intertrendsМеждународные процессыInternational Trends / Mezhdunarodnye protsessy1728-27561811-2773AEFIR10.17994/IT.2023.21.4.75.6intertrends-401Research ArticleФИКСИРУЕМ ТЕНДЕНЦИЮCATCHING A TRENDТрансформация подхода малых открытых экономик к расширениям Европейского СоюзаEU Eastern Enlargement: A View from a Small Open Economy’s PerspectiveСергеевЕгорSergeevEgorКиселёваИринаKiselevaIrinaМГИМО МИД России, МоскваРоссияMGIMO University, MoscowRussian Federation202326042024214133155Copyright © Сергеев Е., Киселёва И., 20242024Сергеев Е., Киселёва И.Sergeev E., Kiseleva I.Данная работа распространяется под лицензией Creative Commons Attribution 4.0.This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.https://www.intertrends.ru/jour/article/view/401

В статье рассматриваются особенности трансформации подхода малых открытых экономик к процессу расширения Европейского Союза. Этот вопрос представляет значительный научный интерес в контексте дискуссий середины 2020-х годов о потенциальном включении новых государств в состав ЕС и внутренних разногласиях в интеграционном объединении по данному поводу. В качестве объекта исследования выбраны Нидерланды как модельное государство, сыгравшее одну из ключевых ролей в развитии интеграционных процессов в Европе. Цель исследования – выявить логику эволюции подхода Нидерландов к разным волнам расширения ЕС. Для достижения этой цели на основе синтеза аналитических категорий малого государства и малой открытой экономики детально рассматриваются факторы, повлиявшие на позицию данных типов игроков в отношении каждого из расширений ЕС. Отдельное внимание уделено особенностям восточного расширения, обострившего хронические дисбалансы объединения и заложившего основу его структурных кризисов. В рамках исследования сделан вывод о когерентности подхода Нидерландов к процессу расширения ЕС. Малые открытые экономики поддерживают включение более развитых государств в состав объединения, что отвечает интересам торговых наций и способствует реализации стратегии коалиционности в европейской политике. При этом они занимают жёсткую позицию в отношении расширения на страны с неустойчивыми экономиками и нестабильными политическими институтами. Для голландского подхода к данному процессу характерны три модели: первая применима к развитым государствам Европы (Нидерланды поддержали расширения до 1995 года), вторая – к странам, добившимся определённой устойчивости экономики (Гаага выразила опасения в отношении включения в ЕС большого количества государств ЦВЕ с переходной экономикой), третья – к потенциальным кандидатам на вступление (Нидерланды отрицают возможность включения ряда Балканских государств и Украины в состав ЕС в ближайшей перспективе). Таким образом, структурные кризисы в Европе, обострившиеся в результате восточного расширения, определили ужесточение позиции малых открытых экономик в отношении включения новых государств в состав ЕС.

The article deals with the transformation of the small open economies’ approach to the enlargement of the European Union. This issue is of particular scientific interest amid the ongoing discussions about the potential inclusion of new states in the EU and disagreements of the current EU members on this issue. The Netherlands was chosen as an object for the research, as it is a model state that played one of the pivotal roles in the development of integration in Europe. The purpose of the research is to identify the directions in which the Dutch approach to EU enlargements evolved. To achieve this goal, the factors that influenced small states’ approach to each of the EU enlargements are examined in detail using a combination of the concepts of a small state and a small open economy. Also, special attention is paid to the peculiarities of the eastern enlargement, which exacerbated the chronic imbalances in the union and laid the foundation for its structural crises. The research concluded that the Dutch approach to the EU enlargement is coherent: the small state supports the inclusion of more “developed” states in the union, which meets the interests of a trading nation, but takes a tough stance regarding accession of countries with unstable economies and fragile political institutions. The Dutch approach to this process consists of "three models": the first is applicable to the developed countries (the Netherlands supported the EU enlargements until 1995), the second to countries that have achieved a certain stability of the economy (the Hague expressed concern about the inclusion of a large number of CEE countries with economies in transition), the third to potential candidates for accession (the Netherlands rejects the possibility of including a number of Balkan states and Ukraine in the EU in the near future). Thus, the structural crises in Europe, exacerbated by the eastern enlargement, led to a certain hardening of the small open economies’ stance on the inclusion of new states in the EU.

НидерландыЕвропейский Союзвосточные расширения ЕСЦентральная и Восточная Европамалая открытая экономикаNetherlandsEuropean UnionEastern EnlargementCentral and Eastern Europesmall open economyReferencesБайков А.А. Сравнительная интеграция. Практика и модели интеграции в зарубежной Европе и Тихоокеанской Азии. М.: Аспект Пресс, 2012. 256 с.Armstrong H.W., Read R. (2000). Comparing the economic performance of dependent territories and sovereign microstates. Economic Development and Cultural Change. Vol. 48. No. 2. pp. 285–306.Байков А.А. Экономическая интеграция как мирополитическое явление. Очерк теории и методологии сравнительной оценки // Контуры глобальных трансформаций: политика, экономика, право. 2017. № 10 (4). С. 38–53.Bauwens W., Clesse A., Knudsen O. (eds) (1996). Small States and the Security Challenge in the New Europe. London: Brassey’s. 247 p.Буторина О.В. Экономическая история евро. М.: Весь Мир: ИЕ РАН, 2020. 576 с.Baykov A.A. (2012) Sravnitel'naya integraciya. Praktika i modeli integracii v zarubezhnoj Evrope i Tihookeanskoj Azii [Comparative Integration: Experience and Patterns of Integration in the United Europe and Asia Pacific]. Moscow: Aspekt Press. 256 p.Государства Альпийского региона и страны Бенилюкс в меняющейся Европе / Под ред. В.Я. Швейцера. М.: Весь Мир, 2009. 544 с.Baykov A.A. (2017) Ekonomicheskaya integraciya kak miropoliticheskoe yavlenie. Ocherk teorii i metodologii sravnitel'noj ocenki. [Economic Regionalism as a Planetary Phenomenon. Theory And Methodology of Comparison]. Kontury global'nyh transformacij: politika, ekonomika, pravo. № 10 (4). P. 38–53.Кавешников Н.Ю. Малые и вредные? // Международные процессы. 2008. Т. 6. № 3 (18). С. 84–92.Bengtsson R., Elgström O. and Tallberg J. (2004). ‘Silencer or Amplifier? The European Union Presidency and the Nordic Countries’, Scandinavian Political Studies. Vol. 27. No. 3. P. 311–334.Комиссарова Ж.Н., Сергеев Е.А. Финансовая система стран Бенилюкс: общее и особенное // Мировое и национальное хозяйство. 2021. № 1 (54). 13 с.Berger M. (2023). The Year 2004: Historiographical Issues Concerning Islam in The Netherlands. Journal of Muslims in Europe. Vol. 12. No. 3. P. 303–324.Новикова И.Н. Малые страны в международных отношениях: некоторые теоретические аспекты // Вестник СПбГУ. Международные отношения. 2022. Т. 15. Вып. 3. С. 219–242.Bjurulf B. (2001). How Did Sweden Manage the European Union? Bonn: Center for European Integration Studies. 35 p.Обичкина Е.О. Франция в поисках внешнеполитических ориентиров в постбиполярном мире: Монография / Е. О. Обичкина; МГИМО(У) МИД России. М.: МГИМО, 2004. 487 с.Butorina O.V. (2020). Ekonomicheskaya istoriya evro [Economic History of Euro]. Moscow: Ves' Mir, IE RAN. 576 p.Осколков П.В., Сергеев Е.А. Нидерландская партийная система: между системой опор и европейской интеграцией // Контуры глобальных трансформаций. 2017. Т 10. №6. С. 155–168.De Jong, J. (2011). De euro en de onderlinge handel in Europa. De Nederlandse economie 2011. Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek. P. 268–289.Романова Л.А. Малые страны Европы: особенности конкурентоспособности // Научно-аналитический журнал «Обозреватель». 2014. №7 (294). С. 61–69.Dekker B. et al. (2019). ‘Weinig empathisch, wel effectief’: Percepties van Nederlandse belangenbehartiging in de Europese Unie. Clingendael. P. 39. URL: https://www.clingendael.org/sites/default/files/2019-04/ Clingendael_Rapport%20_Percepties_van_Nederlandse_belangenbehartiging_in_de_EU.pdf (accessed: 12.07.2023).Armstrong H. W., Read R. Comparing the economic performance of dependent territories and sovereign microstates. // Economic Development and Cultural Change. 2000. Vol. 48. No. 2. P. 285–306.Dekker P. et al. (2007). Divers Europa. De Europese Unie in de publieke opinie & Verscheidenheid in cultuur, economie en beleid. Europese Verkenning. Bijlage bij de Staat van de Europese Unie. Centraal Planbureau. URL: https://www.cpb.nl/sites/default/files/publicaties/download/bijz63.pdf (accessed: 12.07.2023).Bauwens W., Clesse A., Knudsen O. (ed) Small States and the Security Challenge in the New Europe. London: Brassey’s, 1996. 247 p.Duke S.W. (2001). Small States and European Security. In: Reiter E., Gärtner H. (eds) Small States and Alliances. Heidelberg: Physica-Verlag. P. 39–50.Bengtsson R., Elgström O. and Tallberg J. ‘Silencer or Amplifier? The European Union Presidency and the Nordic Countries’ // Scandinavian Political Studies. 2004. Vol. 27. No. 3. P. 311–334.Edwards G., Wiessala G. (2001). ‘Conscientious Resolve: the Portuguese Presidency of 2000’. Journal of Common Market Studies. Vol. 39. No. 1. P. 43–46.Berger M. The Year 2004: Historiographical Issues Concerning Islam in The Netherlands // Journal of Muslims in Europe. 2023. Vol. 12. No. 3. P. 303–324.Elman M.F. (1995). The Foreign Policies of Small States: Challenging Neorealism in Its Own Backyard. British Journal of Political Science. Vol. 25. No. 2. P. 171–217.Bjurulf B. How Did Sweden Manage the European Union? Bonn: Center for European Integration Studies. 2001. 35 p.Emmert F., Petrovic S. (2014) The Past, Present and the Future of EU Enlargement. Fordham International Law Journal. Vol. 37. No. 5. P. 1349–1419.De Jong J. De euro en de onderlinge handel in Europa. // De Nederlandse economie 2011. Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek. 2011. P. 268–289.Fleming M. (1962). Domestic financial policies under fixed and floating exchange rates. IMF Staff Papers: journal. No. 9. P. 369–379.Dekker B. et al. ‘Weinig empathisch, wel effectief’: Percepties van Nederlandse belangenbehartiging in de Europese Unie. Clingendael. 2019. P. 39. URL: https://www.clingendael.org/sites/default/files/2019-04/Clingendael_Rapport%20_Percepties_van_Nederlandse_belangenbehartiging_in_de_EU.pdf (accessed: 12.07.2023).Gegout C. (2002). The Quint: Acknowledging the Existence of a Big Four–US Directoire at the Heart of the European Union’s Foreign Policy Decision-Making Process. Journal of Common Market Studies. Vol. 40. No. 2. P. 331–344.Dekker P. et al. Divers Europa. De Europese Unie in de publieke opinie & Verscheidenheid in cultuur, economie en beleid // Europese Verkenning. Bijlage bij de Staat van de Europese Unie. Centraal Planbureau. 2007. URL: https://www.cpb.nl/sites/default/files/publicaties/download/bijz63.pdf (accessed: 12.07.2023).Henriksen E., Steen F., Ulltveit-Moe K.H. (2001). Economies of Scale in European Manufacturing Revisited. CEPR Discussion paper No. 2896. 29 p.Duke S.W. ‘Small States and European Security’ // Small States and Alliances / ed. by E. Reiter, H. Gärtner. Heidelberg: Physica-Verlag. 2001. P. 39–50.Hosli M., Machover M. (2004). The Nice Treaty and Voting Rules in the Council: a Reply to Moberg (2002). Journal of Common Market Studies. Vol. 42. No. 3. P. 497–521.Edwards G., Wiessala G. Conscientious Resolve: the Portuguese Presidency of 2000 // Journal of Common Market Studies. 2001. Vol. 39. No. 1. P. 43–46.Kaveshnikov N.Yu. (2008). Malye i vrednye? [Small And Harmful?] Mezhdunarodnye processy. 2008. Vol. 6. No. 3 (18). P. 84–92.Elman M.F. The Foreign Policies of Small States: Challenging Neorealism in Its Own Backyard // British Journal of Political Science. 1995. Vol. 25. No. 2. P. 171–217.Komissarova Zh.N., Sergeev E. A. (2021). Finansovaya sistema stran Benilyuks: obshhee i osobennoe [The Financial System of the Benelux Countries: General and Specific]. Mirovoe i natsional'noe khozyajstvo. No. 1 (54). 13 p.Emmert F., Petrovic S. The Past, Present and the Future of EU Enlargement // Fordham International Law Journal. 2014. Vol. 37. No. 5. P. 1349–1419.König T., Geijtenbeek L., Graham J., Muller L. (2011). Uitbreiding van de Europese Unie 2004 en 2007. Cijfers over Nederland. Den Haag/Heerlen: Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek. 46 p.Fleming M. Domestic financial policies under fixed and floating exchange rates // IMF Staff Papers: journal. 1962. No. 9. P. 369–379.Kruizinga S. (2016). A Small State? The Size of the Netherlands as a Focal Point in Foreign Policy Debates, 1900–1940. Diplomacy & Statecraft. Vol. 27. No. 3. P. 420–436.Gegout C. ‘The Quint: Acknowledging the Existence of a Big Four–US Directoire at the Heart of the European Union’s Foreign Policy Decision-Making Process’ // Journal of Common Market Studies. 2002. Vol. 40. No. 2. P. 331–344.Lang K.-O., Buras P. (2022). Partnership for Enlargement: A New Way to Integrate Ukraine and the EU’s Eastern Neighbourhood. ECFR Policy Briefs. URL: https://ecfr.eu/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/ Partnership-for-Enlargement-A-new-way-to-integrate-Ukraine-and-the-EUs-eastern-neighbourhood. pdf (accessed: 11.09.2023).Henriksen E., Steen F., Ulltveit-Moe K.H. Economies of Scale in European Manufacturing Revisited. CEPR Discussion paper No. 2896. 2001. 29 p.Liefferink D., Andersen M.S. (1998). Strategies of the “Green” Member States in EU Environmental Policy-Making. Journal of European Public Policy. Vol. 5. No. 2. P. 254–270.Hosli M., Machover M. ‘The Nice Treaty and Voting Rules in the Council: a Reply to Moberg (2002)’ // Journal of Common Market Studies. 2004. Vol. 42. No. 3. P. 497–521.Maes I., Verdun A. (2005). Small States and the Creation of EMU: Belgium and the Netherlands, PaceSetters and Gate-Keepers. Journal of Common Market Studies. Vol. 43. No. 2. P. 327–348.König T., Geijtenbeek L., Graham J., Muller L. Uitbreiding van de Europese Unie 2004 en 2007. Cijfers over Nederland // Den Haag/Heerlen: Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek. 2011. 46 p.Morari C. (2012). Western Balkan Countries On The Road Of European Integration: Results And Tendencies. CES Working Papers, Centre for European Studies, Alexandru Ioan Cuza University. Vol. 4(3a). P. 574–583.Kruizinga S. A Small State? The Size of the Netherlands as a Focal Point in Foreign Policy Debates, 1900–1940. // Diplomacy & Statecraft. 2016. 27(3). Р. 420–436.Mouritzen H., Wivel A. (2005). The Geopolitics of Euro-Atlantic Integration. London: Routledge. 269 p.Lang K.-O., Buras P. Partnership for Enlargement: A New Way to Integrate Ukraine and the EU’s Eastern Neighbourhood // ECFR Policy Briefs, 2022. URL: https://ecfr.eu/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/Partnership-for-Enlargement-A-new-way-to-integrate-Ukraine-and-the-EUs-eastern-neighbourhood. pdf (accessed: 11.09.2023).Mundell R. (1963). Capital mobility and stabilization policy under fixed and flexible exchange rates. Canadian Journal of Economic and Political Science: journal. Vol. 29. No. 4. P. 475–485.Liefferink D., Andersen M.S. ‘Strategies of the “Green” Member States in EU Environmental PolicyMaking’// Journal of European Public Policy. 1998. Vol. 5. No. 2. P. 254–270.Noutcheva G., Bechev D. (2008). The Successful Laggards: Bulgaria and Romania’s Accession to the EU. East European Politics and Societies. Vol. 22. No. 1. P. 114–144.Maes I., Verdun A. Small States and the Creation of EMU: Belgium and the Netherlands, Pace-Setters and Gate-Keepers // Journal of Common Market Studies. 2005. Vol. 43. No. 2. P. 327–348.Novikova I.N. (2022). Malye strany v mezhdunarodnykh otnosheniyakh: nekotorye teoreticheskie aspekty [Small States in International Relations: Some Theoretical Aspects]. Vestnik SPbGU. Mezhdunarodnye otnosheniya. No. 3 (15). P. 219–242.Morari C. Western Balkan Countries On The Road Of European Integration: Results And Tendencies // CES Working Papers, Centre for European Studies, Alexandru Ioan Cuza University, 2012. Vol. 4(3a). P. 574–583.Obichkina E.O. (2004). Frantsiya v poiskax vneshnepoliticheskih orientirov v postbipolyarnom mire [France In Search Of Foreign Policy Guidelines In the Post-Bipolar World]. MGIMOMID Rossii. Moscow: MGIMO. 487 p.Mouritzen H., Wivel A. The Geopolitics of Euro-Atlantic Integration London: Routledge, 2005. 269 p.Oskolkov P.V., Sergeev E.A. (2017). Niderlandskaya partijnaya sistema: mezhdu sistemoj opor i evropejskoj integratsiej [The Dutch Party System: Between the Pillarization and European integration]. Kontury global'nykh transformatsij. No. 6 (10). P. 155–168.Mundell R. Capital mobility and stabilization policy under fixed and flexible exchange rates. // Canadian Journal of Economic and Political Science. 1963. Vol. 29. No. 4. P. 475–485.Romanova L.A. (2014). Malye strany Evropy: osobennosti konkurentosposobnosti [Small European States: Features of Competitiveness]. Nauchno-analiticheskij zhurnal Obozrevatel'. No. 7 (294). P. 61–69.Noutcheva G., Bechev D. “The Successful Laggards: Bulgaria and Romania’s Accession to the EU” // East European Politics and Societies. 2008. Vol. 22. No. 1. P. 114–144.Rrustemi A., Jovetic M. (2019). Policy Brief: The role of the Netherlands in EU Enlargement Processes: A Potential Staller to the EU’s External Stability. The Hague Centre for Strategic Studies. 6 p.Rrustemi A., Jovetic M. Policy Brief: The role of the Netherlands in EU Enlargement Processes: a Potential Staller to the EU’s External Stability. The Hague Centre for Strategic Studies, 2019. 6 p.Schettkat R. (1999). Small economy Macroeconomics. The Economic Success of Ireland, Denmark, Austria and the Netherlands Compared. Intereconomics. No. 4. P. 159–170.Schettkat R. Small economy Macroeconomics. The Economic Success of Ireland, Denmark, Austria and the Netherlands Compared // Intereconomics. 1999. No. 4. P. 159–170.Schout A. (2018). Deepening EU integration and the Netherlands’ EU narrative. Clingendael. URL: https:// www.clingendael.org/sites/default/files/2018-03/Paper_Deepening_EU_integration.pdf (accessed: 12.07.2023).Schout A. Deepening EU integration and the Netherlands’ EU narrative. Clingendael. 2018. URL: https://www.clingendael.org/sites/default/files/2018-03/Paper_Deepening_EU_integration.pdf (accessed: 12.07.2023).Schout A., Kassim H. (2018). From European narrative to managing European expectations. Clingendael. URL: https://www.clingendael.org/pub/2018/clingendael-state-of-the-union-2018/8-europeannarratives-and-expectations/ (accessed: 12.07.2023).Schout A., Kassim H. From European narrative to managing European expectations. Clingendael. 2018. URL: https://www.clingendael.org/pub/2018/clingendael-state-of-the-union-2018/8-europeannarratives-and-expectations/ (accessed: 12.07.2023).Shvejcer V.Ya. (ed.) (2009). Gosudarstva Al`pijskogo regiona i strany Benilyuks v menyayushhejsya Evrope [The States of the Alpine Region and the Benelux Countries In a Changing Europe]. Moscow: Ves' mir. 544 p.Signa S., Gunella V., Quaglietti L. Global value chains: measurement, trends and drivers. ECB Occasional Papers. 2022. No. 289. Р. 11. URL: https://www.ecb.europa.eu/pub/pdf/scpops/ecb.op289~95a0e7d24f.en.pdf (accessed: 12.07.2023).Signa S., Gunella V., Quaglietti L. (2022). Global value chains: measurement, trends and drivers. ECB Occasional Papers. No. 289. Р. 11. URL: https://www.ecb.europa.eu/pub/pdf/scpops/ecb.op289~ 95a0e7d24f.en.pdf (accessed: 12.07.2023).Snorrason S. Asymmetric Economic Integration: Size Characteristics of Economies, Trade Costs and Welfare. Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag, 2012. 36 p.Snorrason S. (2012). Asymmetric Economic Integration: Size Characteristics of Economies, Trade Costs and Welfare. Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag. 36 p.Sørensen C. How the frugal four could grow in number and influence. European Council on Foreign Relations. 07.09.2020. URL: https://ecfr.eu/article/commentary_how_the_frugal_four_could_grow_in_number_and_influence/ (accessed: 12.07.2023).Sørensen C. (2020). How the frugal four could grow in number and influence. European Council on Foreign Relations. URL: https://ecfr.eu/article/commentary_how_the_frugal_four_could_grow_in_ number_and_influence/ (accessed: 12.07.2023).Steinmetz R., Wivel A. Small states in Europe: challenges and opportunities. London: Routledge, 2016. 248 p.Steinmetz R., Wivel A. [eds.]. (2016). Small states in Europe: challenges and opportunities. London: Routledge. 248 p. Thorhallsson B. (2000). The Role of Small States in the European Union. Aldershot, England: Ashgate. 264 p.Thorhallsson B. The Role of Small States in the European Union. Aldershot, England: Ashgate, 2000. 264 p.Thorhallsson B., Steinsson S. (2017). Small State Foreign Policy. In: Thies C.G. (eds.) The Oxford Encyclopedia of Foreign Policy Analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press. URL: https://doi.org/10.1093/ acrefore/9780190228637.013.484 (accessed: 20.09.2023).Thorhallsson B., Steinsson S. Small State Foreign Policy // The Oxford Encyclopedia of Foreign Policy Analysis / ed. by C. G. Thies. Oxford University Press. 2017. URL: https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.013.484 (accessed: 20.09.2023).Thorhallsson B., Wivel A. (2006). Small States in the European Union: What Do We Know and What Would We Like to Know? Cambridge Review of International Affairs. Vol. 19. No. 4. P. 651–668.Thorhallsson B., Wivel A. Small States in the European Union: What Do We Know and What Would We Like to Know? // Cambridge Review of International Affairs. 2006. Vol. 19. No. 4. P. 651–668.Van der Heiden M. et al. (2021). Changing international landscape and the Dutch economy: trends, drivers and consequences. De Nederlandsche Bank. 87 p.Van der Heiden M. et al. Changing international landscape and the Dutch economy: trends, drivers and consequences. De Nederlandsche Bank, 2021. 87 p.Van Keulen M. (2006). Going Europe or Going Dutch. How the Dutch Government shapes European Union Policy. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press. 264 p.Van Keulen M. Going Europe or Going Dutch. How the Dutch Government shapes European Union Policy. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 2006. 264 p.Vandenbosch A. (1964). The Small States in International Politics and Organization. The Journal of Politics. Vol. 26. No. 2. P. 293–312.Vandenbosch A. The Small States in International Politics and Organization // The Journal of Politics. 1964. Vol. 26. № 2. P. 293–312.Verdun A. (2022). The Greatest of the Small? The Netherlands, the New Hanseatic League and the Frugal Four. German Politics. Vol. 31. No. 2. P. 302–322.Verdun A. The Greatest of the Small? The Netherlands, the New Hanseatic League and the Frugal Four // German Politics. 2022. Vol. 31. No. 2. P. 302–322.Verheugen G. (2013). Enlargement Since 2000: Too Much Too Soon? In: The Crisis of EU Enlargement (IDEAS Special Reports). URL: https://www.lse.ac.uk/ideas/Assets/Documents/reports/LSE-IDEASCrisis-of-EU-Enlargement.pdf (accessed: 15.12.2023).Verheugen G. ‘Enlargement Since 2000: Too Much Too Soon?’ In: The Crisis of EU Enlargement. IDEAS Special Reports. 2013. URL: https://www.lse.ac.uk/ideas/Assets/Documents/reports/LSE-IDEASCrisis-of-EU-Enlargement.pdf (accessed: 15.12.2023).Vital D. (1971). The Survival of Small States. Studies in Small/Great Power Conflict. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. 136 p.Vital D. The Survival of Small States. Studies in Small/Great Power Conflict. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. 1971. 136 p.Voorhoeve J.J.C. (1979). Peace, profits and principles: a study of Dutch foreign policy. The Hague. 378 p.Voorhoeve J.J.C. Peace, profits and principles: a study of Dutch foreign policy. The Hague, 1979. 378 p.Waltz K. (1979). Theory of International Politics. Mass.: Addison-Wesley. 251 p.Waltz K. Theory of International Politics. Mass.: Addison-Wesley, 1979. 251 p.Westlake M., Galloway D. (2004). The Council of the European Union, 3rd edn. London: John Harper. 456 p.Westlake M., Galloway D. The Council of the European Union. London: John Harper, 2004. 456 p.Zweers W. (2023). Dutch Parliament Demands Geopolitical Alignment in EU Enlargement. Clingendael. URL: https://www.clingendael.org/publication/dutch-parliament-demands-geopolitical-alignment-euenlargement (accessed: 12.07.2023).Zweers W. Dutch Parliament Demands Geopolitical Alignment in EU Enlargement // Clingendael. 2023. Available at: https://www.clingendael.org/publication/dutch-parliament-demands-geopoliticalalignment-eu-enlargement (accessed: 12.07.2023).Zweers W., Van Loon I. (2020). The Netherlands as a champion of EU enlargement? The Hague: Netherlands Institute of International Relations Clingendael. 10 p.Zweers W., Van Loon I. The Netherlands as a champion of EU enlargement? The Hague: Netherlands Institute of International Relations Clingendael, 2020. 10 p.Zweers W., Van Loon I. The Netherlands as a champion of EU enlargement? The Hague: Netherlands Institute of International Relations Clingendael, 2020. 10 p.

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest present.