As the European Union confronts a world increasingly shaped by instability and geopolitical competition, the bloc is being urged to embrace a dual agenda of enlargement and internal reform – or risk irrelevance. In a new report published by the European Policy Centre (EPC), analysts call on the EU to abandon its piecemeal, hesitant approach and commit to ‘permachange’: a permanent state of adaptation in response to cascading crises.

The EPC outlines four strategic scenarios for enlargement – ranging from a ‘Speedy Big Bang’ where all willing aspirants are brought in rapidly, as with the enlargement wave of 2004, to a minimalist ‘No Enlargement’ path, effectively freezing further expansion.

The authors argue that the EU is at a crossroads, facing not just a ‘permacrisis’ – a state of continuous, overlapping shocks – but a strategic moment that demands transformative decisions. “To remain relevant inside and outside Europe, the EU27 must embrace the logic of ‘permachange’: constantly adapting in response to transformative crises,” the EPC warns.

“If one accepts we live in times of permacrisis, then change should not be seen as an exceptional event. Change becomes a constant as well, a constant fact of life through which the union grows in numbers and in strength to keep up with the times and also to lead the way,” Corina Stratulat, associate director and head of the European Politics and Institutions Programme at the EPC, told the think-tank’s webinar ‘A Test of Times – Permachange through enlargement and EU reform’ on April 29. 

“Permachange in the permacrisis era is not just a survival mechanism but an evolutionary choice … Permachange is about embracing change.” 

According to Janis Emmanouilidis, deputy chief executive and director of studies at the EPC, for the last 10-15 years, the EU has been operating with a mindset of muddling through. 

“We need a different mindset when it comes to structurally changing the EU in light of an enlarging union,” Emmanouilidis told the webinar. “Permachange is what we should be embracing in future.”

At the heart of this vision is the proposition that enlargement and internal reform are no longer optional – they are ‘normative imperatives’ that must be pursued in tandem. In the face of Russia’s war on Ukraine, the growing assertiveness of authoritarian regimes, and looming demographic and technological transitions, the Union’s internal architecture is no longer fit for purpose. Nor is its current approach to enlargement adequate in an era when geopolitical urgency often outpaces institutional caution.

“In the era we live in, the EU as we know it finds itself in a do-or-die situation,” the EPC contends, calling on the bloc to ‘think enlarged’, preparing for a future union of 30 or more members.

“An enlarging union is a geostrategic imperative and failing to deliver on that would not only undermine the EU’s credibility but also destabilise the neighbourhood, weaken Europe’s influence globally, among others,” Johannes Greubel, senior policy analyst, head of programme and Connecting Europe project lead at the EPC, told the webinar. 

“The reform imperative means even without enlargement, the EU needs to reform to remain a functioning actor in a more complex world, even more so if it wants to enlarge, so I think EU requires reform of the operating system and of its politics to live up to that era … if we want reform of the union, we cannot do this on the basis of an EU27. We need to reform the union so it is democratically functioning as a union of 30 or 35 member states.”

Strategic choices

As well as the different scenarios for enlargement, the report also proposes five reform options, with a preference for a ‘Gradual Progressive EU Reform’ model that would allow the union to adapt its rules and institutions progressively, while remaining open to deeper integration by coalitions of the willing.

The preferred route combines the 'Speedy Big Bang' and ‘Strategic Regatta’ enlargement strategies with gradual institutional reform – a hybrid model that balances urgency with realism. “The two tracks can be adjusted in terms of speed and ambition in response to the evolution of wider geopolitical developments,” the report notes, offering flexibility for a continent increasingly navigating the unexpected.

The call for simultaneous reform and enlargement is rooted in the recognition that each process reinforces the other. Reforms that make the union more inclusive, effective and crisis-ready also enhance its attractiveness to candidate countries. Conversely, delivering on the membership promise to Ukraine, the Western Balkans and other hopefuls would help restore the EU’s geopolitical credibility.

Emmanouilidis argues that reforms are needed even if the EU does not enlarge. 

Meanwhile, reforms within the EU can give a boost to enlargement policy, according to Stratulat. She also makes the case for reforms within the EU and in candidate countries to take place simultaneously. “Then the two sides are playing with their cards on the table. It inspires trust. 

A test of political will

Yet, perhaps more than technical feasibility, the EPC frames the issue as one of political choice. “Europeans can again determine their collective future. They are not condemned to become irrelevant at the regional and global level,” the report asserts. “They lack neither options nor agency when it comes to expanding and upgrading the Union. It is a matter of political choice.”

At present, that choice appears far from settled. While rhetorical support for enlargement has surged since 2022, concrete steps remain halting. Internal divisions persist over both the readiness of candidate countries and the implications for the EU’s internal balance of power and budgetary arrangements.

Sceptics in Brussels and national capitals often argue that the EU cannot simultaneously widen and deepen. The EPC rejects this view, stating that enlargement “only reinforces the Union’s reform imperative” and warning that current institutional inertia is unsustainable. Without a clear roadmap and renewed political commitment, the EU risks fuelling frustration among candidate countries – and emboldening external actors seeking to exploit the vacuum.

One of the more controversial suggestions in the EPC’s report is the possibility of admitting all current candidates in a single, bold move – the 'Speedy Big Bang’ – even if it means relaxing the merit-based model that has underpinned previous enlargement rounds. This would see a new batch of entrants to the union on the scale of the 2004 enlargement to Central Europe. In this scenario, “reform shortcomings and the risk of democratic backsliding should be duly addressed post-accession,” the EPC concedes.

The authors argue that the scale of today’s geopolitical rupture justifies a different calculus. “pursuing the same course of action and expecting different results is misguided, especially when the geopolitical imperative cannot wait for the leverage of EU membership to start bearing fruits,” they write.

Nevertheless, even a Big Bang approach cannot succeed without institutional recalibration. To this end, the EPC proposes the creation of an ‘Open Supra-Governmental Avantgarde’ – a flexible coalition of willing states that could forge ahead on defence, security, and integration even if unanimity proves elusive within the formal EU framework.

What unites the EPC’s proposals is a sense of urgency – and the fear that delay could prove fatal. “This is not a drill,” the report concludes. “History is calling – but will Europeans come to the rendezvous?”

The 2024-2029 institutional cycle offers a critical window for change. “To make the Union enlargement-, future- and crisis-proof, the EU and its members should follow a gradual internal reform approach… and provide new impetus to reform,” the report says. “Increasing the clarity and predictability of the internal EU reform path is required to persuade national capitals to commit to revamping the Union.”