Special project: "Challenges of European Integration"

Why is it crucial for Ukraine to start preparing for EU membership now

22 JANUARY 2025
01
Negotiations are already underway. But who exactly needs to be prepared for EU membership
02
Former Latvian Prime Minister and Minister of Agriculture Laimdota Straujuma
03
Former Head of Latvia’s EU Accession Negotiations, Former EU Commissioner for Energy and Development, Andris Piebalgs
04
Former Director of Latvia’s European Integration Bureau, chairperson of the Council of Senior Officials on EU affairs Edvards Kusners

Negotiations are already underway. But who exactly needs to be prepared for EU membership

Joining the European Union is an extremely complex and lengthy process. In this article, we explain who needs to start preparing now.
Over the past three years, Ukraine has not only achieved the coveted status of an EU candidate country but also moved at record speed to begin negotiations. Currently, preparations are underway for Ukraine’s accession talks with the European Union. While this is a long and challenging process, the country has a real opportunity to become a full EU member in the coming years.
However, achieving this goal is not just a matter of political will – it requires extensive preparatory work across all levels of governance, the economy, civil society, and business. EU membership is not merely a change in a country’s status on the international stage; it entails a series of reforms impacting various spheres of life, from justice and economic policies to anti-corruption measures.
The EU last expanded its borders ten years ago in 2013, with Croatia’s accession. The circumstances surrounding this current round of enlargement are fundamentally different. Ukraine must not only meet the EU’s requirements but also maximize the opportunities provided by membership in the single economic market. The role of every institution and citizen in this process is critically important.
Preparing for EU membership essentially means planning the country’s future within a unified market. It is crucial to draw on the experiences of other nations that have already traveled this path. At the same time, it’s important to note that the EU legal system evolves rapidly, and since countries like Poland and Latvia joined the EU, a significant number of new legislative acts have come into force. Ukraine must adapt its domestic legislation to these changes.
Preparation must involve not only government officials and parliamentarians but also local authorities, businesses, professional associations, and ordinary citizens. The capacity of the state apparatus to prepare for negotiations and eventual membership will remain a central topic in the coming years. To address this, we’ve spoken with representatives of other countries that have gone through this process to learn from their experiences.
The key task is to build robust institutional capacity capable of meeting EU requirements and aligning with EU legislation, which is uniform across all member states. This effort requires action at all levels – from improving legislation to training civil servants who can operate effectively under new conditions. Additionally, it is vital to clearly define the country’s priorities on its path to the EU, including economic reforms, infrastructure development, and support for small and medium-sized businesses.
Through thorough preparation, Ukraine can not only meet the conditions for EU membership but also derive maximum benefit from it, fostering the country’s development and prosperity on the global stage.
While Ukraine cannot simply replicate the experiences of other nations, understanding who needs to prepare and how is essential for success. EU membership impacts everyone – from local communities to central authorities. Learning from the mistakes and successes of other member states can help Ukraine avoid similar pitfalls on its path to the European Union. This article explores the experiences of EU member states that have already gone through this process and are now sharing their insights.

Who needs to be prepared?

To effectively prepare state institutions, clear coordination between ministries and local authorities is required to ensure the timely execution of tasks related to adapting to European standards. Reforms in public administration are also crucial, particularly in training civil servants who can operate effectively in new conditions. A key focus should be on English language proficiency and internal coordination, as institutional capacity is essential for fulfilling EU integration commitments.
Local authorities play a significant role in fulfilling EU commitments, particularly in distributing European funds. Therefore, training and capacity-building at the local level are essential to ensure effective project management at the regional level. In Poland and Latvia, local authorities actively participated in the European integration process, contributing to the successful development of their regions.
As demonstrated by the experiences of Poland and Latvia, the Parliament should define the fundamental principles of integration while delegating the authority to develop secondary legislation to the government. Parliamentary micromanagement can hinder the European integration process; thus, maintaining a balance between general guidance and detailed oversight is crucial. Nonetheless, the Parliament has a key role in processes like screening, ensuring the effectiveness and timely implementation of EU requirements.
It is also vital to involve businesses in the European integration process through associations to facilitate information exchange and assess potential economic impacts. Businesses need to be aware of transition periods, new EU rules and standards, as well as long-term benefits and challenges. Successful collaboration between the public and private sectors helps create optimal conditions for businesses during integration, including adapting to new regulations.
Last but not least, societal preparation is critical. Citizens need to be ready for changes in their daily lives, particularly in areas such as law, economy, and social welfare. Expanding knowledge about the EU through government initiatives and educational programs helps secure public support and fosters social consensus for the integration process.

Former Latvian Prime Minister and Minister of Agriculture Laimdota Straujuma:

Laimdota Straujuma
In 1995, the Latvian government submitted its application to join the EU and established a European Affairs Committee in the Saeima (Parliament). This marked the beginning of the practical EU accession process.
Two years later, the European Commission published its EU enlargement strategy, "Agenda 2000", which included evaluations of the accession applications from all candidate countries. Latvia had significant shortcomings and delays at the time, failing to make the list of the five candidate countries that began accession negotiations. This served as a wake-up call, mobilizing Latvia’s integration efforts. Over the following years, Latvia caught up and even surpassed some countries that had started the integration process earlier.
By 2000, the Latvian government adopted the updated fourth National Program for European Union Integration, linking it to the state budget. This program outlined four strategic priorities for Latvia to address in order to join the EU:
Preparing society for EU membership, including compliance with the bloc’s political criteria, particularly in areas like combating corruption and protecting minorities.
Preparing the economy, with measures to meet EU economic criteria, such as improving the business environment, completing privatization, developing land and real estate markets, and formulating policies for international trade relations.
Ensuring compliance with the rights and obligations of EU membership, which required assessing Latvia’s current situation in all sectors to demonstrate its responsibilities and commitments as an EU member state. This included areas such as the internal market, economic and fiscal policy, the environment, justice, and foreign policy.
Preparing public administration, focusing on reforming and creating an efficient civil service system, including the training of public servants.
The work of the EU accession negotiations was politically coordinated by the Council for European Integration Council, chaired by the Prime Minister. The Council was composed of ministers whose sectors were most involved in the integration process. Technically, the negotiations were conducted and coordinated by the Senior Officials' Meeting, which consisted of high-level officials of the ministries involved in the integration process, usually the ministries were represented by the Deputy State secretaries. The Senior Officials' Meeting was chaired by the Deputy State Secretary of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Representatives of the social partners and non-governmental organisations were also able to attend the meetings of senior officials.
The government strengthened the role of the Office for European Integration by placing it under the authority of the Prime Minister. The functions of the Bureau included assessing the conformity of regulatory enactments with the requirements of the European Union and preparing proposals for the necessary amendments to the regulatory documents of Latvia. In fact, the office was the secretariat of the European Integration Council. During this period, the Latvian Cabinet of Ministers established the Translation and Terminology Center as part of the Government Office for European Integration. The center's work, focused on translating the "acquis communautaire" (EU law), was important for Latvia's EU accession.
Under the legal framework, all Latvian positions had to be coordinated with the Saeima’s European Affairs Committee. This committee not only assessed submitted documents promptly but also facilitated the swift passage of necessary legislative acts in Parliament.
Like other EU candidate countries, Latvia negotiated transitional periods to fulfill its obligations as an EU member state. In total, Latvia secured 32 transitional periods. Examples included timeframes for compliance in waste processing by dairy, meat, and fish enterprises; restrictions on the purchase of agricultural land and forests by non-EU residents and companies; and differentiated VAT rates for heating, among others.
In the integration process, it is critical to have a clear decision-making hierarchy, where the preparation process is not fragmented. Coordination between various ministries, especially at the highest levels, is vital. Administrative capacity is a key component, requiring both subject matter knowledge and English language proficiency. Additionally, political and administrative cooperation among ministries was achieved through high-level meetings involving social partners.
It is essential to clearly identify and prioritize national interests, focusing on a limited number of the most critical issues. For example, ministries should develop their own priority lists.
It is worth noting that transitional periods do not apply to institutional capacity, which requires immediate readiness. Instead, such periods are granted for specific policies, contingent on how effectively ministries collaborate with each other, businesses, and other stakeholders.

Former Head of Latvia’s EU Accession Negotiations, Former EU Commissioner for Energy and Development, Andris Piebalgs:

Andris Piebalgs
In Latvia’s case, the responsibilities for European integration were assigned to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) and the newly established European Integration Bureau. Additionally, each ministry had a Deputy State Secretary responsible for European integration.
The MFA handled overall coordination and negotiations, while the Bureau was tasked with coordinating and communicating with ministries and municipalities, aligning preparations for accession, organizing screening processes, and compiling reports.
Domestically, the Bureau and the MFA were somewhat on equal footing, but externally, it was the MFA that led the negotiations. The approach was decidedly proactive. The Bureau aimed to strengthen administrative capacity in Latvia, even without having direct authority over the ministries.
Municipalities held significant potential for the entire process. Despite varying administrative capacities, their enthusiasm to be part of the integration story was immense. In fact, local governments were more "engaged" in the European integration process than the ministries, which were often burdened with extensive responsibilities and bureaucratic duties.
Engaging domestic stakeholders was also crucial. Businesses, for instance, presented a dual challenge: on one hand, they saw the opportunities offered by the EU; on the other, they preferred maintaining the status quo and extracting dual benefits. They were uncertain about whether the sacrifices they made would yield the expected benefits, which often materialized later. Engaging with stakeholders early on, explaining Latvia’s position, gauging their views, and keeping them involved in the process was essential.
I believe there were three major challenges, for European integration that Ukraine might face as well.
First, limited knowledge about the country among EU member states. The legal system is undoubtedly imperfect, but in the end, perceptions determine the pace of accession. Therefore, we worked hard to disseminate information about Latvia’s actual situation, anticipating potential issues, and highlighting our progress. Ultimately, EU accession is a political decision – whether a country is ready for reforms or not. The Copenhagen criteria are, after all, a political judgment.
The second focus area, addressed primarily through the MFA, was identifying potential negotiation challenges. For us, agriculture, fisheries, and phytosanitary regulations posed difficulties. We tried to address these issues early to avoid significant internal and external complications.
The third challenge was screening, administrative capacity, and implementation. This was the Bureau’s core responsibility. Many of our civil servants initially lacked any knowledge of English, a hurdle where Ukraine is far more advanced. In areas like energy, for example, Ukraine has already navigated ENTSO-E processes, so people understand directives, regulations, adaptation, and reporting mechanisms.
The European Integration Bureau had a strong overview of capacity gaps within institutions responsible for EU accession. It ensured that capacity-building was integrated into the national program for the adaptation of EU legislation.

The Bureau recruited new civil servants, often top university graduates, which allowed it to manage and coordinate ministries' work effectively, backed by both political support and its own expertise.

Former Director of Latvia’s European Integration Bureau, chairperson of the Council of Senior Officials on EU affairs Edvards Kusners:

Edvards Kusners
The EU is fundamentally about economic regulation, being an economic union based on common rules and standards.
There are numerous technical issues to address, and we had to transform our legal culture and approaches to align Latvia’s national legal system with that of the EU. This process involved much more than simply transposing laws.
Different legal cultures can create serious efficiency problems for a member state, particularly during the pre-accession phase.
For me, as the Director of the European Integration Bureau, the key challenge was the siloed nature of the civil service, reminiscent of medieval cities surrounded by walls, which hindered collaboration. The EU breaks down these walls entirely. Many policies are cross-ministerial, and you cannot simply distribute EU policies among ministries and expect smooth progress without proper coordination.
In our alignment process, we sought out the weakest links in the chain, as those are where the chain typically breaks. We worked to support ministries with evident capacity gaps by leveraging political backing and influencing budgetary decisions.
At the technical level, the Cabinet of Ministers is the primary rule-maker, while the legislative body, i.e., the parliament, establishes the framework legislation. Laws set out goals, principles, expected outcomes, and delegate authority to other bodies. In Latvia, only the Cabinet of Ministers issues technical regulations, which form the bulk of the legislation. Micromanagement by the parliament is highly detrimental to both a country’s development and EU accession efforts.
Copyright law was a challenging area. It took over a year to secure funding for the first expert in this field because we were a newly re-established country with an underdeveloped civil service and no existing intellectual property legislation.
The Ministry of the Interior faced challenges with migration and state border issues, requiring extensive international cooperation for which people were unprepared.
The judiciary also posed significant hurdles; training judges was crucial since EU negotiations demand proof of the ability to implement EU laws.

The European Integration Bureau identified gaps in institutional capacity and ensured their inclusion in national programs for building readiness for EU membership. Moreover, the Bureau’s team of highly capable young civil servants, combined with robust political backing, enabled it to effectively guide and coordinate the ministries until the day Latvia joined the EU.
Of course, agriculture is also very complex in political and social terms, but in reality, it is not so complicated from a technical perspective. It is simply a very broad area of regulation, and when you begin to delve into it, the scale can be overwhelming. However, in the end, it turns out to be a vast array of technical rules.
Sometimes it's the scale, sometimes it's intimidating, and sometimes it's the complexity – or even, in a sense, the unfinished nature of EU policy in this area – because this policy field is still forming and evolving.
As for discussions with businesses, such interactions were a challenge in the country at that time.
We tried to negotiate with capable business associations to conduct impact assessments and understand the consequences of EU accession for their businesses and specific sectors. However, we only had one case where a business association was able to provide us with data and a position on how they envisioned their business in the long term. For the most part, they said, "We don’t know what will happen in a year or two, as we are living in the chaotic world of the late 1990s."
The result of effective cooperation between the state and the non-state sectors can be a constructive negotiating position that determines the best conditions for integration, particularly regarding transitional periods.
The views and opinions are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the European Union or the Delegation of the European Union to Ukraine.
©2000 — 2025, Ukrainska Pravda. Please add a reference (hyperlink for online publications) when using our publications.