience, CSOs often serve not only as independent policy advisors but also as vital democratic watchdogs, helping to address structural deficiencies and strengthen democratic governance. This partnership can bridge the gap between institutional frameworks and societal readiness, ensuring a more well-rounded integration process.

Sources:

De Búrca, G. (2022) 'Poland and Hungary’s EU membership: On not confronting authoritarian governments,' International Journal of Constitutional Law, 20(1), pp. 13–34. https://doi.org/10.1093/icon/moac008.

Farrell, H. and Newman, A. (2016). “The new interdependence approach: theoretical development and empirical demonstration”, Review of International Political Economy, 23(5): 713-736.

Henderson, K. (2024). “Slovakia in the EU: Success story or Problem case?”, LSE Blogs, https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/europpblog/2024/05/29/slovakia-in-the-eu-success-story-or-problem-case/.

Kinnvall, C. (2004). “Globalization and Religious Nationalism: Self, Identity, and the Search for Ontological Security”, Political Psychology, 25(5): 741-767.

Körömi, C. (2024) 'Orbán’s new threat: Dispatching migrants to Grand-Place in Brussels,' POLITICO, 30 September. https://www.politico.eu/article/viktor-orban-migrants-hungary-gates-brussels-main-square-grand-place/.

Mokrá, L. and Kováčiková, H. (2023). “The Future of Slovakia and Its Relation to the European Union: From Adopting to Shaping EU Policies”, Comparative Southeast European Studies, 71(3): 357-387. 

Navrátil, M. and Lovec, M. (2004). “From New to Indispensable: How the 2004 Enlargement Reshaped the EU’s Transformative Powers", Politics and Governance, 12(1): 1-12.

Pollet, M. and Roussi, A. (2024) 'Hungary takes EU to court over media freedom,' POLITICO, 19 July. https://www.politico.eu/article/hungary-take-eu-court-over-media-freedom-viktor-orban/.

Reuters (2024). “Slovak PM Fico's party likely to remain out of EU parliament alliances”. September 15: 2.

Schlenker, A. (2012). “Support for the European Union in Central and Eastern Europe before and after Accession: Comparing Different Reasons”, Politique Européenne, 38(1): 94-122.