InvigoratEU Management Handbook (D1.1, V2)
Published January 28, 2025
Michael Kaeding, Liesa Döpcke
The Management Handbook structures the collaboration of the consortium, the Scientific Lead (SL) and the Project Coordinator (PC) in the project InvigoratEU. First, it gives an overview of the general information of the project and the important dates during the project. It informs about the rules and procedures for meetings, such as the General Assembly and the three main conferences. Since reporting is of high importance in the project, the legal points as well as the InvigoratEU specific procedures are described here. Regarding the budget, the budget flexibility as well as amendments, the relevant points from the grant agreement are summarized and complemented by the concrete procedures of InvigoratEU. The handbook contains information on data management, which will be expanded by the data management plan. As the dissemination of the project’s results is highly relevant, the manual contains information on publications and the acknowledgement of EU funding/disclaimer. To ensure the success of the project, a quality assurance, risk assessment and contingency plan was prepared. Moreover, information is provided on the digital infrastructure set up by the Coordinator. In addition to the information, the manual contains practical advice on project procedures and communication to ensure efficient cooperation.
See the full document here: https://zenodo.org/records/17034572
InvigoratEU Report of mid-term conference in Brussels (D2.3)
Published January 1, 2026
Mariam Bitchoshvili, Mariam Khotenashvili
The InvigoratEU Mid-Term Conference examined ways to consolidate and steer the renewed momentum in EU enlargement and neighbourhood policy that has emerged since 2022. Amidst new geopolitical challenges, democratic erosion, and societal fragmentation, the mid-term conference brought together 85 participants, including 51 members of the InvigoratEU consortium, representatives from all three sister projects (REUNIR, ReEngage, GeoPowerEU), as well as stakeholders from EU institutions, Brussels-based think tanks and civil society organisations.
See the full document here: https://zenodo.org/records/18373908
InvigoratEU Analytical Glossary (D3.1)
Published April 1, 2024
Hannah Brandt, Funda Tekin
The Analytical Glossary provides detailed and concise definitions, terminology, concepts and benchmarks as key reference document for InvigoratEU research.
See the full document here: https://zenodo.org/records/17224960
InvigoratEU Conceptual Background Paper (D3.2)
Published July 1, 2024
Hannah Brandt, Funda Tekin, Pol Bargues, Ramūnas Vilpišauskas
The Conceptual Background Paper provides academic reflections on Europe’s resilience and a (re)invigorated EU enlargement and neighbourhood strategy. It first outlines the milestones of the EU’s policies with its neighbourhood. A guiding question is whether and if so in how far the EU’s enlargement policy can live up to its reputation of being one of the EU’s most successful foreign policies again – a label that has seemed too ambitious for the past two decades in view of the countries in the Eastern Neighbourhood and Western Balkans. Subsequently, the concept of resilience is introduced and critically assessed in the context of EU foreign policy. The InvigoratEU Triple-R-Approach: Reforming, Responding, Rebuilding guides the remaining part of the study, in which the challenges and potentials of EU enlargement and neighbourhood policies will be assessed. These will be analysed in terms of contribution to democratic consolidation, conflict prevention, capacity-building, enhancing security and the protection against hybrid threats and potentials for connectivity and sustainable (social and economic) development.
See the full document here: https://zenodo.org/records/17225353
InvigoratEU Report on EU´s Enlargement and Neighbourhood Policy Toolbox (D3.3)
Published July 1, 2025
Frank Schimmelfennig, Levan Kakhishvili
The Report on EU’s Enlargement & Neighbourhood Policy Toolbox by Frank Schimmelfennig and Levan Kakhishvili critically examines the European Union’s (EU) enlargement and neighbourhood policy, focusing on its existing tools, objectives, and necessary reforms. The analysis aims to inform future policy development to enhance the EU’s resilience, particularly in light of evolving geopolitical contexts and the ongoing integration challenges within the Eastern Neighbourhood and Western Balkans. The report divides the evolution of the EU enlargement policy into three phases: the “big bang” enlargement of 1990-2004, protracted enlargement of 2005-2021, and geopolitical enlargement since 2022. It has been found that different sets of factors have determined the variation of the EU strategy for enlargement across the timeframe. These factors include the domestic EU context, the progress of transformation in aspirant countries, and geopolitical considerations. although the policy of conditionality has had profound positive effects on democratization and economic liberalization of Central and Eastern European countries, it has also been associated with undesirable effects. Surveying these effects on the political and economic transformation of the EU aspirant countries reveals areas for improvement for the future of the EU enlargement strategy. Finally, the report recommends strengthening conditionality mechanisms, enhancing civil society engagement, addressing regional disparities, promoting public engagement and adopting a differentiated integration model, to invigorate the EU enlargement strategy and help build a united and prosperous Europe.
See the full document here: https://zenodo.org/records/17340364
InvigoratEU Democracy-Support Innovations in the Eastern Neighbourhood (D4.1)
Published January 1, 2026
Giselle Bosse, Elena Ventura
This comparative analysis concludes the InvigoratEU WP4 deliverable by synthesising findings from the accession trio – Georgia, Moldova, and Ukraine – through the lens of Task 4.1’s conceptual framework. Task 4.1 operationalises democratisation as a multi-level interplay of international (e.g., EU conditionality), regional (e.g., Russian hybrid threats), state (e.g., institutional reforms), and societal (e.g., civil society agency) factors, specifically tailored to conflict and post-conflict environments. This approach moves beyond traditional models focused on peaceful transitions, revealing how geopolitical pressures in the Eastern Neighbourhood generate distinctive patterns of democratic resilience. By extracting three novel democratisation models – securitised hollowing (Georgia), hybrid consolidation (Moldova), and wartime hybridisation (Ukraine) – the analysis delivers Objective 4.1 (04.1): innovative perspectives on democratisation processes amid blockages to democracy, stability, and resilience.
See the full document here: https://zenodo.org/records/18455689
InvigoratEU Democracy-Support Innovations in the Western Balkans (D4.2)
Published January 1, 2026
Elena Ventura, Richard Youngs
EU democracy support policies in the WB do not take place in a vacuum. The enlargement process has the potential to act as a catalyst for democratic improvements in candidate countries. Yet, decades of stalled integration and bilateral disputes with Member States have caused widespread frustration and created opportunity structure for external interference. The EU’s hesitant stance to prioritize democratic values in favor of geopolitical concerns has further allowed local elites to adjust their strategic objectives. Instead of implementing substantive reforms, governments have conducted box-ticking compliance with EU criteria.
See the full document here: https://zenodo.org/records/18456043
InvigoratEU Social Acquis Compliance Scoreboard (D5.1)
Published September 29, 2025
Frank Schimmelfennig, Levan Kakhishvili
The Social Acquis Compliance Scoreboard is a monitoring tool designed to assess the formal legal convergence of EU candidate countries with the EU’s social policy framework. It focuses on seven countries – Albania, Georgia, Moldova, Montenegro, North Macedonia, Serbia, and Ukraine – tracking annual progress from the signing of each country’s Association Agreement (AA) with the EU until 2024. The baseline is established using the legislation in force at the time of the AA signing, and changes are assessed annually by coding new or amended laws against 100 legally binding EU social policy indicators.
The scoreboard is structured around five dimensions derived from EU law and policy: labour law, health and safety, equality and non-discrimination, social protection and inclusion, and social dialogue. Initially based on 718 indicators, the tool was streamlined for feasibility, ultimately focusing on 100 indicators across 20 attributes. National legal frameworks are assessed by human coders who evaluate whether each EU norm is fully, partially, or not at all incorporated into national law, assigning scores accordingly (0-2 points per indicator). The resulting annual scores provide a percentage-based measure of legal alignment with EU norms. This tool enables dynamic tracking of convergence trends and offers valuable insights to identify obstacles and support mechanisms for deeper EU integration in the social policy domain.
See the full document here: https://zenodo.org/records/17222592
InvigoratEU Social Acquis Compliance in the Accession Countries: Patterns of Formal Convergence – Drivers, Obstacles and Effects (D5.2)
Published January 1, 2026
Levan Kakhishvili
This report investigates the formal convergence of seven EU candidate countries – Albania, Georgia, Moldova, Montenegro, North Macedonia, Serbia, and Ukraine – with the EU social acquis. Using the newly developed Social Acquis Compliance Scoreboard (2001–2024), supplemented by expert interviews and political ethnography in Georgia and North Macedonia, the report analyses the drivers, obstacles, and societal consequences of legal harmonisation in the area of social policy. The findings show that while all candidate countries have significantly expanded their alignment with EU norms, the depth and quality of convergence vary widely, and implementation gaps persist across the region.
The quantitative analysis reveals a clear upward trend in formal approximation across all seven countries, often tied to critical milestones in the accession process, such as submission of EU membership applications, granting of candidate status, and the opening of accession negotiations. However, this progress is sensitive to the credibility of the EU’s membership promise. In North Macedonia, repeated delays and bilateral blockages have fostered reform fatigue and disillusionment. In Georgia, reforms peaked before candidate status was granted, but subsequent political developments have stalled alignment efforts, demonstrating that political will is decisive in sustaining convergence.
The qualitative findings deepen these insights by showing how domestic politics shape reform trajectories. Left-leaning governments and individual policy entrepreneurs tend to advance EU-aligned social legislation, while conservative or populist actors slow down reforms. Informal veto-players, especially business associations, can significantly filter legislative changes, as illustrated by Georgia’s 2020 labour reform process. Meanwhile, national identity narratives can either mobilize public support for Europeanization or be weaponized to undermine EU credibility and stall the accession process.
See the full document here: https://zenodo.org/records/18301260
InvigoratEU Rethinking Social Cohesion in EU Accession Countries: Lessons from Western Balkans and Eastern Neighbourhood (D5.3)
Published January 1, 2026
Nino Abzianidze, Tornike Zurabashvili, Gugula Tsukhishvili, Giorgi Khishtovani
The present Policy Report analyses the nature and dynamics of social cohesion in the candidate countries of the Eastern Neighbourhood (Georgia, Moldova, Ukraine) and Western Balkans (Montenegro, North Macedonia, Serbia) and identifies to what extent the EU accession process has impacted it. As there have been no systematic, comparative or in-depth studies of social cohesion conducted covering these countries, our knowledge of its regional peculiarities is rather scarce. Addressing this gap, the Report presents the first attempt of conducting an in-depth comparative analysis of the nature and dynamic of social cohesion in the candidate countries of the Eastern Neighbourhood (EN) and Western Balkans (WB), specifically in the context of the EU accession process. Social cohesion is understood as a complex concept that encompasses aspects of socio-economic equality (e.g., access to finances, education and health), belonging and tolerance, social participation and people-to-people relations, as well as political participation and institutional trust. Based on the desk research and expert interviews, this research provides the possibility of developing empirically informed recommendations regarding the improvement of the EU enlargement policy, specifically with regards to various aspects of social cohesion. The findings demonstrate that, despite notable progress in recent years, candidate countries in the WB and the EN regions still lag behind EU levels in several key aspects of social cohesion. It shows that societies in these countries are characterised by uneven levels of social, political, and economic participation, which lead to the disruption of social fabric, hindering the development of genuinely cohesive societies. Importantly, much of these challenges stem from internal factors such as governance models, historical legacies, and social structures, but they are also propelled by malign foreign interference, which aim to weaken the unity and resolve of societies. While some of the best practices aimed at strengthening social cohesion in candidate countries have been identified, the challenges revealed through the research underscore the need for comprehensive, multi-layered initiatives from both the EU and national governments. Strengthening social cohesion is essential not only for the candidate countries at their current stage but also for ensuring that EU accession proceeds smoothly as they advance on their membership paths. To achieve meaningful results, the EU should mainstream social cohesion within its policy frameworks and allocate resources to strengthening all its dimensions throughout the accession process.
See the full document here: https://zenodo.org/records/18390585
InvigoratEU Long Policy Report on Russia´s Ambitions and Leverage (D6.1)
Published May 1, 2025
Marko Todorović
This study analyses Russia’s influence in the Eastern Trio (Georgia, Moldova, and Ukraine) and the Western Balkans (Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo, Montenegro, North Macedonia, and Serbia) over the past decade, focusing on its political, economic, and societal dimensions. Using the InvigoratEU External Influence Index, a comprehensive empirical tool specifically designed for this study, it systematically measures and compares Russian leverage across nine EU candidate countries. The index captures shifts in influence from 2013 to 2023, highlighting how political-security dynamics, economic dependencies, and societal developments have shaped Moscow’s leverage in the region and the strategic responses of affected states. The findings reveal a general decline in Russian influence, particularly in the political and economic spheres, while societal influence remains more resilient. Political leverage has weakened as countries distance themselves from Moscow, though informal networks and disinformation campaigns persist. Economic influence has been reduced through energy diversification and trade realignment, limiting Russia’s capacity for coercion. However, societal influence remains a key vector, with Russian media, religious networks, and ideological narratives continuing to shape public opinion and foster Euroscepticism. These trends highlight the need for a proactive EU response that reinforces the credibility of enlargement, strengthens energy independence, and counters Russian disinformation. Further gradual integration of candidate countries into the EU could maintain reform momentum and systematically diminish Moscow’s leverage, while targeted investments in energy infrastructure and diversified supply routes would enhance regional resilience and limit Russia’s capacity for economic coercion. Additionally, enhanced support for independent media, fact-checking initiatives, and strategic communication in local languages is essential to mitigating Russian influence. The study underscores that while Russia’s ability to exert direct control is diminishing, its capacity to shape societal narratives remains a challenge, requiring a forward-looking EU strategy that integrates political, economic, and societal dimensions to reinforce resilience and strategic influence in the region.
See the full document here: https://zenodo.org/records/17338235
Chinese Influence in the Eastern Trio and the Western Balkans: Strategic Fragmentation in the EU's Enlargement Countries (D6.2)
Published July 1, 2025
Matteo Bonomi
This publication by Matteo Bonomi analyses China’s influence in the Eastern Trio and the Western Balkans.
China’s growing presence in Eastern and Southeastern Europe has become a source of strategic concern for the EU, especially as global power dynamics shift under the weight of increasing U.S.-China rivalry. Once seen primarily as an economic partner, China is now viewed by many in Europe as a systemic rival, particularly due to its trade practices, ambiguous geopolitical positions – such as its stance on Russia’s invasion of Ukraine – and its model of state-led development. Against this backdrop, the report examines China’s influence in nine EU (potential) candidate countries: the Eastern Trio (Georgia, Moldova, Ukraine) and the Western Balkans (Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo, Montenegro, North Macedonia, Serbia), assessing the scope and nature of Chinese involvement.
Find the document here: https://zenodo.org/records/17338857
InvigoratEU Long Policy Report on Turkey's Ambitions and Leverage (D6.3)
Published September 1, 2025
Marko Todorović
This report examines Turkey’s influence in the Western Balkans (Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo, Montenegro, North Macedonia, and Serbia) and the Eastern Trio (Georgia, Moldova, and Ukraine) over the past decade, focusing on political, economic, and societal dimensions. Using the InvigoratEU External Influence Index—an empirical tool specifically designed for this study—it systematically measures and compares Turkish leverage across nine EU candidate and partner countries. The Index captures shifts from 2013 to 2023, offering a cross-country and longitudinal analysis of how Ankara has engaged with the region and how these countries have responded. The findings show that Turkey’s influence is neither uniformly benign nor overtly antagonistic, but shaped by local receptivity, institutional interest, and historical or cultural proximity. Unlike coercive actors, Turkey typically avoids direct confrontation with the EU, opting instead for relational diplomacy, targeted investments, and long-term societal engagement. Political influence has grown modestly, driven by high-level visits, security cooperation, and elite alignment—especially in Kosovo, Ukraine, and North Macedonia. Economic influence has expanded more steadily, fuelled by concessional loans, preferential trade agreements, and infrastructure projects. However, macroeconomic instability in Turkey casts doubt on the long-term sustainability of this outreach. Societal influence emerges as the most persistent and embedded dimension. Through cultural diplomacy, religious networks, educational initiatives, and media presence—including popular Turkish TV series—Turkey has cultivated durable societal linkages, particularly in Muslim-majority areas of the Western Balkans. While this influence is less pronounced in the Eastern Trio, it plays a growing role in public perceptions. These trends suggest that Turkey’s influence is best understood as adaptive and opportunistic rather than expansionist or ideological. It advances where EU presence is weak, particularly at the local level, and where Turkey can act quickly and visibly.
See the full document here: https://zenodo.org/records/17339529
Long Policy Report on rules alignment of protecting critical infrastructure in interdependent states (D7.1)
Published March 1, 2025
Ramūnas Vilpišauskas, Sergejs Potapkins, Svitlana Chekanova, Danijela Jacimovic, Gocha Kardava, Marco Siddi, Nana Tabagua
The report provides an extensive discussion of evolving landscape of threats to the CI in the EU and selected candidate countries in recent years and the challenges which, while varying depending on particular countries, also are common to all states affected by geopolitical tensions. The analysis of threats to energy, communications, transport and other CI in the Baltic States, Ukraine and the Baltic Sea region shows that hostile activities by authoritarian states, in particular, Russia, or actors linked to them have become increasingly frequent. Their proliferation especially intensified after Russia’s full-scale war against Ukraine in 2022, as it also became a wider confrontation between the West and authoritarian powers. The analysis of CI-related policies in Montenegro, Ukraine and Georgia – three candidate countries, which differ in terms of their state of accession into the EU, their connectivity patterns and risks to their CI associated with them – allows to assess different challenges arising to their CI and provision of vital services to society and state and methods of coping with them in each of them. The report concludes with recommendations emphasising the importance of daily practices of partnership and exercises involving all stakeholders of CI ecosystems and cooperation with the EU and NATO partners, taking into account different patterns of interdependencies and existing threats.
See the full document here: https://zenodo.org/records/17340020
Long Policy Report on a Common Framework for the Protection of Critical Infrastructure in the EU and its Neighbourhood (D7.2)
Published November 1, 2025
Ramūnas Vilpišauskas, Marts Ivaskis, Svitlana Chekanova, Danijela Jacimovic, Marco Siddi, Nana Tabagua, Teemu Tammikk
The report provides detailed analysis of the evolution and exiting policies of the EU in the field of the critical infrastructure (CI) protection and resilience as well as structured assessment of how CI related policies are adopted and implemented in selected EU Member States and candidate countries. To structure the comparative analysis of the national policies and institutions it proposes an analytical framework based on the policy implementation and compliance with EU norms literature focusing on the threat landscape, policy and institutional context as well as incentives and capacities for implementing CI related policies. This allows to provide an assessment of the current state of CI related policies in three selected EU Member States and three candidate countries which is based on original material collected for the purpose of this report, including primary and secondary sources. The conclusions and recommendations section elaborates on the differences and similarities of national CI related policies as well as challenges and opportunities for their alignment taking into the functional needs originating from existing interdependencies as well as specificities of national contexts. They also illustrate the ways and means of further contributions of the EU, in particular, the European Commission in advancing the goals of CI related policies and their alignment in the enlarging EU and its neighbourhood.
See the full document here: https://zenodo.org/records/17630178
InvigoratEU Strengthening Critical Infrastructure Resilience in an Era of Hybrid Threats: Challenges, Lessons, and Policy Options for the EU and its Neighbourhood (D7.3)
Published January 1, 2026
Marts Ivaskis, Ramūnas Vilpišauskas, Danijela Jacimovic, Nana Tabagua, Svitlana Chekanova
Europe’s critical infrastructure (CI) is facing an increasingly hostile threat environment from a variety of different actors. Russian hybrid operations, sabotage against energy and communications systems, and the vulnerabilities in increasingly interconnected systems highlight the importance of the topic. Recent attacks on European CI such as attacks on undersea cables in the Baltic Sea or incidents such as drone incursions into EU and NATO airspace highlight that protection as an inherent goal is unachievable. Instead, the goal should be to create resilient systems that can absorb and recover from disruptions.
The policy brief identifies two main clusters of challenges: 1) Systemic challenges; and 2) Operational challenges. Systemic challenges stem from divergent threat perceptions, limited awareness of CI related risks, and different levels of hybrid and geopolitical threats. Operational challenges, however, include uneven implementation of the CER and NIS2 Directives, fragmented national CI frameworks, underdeveloped PPPs, limited resources, and a lack of investment in CI resiliency planning.
See the full document here: https://zenodo.org/records/18455004
InvigoratEU The Enlarging EU as a Security Actor: Capacity Building in the Eastern Neighbourhood and the Western Balkans (D8.1)
Published January 1, 2026
Tyyne Karjalainen, Tuomas Iso-Markku
The European Union’s (EU) security role in its neighbourhoods is undergoing a significant transformation. Russia’s full-scale war against Ukraine is reshaping both the EU’s concrete security activities in and with neighbouring countries and the justifications and objectives that the Union attaches to its security engagement. These developments unfold in the context of – and also represent a response to – a changing European security architecture, in which the roles of the existing security organisations and arrangements are in flux. Notably, the EU reinvigorated its enlargement policy in 2022, opening a membership perspective for Ukraine, Moldova, and Georgia, while advancing the accession of the Western Balkan candidates. This creates a new rationale for the EU’s security engagement, as partners are increasingly expected to become future members of the Union.
This InvigoratEU Long Policy Report traces the EU’s evolving security practice and narratives in the Eastern neighbourhood and the Western Balkans, both before and after the outbreak of Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine. It focuses in particular on how, and to what extent, the EU’s approach to security engagement in the neighbourhoods, including capacity building, changed in 2022. Capacity building is not a single policy or instrument but rather a cross-cutting approach within the EU’s security activities, encompassing training, equipping, and advising. It is conducted by a variety of EU actors and through different instruments such as the Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) missions and operations and the European Peace Facility (EPF) support measures. The report discusses how different logics have shaped the EU’s capacity building as part of the Union’s broader security role in the neighbourhoods. Drawing on approximately one hundred EU documents, it examines the justifications that the EU has provided for its security policies and tests four key hypotheses. First, it analyses the role of a geopolitical logic in the EU’s capacity building efforts in the neighbourhoods. Second, it explores the impact of the logic of modernization on the EU’s engagement. Third, it investigates the extent to which demand or requests from partners in the neighbourhoods have shaped EU security policies. Finally, it assesses whether, and how, the objectives linked to EU enlargement are reflected in the Union’s capacity building efforts.
See the full document here: https://zenodo.org/records/18374762
InvigoratEU The Impact of Security and Defence Factors on Resilience Building (D8.2)
Published January 1, 2026
Artur Gruszczak
This report examines how the European Union’s evolving security and defence posture – accelerated by Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022 – shapes resilience building in the Eastern Neighbourhood and the Western Balkans (ENWB). It argues that the EU’s shift from a predominantly civilian power to a more defence-oriented geopolitical actor significantly affects enlargement, neighbourhood policies, and the Union’s credibility as a security provider.
Resilience in the security and defence sectors is conceptualised as a multidimensional process grounded in adaptability, robustness, deterrence, and civil–military coordination. Drawing on the InvigoratEU framework, the report introduces a parallel “Triple R” perspective – readiness, robustness, and resolve – to assess EU capabilities and expectations regarding defence modernisation, security sector reform, and the management of hybrid threats in ENWB countries. This approach highlights both the Union’s strengths, such as improved preparedness, coordination, and civil–military cooperation, and its persistent weaknesses, including fragmented decision-making and uneven implementation of policy tools.
See the full document here: https://zenodo.org/records/18336969
InvigoratEU Policy Paper on Demands for European Security and Defence Cooperation in Ukraine after Russia's Invasion (D8.3)
Published September 1, 2025
Ryhor Nizhnikau, Tyyne Karjalainen, Juha Jokela
The European security outlook, and European support for Ukraine in particular, has changed dramatically. The EU is Ukraine’s key ally, a fact that Ukrainians fully appreciate. The full-scale war has created momentum for previously impossible forms of assistance and cooperation. In the first days of the full-scale war, EU member states considered sending only helmets to Ukraine, whereas in 2025, the military support sent by EU member states to Ukraine is worth 60 billion euros, including advanced and lethal weapon systems, as well as supplies ranging from ammunition to missiles and fighter jets. The most recent plans for security guarantees for a post-ceasefire Ukraine, including air policing, maritime operations, and a reassurance force building capacities for Ukraine’s land forces, demonstrate the cumulative change in the willingness of European states to respond to Ukraine’s security needs.
Much of EU policymaking is based on its interactions and joint decision-making with the Ukrainian government, which has reached an unprecedented level since 2022. However, the evolution of the EU-Ukraine security and political partnership, particularly enlargement, and its eventual outcome will also depend on Ukrainian public perception. The aim of this paper is to collect and analyse information regarding Ukrainian public opinion on the EU, security, and defence, as well as how to facilitate the integration process, address the existing limitations, and improve the foundations of the EU-Ukraine relationship. This will be particularly relevant when the electoral process resumes. Evidence of public misunderstanding or frustration could lead to political backlash.
See the full document here: https://zenodo.org/records/17366217
The Risks of a Reinvigorated EU-Western Balkans Defence Cooperation (D8.4)
Published November 1, 2025
Pol Bargues, Francesca Lupi
The Russia’s war against Ukraine and the United States’ gradual disengagement from European security have prompted the European Union (EU) and its Member States to reassess their defence posture, with renewed attention to the Western Balkans. Once sidelined due to stalled enlargement efforts, the region has re-emerged as a strategic priority. The dominant narrative states that EU’s defence cooperation is increasingly aligning the Western Balkan’s foreign policies with EU objectives, potentially reinvigorating the enlargement process. However, this policy paper argues that this geopolitical turn has overlooked risks: the erosion of the EU’s modernisation approach to build peace in the Western Balkans, regional fragmentation due to uncoordinated defence initiatives, and the potential escalation of conflict amid fragile power dynamics. By analysing these multi-level risks, this policy paper questions the assumption that defence cooperation naturally supports EU enlargement and explores the tension between the logics of modernisation and geopolitics in EU foreign policy. Finally, it puts forward three policy recommendations: re-centre cooperation around peace and democracy; embed a regional lens in defence cooperation; and ensure that defence alignments do not fuel fears or distrusts among the Balkan countries. The analysis is structured across three sections: the EU’s strategic shift in the Western Balkans, its defence engagements, and the unintended consequences of this approach.
See the full document here: https://zenodo.org/records/17579952
Western Balkans and Eastern Partnership candidate countries’ path to the EU: present and future
Víctor Burguete, Oriol Farrés, Julian Plottka and Kai Ole Vorberg
This publication by Víctor Burguete, Oriol Farrés, Julian Plottka and Kai Ole Vorberg aims to identify critical drivers and trends for Eastern Partnership (EaP) candidate countries and the Western Balkans (WB) in their path to the EU. To visualize existential threats, challenges and opportunities.
How? Literature review of foresight studies concerning the EU, and its candidate countries from the Eastern Partnership (i.e. Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine) and Western Balkans (i.e. Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo, Montenegro, North Macedonia and Serbia). This is important to highlight diverging trajectories and the areas in which cooperation and integration with the EU are most needed. If there are specific gaps in foresight studies, data will be used to complete the analysis.
Find the document Horizon scanning for InvigoratEU’s visioning process.
