THE STATE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Reforming Europe in a time of war

THE STATE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION 20 This means that, given that the five main political groupings are in favour of the proposal and it is only the far right, including their Spanish allies, who voted against it, it was to be expected that, at the last European Coun- cil to be held under the French Presidency, on 22 and 23 June, the establishment of a third European Convention would finally be approved. However, the resolution was not passed and would have to be discussed in September, under the Czech Presidency of the Council of the EU. A bucket of cold water at the European Council of 23 and 24 June The European Council was held in Brussels on 23 and 24 June. The final meeting under the French Presidency had been long awaited, in particular because it had to resolve the formal request by the European Parliament (in application of article 48.2) to call a European Conven- tion, which had been formulated on the two occasions noted above. The big surprise was that, of the seven points of the conclusions of the European Council, only point six made reference to the Conference on the Future of Europe. But it made no reference to the request itself. As a result, it remained unclear what would happen with the request to call a European Convention, and the conclusions did not even state if the matter would be carried over to the next European Council in September, under the Czech Presidency, thus creating great uncertainty. This uncertainty was, if anything, further heightened by the fact that the first of the Council’s conclusions ad- dress Europe in the broad sense, referring to Macron’s proposal regarding a European Political Community, clar- ifying the meaning of this, but once again leaving the matter for the next meeting of the Council. Point two of the Council’s conclusions refers to Ukraine, and “reiter- ates that [the Council] firmly stands with Ukraine and that the European Union will continue to provide strong support for Ukraine’s overall economic, military, social and financial resilience, including humanitarian aid”. It also adopted the sixth package of sanctions, increasing pressure on Russia to bring an end to its war of aggres- sion. And it set out a proposal to provide an additional 9 billion euros of macro-financial assistance, along with proposals to support the reconstruction of Ukraine. Particularly noteworthy is point three of the conclu- sions, which grants Candidate Country Status to Ukraine and the Republic of Moldova and is prepared to grant it to Georgia once the priorities specified in the Commis- sion’s opinion on that country’s membership application have been addressed. Point four expresses the EU’s full and unequivocal commitment to the EU membership perspective of the Western Balkans and calls for the acceleration of the accession process. However, while the EU’s continuing commitment to expansion makes the need to deepen the EU even more pressing, this process remains in abeyance. With respect to the Conference on the Future of Eu- rope, the only reference to this is that it has represented an exceptional opportunity to enter into dialogue with European citizens, once again ignoring civil society. And point 29 stresses the importance of ensuring that “cit- izens” are informed of the follow-up to the proposals made in the Report of the conclusions of the Conference on the Future of Europe. At no point does it say anything regarding the two requests of the European Parliament to call a European Convention. Conclusions: the need for Treaty reform, which is further exacerbated by the commitment to expansion at the June Council Despite all this, reform of the Treaties of the European Union is essential. This reform needs to be implemented soon, and certainly before the expansion process contin- ues. Indeed, there should be no further expansion without internal consolidation. However, in the European Council of 23 and 24 June, which made no mention whatsoever of the European Convention or Treaty reform, there was