Would the process take a decade?

Recent applications to join the EU have generally not been fast. However, it is incorrect to use these cases as an indication that a UK application would take the same amount of time.

For the most recent state to join the EU, Croatia in 2013, the process (from application to accession) did indeed take a decade. For Romania and Bulgaria in 2007, it was 12 years each.

Turkey’s application – which you may remember was mentioned frequently during the EU referendum – has taken the longest of all, having first been made in 1987. It is currently ‘frozen’ over concerns about democracy.

However, if you look back to the 1995 enlargement round, you find a different story. This round saw membership for Austria, Sweden and Finland. Austria’s application took 6 years, Sweden’s 4 years, and Finland’s set the record, taking less than 3 years (18 March 1992 to 1 January 1995).

The process was faster in these cases because these states needed less reform to meet the EU’s criteria.

Finland's application to join the EU took less than 3 years, while Sweden's took 4 years

The closer you are EU law and values when you apply, the less time the application takes. As enlargement has extended further afield, more work has been needed – but a rejoining UK would be an unusual case. The UK’s current level of EU alignment is much more comparable to Finland 1995 than to Croatia 2013, whose 10-year application process included the need for judicial and human rights reforms, the resolution of border issues with Slovenia and more.

EU enlargement had stalled in recent years, with applications from the Balkan countries in particular being allowed to languish, which again gives the appearance of long timelines. However, since Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine, enlargement has received a renewed focus, with Ukraine, Moldova and Bosnia and Herzegovina moving to the negotiations stage, and Georgia becoming a candidate member.

A process of negotiation

An application for EU membership proceeds in stages:

1. Application. The initial application is submitted and assessed against the membership criteria.
2. Candidate status. Based on the assessment, and if all member states agree, the country becomes a candidate for membership. This opens the negotiation process.
3. Membership negotiations. The candidate member negotiates the terms of entry with the EU and prepares to implement EU laws and standards.
4. Accession (joining). An accession treaty signed by the new member (or members) and all member states.

Sometimes the suggestion that the UK will be able to negotiate its terms of entry is seen as ‘British exceptionalism’. But this is untrue. The negotiation of terms is a standard part of the application process for every country.

As the EU's Article 49 - which sets out the procedure for a state to apply to join - says, the terms of admission “shall be the subject of an agreement between the Member States and the applicant State”.

What about the veto?

There are several points in the accession process where existing EU member states need to unanimously agree to move to the next stage. This means, in practice, that each state has a ‘veto’ – a term that became infamous in British politics after French president Charles de Gaulle twice vetoed UK membership of the EEC in the 1960s.

The EU’s application process is much more formalised than the old EEC’s, however. The ‘veto’ is generally part of the negotiation process and a way to ensure all states are heard. Member states may raise some difficult issues, for example the status of Gibraltar, which is already having to be renegotiated because of Brexit. Member states could also wield the veto to get some minor terms added that are important to them. The EU’s leadership would mediate on these to find a position that everyone can live with.

Would we have to apply ‘from scratch’?

Some critics of the idea of ‘rejoining’ the EU point out that there is no formal rejoin process: the UK simply has to make a new membership application, ‘from scratch’.

This is a mixture of true and false. It is true that we do not get any kind of special re-application process – the process is the same as for any country that applies for membership. However, because of its existing level of EU alignment, the UK would have a head start in accession to the EU.

This is not about ‘jumping the queue’, as there is no ‘queue’: EU membership applications are not first-come-first-served. As the European Commission puts it: “The pace of the negotiations… depends on the speed of reform and alignment with EU laws in each country. The duration of negotiations can vary – starting at the same time as another country is no guarantee of finishing at the same time.”

The EU assesses each application to see whether the state yet meets its criteria. If it does, it may be accepted, though it is likely that some small issues will need to be addressed. If the state does not currently meet the criteria, then the application may be rejected outright, or – more commonly – the state will be given a list of reforms to work on. This is the part of the process that can become drawn out in some cases.

While the UK must pass through the same accession process as any other country, it is likely that it would be able to do so at an accelerated speed.

Some dispute the use of the word rejoin itself, but rejoining does not imply a separate legal application process, simply the act of once again joining an organisation of which you were previously a member. 'Rejoin' has become the generally accepted term for the UK seeking to become a member of the EU again - it is not particularly useful to try to change this.

In reality, we are both applying ‘from scratch’ and rejoining: we do not get a special application process, but we are in a position to proceed quickly through the standard one.

» See more questions and answers