This paper showcases the weaknesses of eu enlargement law and demonstrates how one Member State – namely, Greece – is notable for abusing this weakness, for harming the candidate countries, the eu, and the institutions alike, for stripping the eu position of its predictability, and for undermining the eu Commission’s efforts. Accordingly, Greece has severely incapacitated the key procedural rule of law component of the eu’s enlargement regulation, turning it into a randomised political game and ignoring any long-term goals of stability, prosperity, and peace that the process is to stand for. Following a walk through Greece’s engagement throughout a number of enlargement rounds, the paper concludes that the duty of loyalty – which is presumably able to discipline Member States that undermine the common effort – should find a new meaning in the context of eu enlargement.
Arıkan.H.2003. ‘Good Neighbourliness Condition for eu Membership: The eu Policy Towards the Cyprus Conflict and its Security Implications’Ankara Universitesi Sıyasal Bilgiler Fakültesi Dergisi58(4): 25–47.
BahcheliT.2003. ‘Cycles of Tension and Rapprochement: Prospects for Turkey’s Relations with Greece’ in Ismael. T. Y. and Aydın. M. (eds). Turkey’s Foreign Policy in the 21st Century: A Changing Role in World Politics (Aldershot: Ashgate): 161–80.
———. 2004. ‘Turning a New Page in Turkey’s Relations with Greece? The Challenge of Reconciling Vital Interests’ in Aydin. M. and Ifantis. K. (eds). Turkish-Greek Relations: The Security Dilemma in the Aegean (London/NY: Routledge): 95–122.
‘The Position of the Good Neighbourliness Principle in International and eu law’ in Kochenov. D. and Basheska. E. (eds). Good Neighbourliness in European Legal Context (Leiden: Brill Nijhoff): 24–56.
Berridge.G.1996. ‘The un and the world diplomatic system: lessons from the Cyprus and us-North Korea talks’ in Bourantonis. D. and Evriviades. M. L. (eds). A United Nations for the Twenty-First Century: Peace, Security, and Development (The Hague: Kluwer Law Intl): 105–26.
Çakir.A. E.2010. ‘Political Dimension: Always in the List of “Also-rans”: Turkey’s Rivals in eu–Turkey Relations’ in Çakir. A. E. (ed). Fifty Years of eu–Turkey Relations: A Sisyphean Story (London/NY: Routledge): 10–46.
Grabbe. H. 2003.
‘Challenges of eu Enlargement’ in Lieven. A. and Trenin. D. V. (eds). Ambivalent Neighbours: The eu, nato and the Price of Membership (Washington, dc: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace): 67–89.
Grigoriadis. I. N. 2014.
‘The Changing Role of the eu Factor in Greek-Turkish Relations’London School of Economics and Political Science Hellenic Observatory, Symposium Paper, <http://www.lse.ac.uk/europeanInstitute/research/hellenicObservatory/pdf/1st_Symposium/GrigoriadisIoannis.pdf> [accessed on 31 October 2015].
———. and Wessel. R. 2008.
‘Restraining External Competences of eu Member States under cfsp’ in Cremona. M. and de Witte. B. (eds). eu Foreign Relations Law, Constitutional Fundamentals (Oxford: Hart Publishing): 79–121.
House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee. ‘uk–Turkey Relations and Turkey’s Regional Role’, 81–85, <http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201012/cmselect/cmfaff/1567/1567.pdf> [accessed on 31 October 2015].
Hughes.E.2011. Turkey’s Accession to the European Union: The Politics of Exclusion? (London/ny: Routledge).
RodinS.2012. ‘The European Union and the Western Balkans: Does the Lisbon Treaty Matter?’ in Bindi. F. and Angelescu. I. (eds). The Foreign Policy of the European Union, 2nd edn (Washington: Brookings Institution Press): 153–71.
RumeliliB.2008. ‘Transforming the Greek-Turkish conflicts: the eu and “what we make of it”!’ in Diez. T., Stetter. S. and Albert. M. (eds). The European Union and Border Conflicts: The Power of Integration and Association (Cambridge: cup): 94–128.
ŠabičZ.2002. ‘Slovenia and the European Union: A Different Kind of Two-Level Game’ in LindenR. H. (ed). Norms and Nannies: The Impact of International Organizations on the Central and Eastern European States (Oxford: Rowman & Littlefield): 91–127.
Tsakonas.P. J.2009. ‘How Can the European Union Transform the Greek-Turkish Conflict’ in Arvanitopoulos. C. (ed). Turkey’s Accession to the European Union: An Unusual Candidacy (Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag): 107–20.
TsardanidasC. and StavridisS.2011.
‘Greece: From Special Case to Limited Europeanization’ in WongR. and HillC. (eds). National and European Foreign Policies: Towards Europeanization (London/NY: Routledge): 111–30.
TulmetsE.2008. ‘A “Soft Power” with Civilian Means: Can the eu Bridge its Capability-Expectations Gap in the enp?’ in Delcour. L. and Toulmets. E. (eds). 2008. Pioneer Europe? Testing eu Foreign Policy in the Neighbourhood (Baden-Baden: Nomos): 133–58.
‘Bilateral Barriers or Good Neighbourliness?’Clingendael European Papers, 15–22, <http://www.clingendael.nl/publication/bilateral-barriers-or-good-neighbourliness-role-bilateral-disputes-eu-enlargement> [accessed on 31 October 2015].
See, for instance, Uilenreef2010, with regard to the impact of the bilateral dispute between Slovenia and Croatia on the eu integration efforts of the latter.
Shaelou2010: 60, for instance, notes that after Cyprus’ accession to the Union, the aim of recognition of the Republic of Cyprus by Turkey and the normalisation of the relations between Cyprus and Turkey was to be achieved by exerting political pressure, as well as through the ‘technical requirements deriving from binding instruments of [eu] law’.
Tocci2002: 108, for instance, argues that a settlement of the dispute was effectively a condition in the Opinion on the application of Cyprus. See also Bourne 2001: 394.
Quoted in McCartan2002.
Thus, on 16 February1994, the Greek government placed a total embargo on Macedonia, with the sole exception of food and pharmaceuticals. On 22 April 1994 the Commission brought an action against Greece in front of the ecj, claiming that the Member State misused its powers by failing to justify the unilateral measures prohibiting trade: see Case C–120/94 Commission of the European Communities v Hellenic Republic  ecr I–1513. With the conclusion of the ‘un Interim Accord Between the Hellenic Republic and the fyrom’, un Doc 95−27866 of 13 September 1995 (Interim Accord), Greece lifted the trade restrictions and the Commission decided to withdraw its application.