Normative versus geopolitical aspects of the EU enlargement process (Slovak and Macedonian case)

This paper presents a comparative analysis of Macedonia and
Slovakia in the context of European integration process, focusing on Copenhagen criteria condition of minority protection. This comparative analysis identifies key constraints and facilitating factors in both cases and situates them within intergovernmentalist and realist interpretations of EU enlargement, including its
procedural standards and strategic considerations.
In both countries, minority issues were condition for EU accession and addressed through legal measures. After resolving the Hungarian minority issue in Slovakia and the Albanian minority issue in Macedonia, Slovakia advanced to EU membership in 2004, while in Macedonia (fifteen years after receiving candidate status and prior to the opening of accession negotiations) in 2020, a new minority issue emerged and was introduced as a condition, delaying the country’s further progress in this process.
By applying intergovernmental and realist theories, the analysis in this paper explores whether EU enlargement depends on common EU policies, i.e. formal criteria, or whether individual interests and policies have a greater impact. The findings show that in the Slovak case, in addition to standard criteria, the geopolitical context plays an influential role in the country’s integration, while the progress of North Macedonia’s accession, bilateral issues with certain EU member states are more considered than progress in fulfilling formal criteria. Overall, the results show that, in addition to legal standards, individual interests of certain countries and geopolitical factors can influence the pace and dynamics of EU enlargement.