Summary
In recent years, there has been a substantial shift in the EU’s stance on enlargement towards geopolitical logic and actorness. This is reflected in academic literature and debates on the reasons, rationales, effects, and deconstructions of such a turn. This Paper aims to look at how local perceptions and expectations in Candidate Countries (CCs) are shaped by malign foreign influences and the “geopolitisation” of EU enlargement, including the interplay of control and protean powers in addressing these challenges.
As such, this Paper contributes to relevant academic debates by offering a perspective from the six CCs in the Western Balkans (WB6) and the Eastern Neighbourhood (EN) trio. Building on data from public opinion polls conducted in these countries in 2021-2025, our research draws on fieldwork carried out in the first half of 2025: at least two focus groups per country, with experts and the general public, and a minimum of 10 interviews per country with officials, politicians, experts, and civil society activists. In our empirical work, we focus on local perceptions and public sentiments regarding the risks, uncertainties, and external influences, particularly of a malign nature, that these countries are facing in the security, political, and socio-economic areas.
We argue that in all nine CCs under review, malign external influences are seen as coming, if not exactly from within the region, then closely connected with it. Russia is seen as the key malign external actor by the public and experts in the EN3, accompanied (and mimicked in many of its approaches) by Serbia in the case of the WB6. Perceptions of the closeness of malign external influence are manifested and reflected upon differently in public perceptions in these countries, along with expectations of the EU and its role in resisting malign influences and boosting enlargement.
The Paper also demonstrates that it is misleading to lump CCs together geographically, as the differences between the WB6 and EN3 are striking. Still, there are patterns and trends that transcend these regions and highlight CC responses to external influences, particularly Russia’s, as well as their interactions with the EU enlargement process, external policies, and toolkit. A comparative analysis of such perceptions and responses therefore expands the conceptual frameworks of the geopolitical turn of enlargement and the interplay of control and protean powers, and the wider theoretical debates regarding EU integration.
