The Eastern 'Big Bang' enlargement in 2004 closed an important chapter in the EU integration story. The beginning of a new chapter was not long in following: in May 2004 the EU acquired not just ten new member states but also several new neighbours, most of which have at some point expressed an interest in a closer and more structured relationship with the EU. Thus, the basic dilemma—the EU's territorial expansion and the issue of 'inclusion vs. exclusion'—has become relevant again. In the same way as with the countries in Central and Eastern Europe in the late 1980s and early 1990s the EU could not ignore messages from its new neighbours to the east and to the south simply because the issue of security for the region as a whole and for individual states' borders became topical again. One should note that the EU has always been faced with the 'inclusion vs. exclusion' dilemma: how far should the EU borders be stretched? According to the Treaty of Rome, any country in Europe can be considered a potential candidate for membership of the EU. Although this criterion looks quite neat on paper, in reality the concept of 'Europe' and 'Europeanness' has become quite vague over time. Consequently, the task of translating such fuzzy concepts into meaningful foreign policy is also a difficult one. In order to sustain its status as the most successful and efficient project of regional integration the EU cannot offer membership to every country that wishes it without proper assessment of enlargement impacts. But it cannot afford to set explicit limits to EU membership either. A clear 'exclusion' policy will isolate countries that can pose a variety of economic, political, and security threats to the EU.

In this light, the European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) launched in 2004 is, essentially, the EU's response to the 'inclusion-exclusion' dilemma: its main goal is to develop closer relations and cooperation ties with the EU's neighbours but without offering them explicitly the prospect of EU membership. The ENP framework applies to the 16 of the EU's closest neighbours: Algeria, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Egypt, Georgia, Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, Libya, Moldova, Morocco, Occupied Palestinian Territory, Syria, Tunisia, and Ukraine. In addition, the ENP incorporates a number of regional co-operation initiatives: the Eastern Partnership (launched in May 2009), the Union for the Mediterranean (formerly known as the Barcelona Process, officially re-launched in Paris in July 2008), and the Black Sea Synergy (launched in Kiev in February 2008). The official purpose of the ENP framework is to offer the EU neighbours 'a privileged relationship' based on 'mutual commitment to common values' such as democracy and human rights, rule of law, good governance, market economy, and sustainable development (European Commission, 2004). Analysts indicate that this is, essentially, an 'all but institutions' offer—the EU offers closer co-operation and ties with its immediate neighbours but it withholds the ultimate 'carrot'—the prospect of EU membership.

Broadly speaking, the ENP's overall aim towards its neighbours is ambitious: to promote democracy and respect for human rights as well as to encourage domestic political and economic reforms. The international context and, specifically, the role of international actors in influencing a country's democratization path and outcomes are important explanatory factors which should not be overlooked in any meaningful analysis of democratization trends and patterns. (See Chapter 7 for a detailed account of theoretical approaches on the international dimension of democratization.) Among the most deliberate influences on the part of external actors are various democracy promotion strategies applied by these actors in target transition countries. (See Chapter 7, for a detailed overview of the US and the EU democracy promotion strategies.) These strategies range from indirect and socialization-based methods such as democracy assistance to more direct and incentive-oriented strategies such as political conditionality. Notably, the ENP also contains some elements of soft conditionality towards the EU neighbours: on offer are fifteen incentives ranging from 'more effective political dialogue' and 'enhanced cultural cooperation' to 'perspectives of integration into transport, energy and telecommunications networks' and 'enhanced and improved [financial] assistance' (European Commission 2003). A set of benchmarks has been set out in specific Action Plans for each neighbour, in which the EU spelled out what was expected from the ENP partners and which the EU was planning to use when evaluating neighbours' progress towards reform. The Action Plans also specified that new benefits would be offered only to reflect progress made: the more the country conforms to the EU values and fulfils the ENP conditions of support, the closer it can co-operate with the EU and the more benefits it will get from the ENP framework.

How effective has the ENP been so far in promoting democracy and respect for human rights in the EU's neighbours? The record of EU democracy promotion through the ENP has been mixed at best. The EU officials optimistically report that, in general, the ENP has been a success: it generated more trade and people-to-people contacts between the EU and the neighbours, as well as more substantive aid allocations on the part of the EU to the neighbours. In a recent ENP evaluation report the EU acknowledged that Ukraine, Moldova, and Morocco made the best use of the EU incentives and showed significant progress in domestic reforms and democratization (European Commission 2010). As a result, these countries will be rewarded with more aid and closer co-operation in future. Other ENP partners such as Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Egypt have been less successful in complying with the ENP's conditions. Within the EU's Eastern Partnership Belarus has recently been excluded from negotiating an association agreement with the EU and other EU concessions due to lack of progress in fulfilling democracy and human rights conditions for closer ties with the EU.

On 25 May 2011 the European Commission launched a new European Neighbourhood Policy that would provide almost 7 billion euros in funding to strengthen individual and regional relationships between the EU and countries in its neighbourhood through an approach that emphasizes more funds for more reform. The approach hoped to provide more mutual accountability, but also more funding. In March 2015 the European Commission launched a review of its principles, which aimed to look at what tools should be used and how large in scope the policy should reach. 

The success or failure of the ENP to entice the neighbours towards further democratization and greater respect for human rights can be meaningfully evaluated only over time. The ENP's 14-year lifespan might not be enough to do that. The Arab Spring and recent Russian encroachment have made the ENP appear to be ineffective. In addition, the ENP conditionality suffers from a number of weaknesses which can account for inertia and lack of results in the EU–neighbourhood relationship. Perhaps, the most important weakness is a lack of the ultimate incentive—an explicit promise of EU membership. All alternative incentives might simply not be sufficient for domestic political elites to be willing to incur all the adjustment costs and risks associated with further democratization and liberalization of their domestic regimes. However, the EU's alternative policies of engagement with its neighbours are scarce. The costs of doing nothing on the part of the EU are also high. Therefore, co-operating with neighbours through the ENP can be the only viable democracy promotion strategy for the EU at the moment. If so, the EU should make sure that the policy represents a well-balanced mix of conditions and incentives as well as consistent and fair engagement with its neighbours.

Critical thinking questions

• What is democracy promotion? Outline the main types, strategies, and categories of actors engaged in democracy promotion. Can democracy be promoted from the outside? What are the limitations of democracy promotion?
• Why is it important to consider the international context when trying to explain regime change and democratization? How would you measure the international context in your study of democratization of a country?
• What is political conditionality? How can the use of political conditionality be justified? What are the limits and risks of political conditionality?
• Imagine you are an EU official responsible for relations with the EU neighbours. What actions and policies would you suggest in relation to Belarus, Ukraine, and Egypt? Explain your position.