The European Union will apply stricter accession procedures

The French intentions, relating to the introduction of stricter criteria for admission to the European Union, seem to have been accepted by the European Commission. Paris's concerns about the lack of sufficient criteria to guarantee the sharing of the founding ideals of a united Europe are widely shared and demonstrable by the cases of those countries that joined the Union only for economic convenience, without sharing its plan and , above all, the charges. If the thought goes to the period between 2004 and 2011, with the increase of the members of the Union from 15 to 28, we must also remember the history of the United Kingdom, which during its stay enjoyed conditions far more favorable than the others members and, despite this, did not find it convenient to remain within the Union, causing a grueling negotiation still far from being concluded. Certainly the countries that most provoked Frnacese mistrust, but not only, are those of the so-called Visegrad pact, nations that belonged to the Soviet bloc and that have proved Eurosceptic and not inclined to democratic values. These countries are characterized by a large amount of funding, which often constitutes the major item in their budgets, which does not correspond to a desire to take on the burdens on other states, such as the issue of migratory redistribution, and do not present standards of guarantee of civil and democratic rights sufficient to justify their presence in Brussels. What is expected to be approved is stricter legislation towards countries applying for admission to the Union, with the possibility of blocking and suspending negotiations, without a real guarantee of the presence of a reform process in accordance with the requirements required by Brussels. . Even the financial aid provided before accession can be stopped, without, however, affecting the share destined for civil society. In concrete terms, the negotiations for the accession of North Macedonia and Albania can currently be interrupted. The immediate objective, also recognized by the European Commission, is to tighten up the accession process of the Balkan countries, which still do not present adequate guarantees on the application and protection of civil and political rights. Brussels' request is likely to focus precisely on respect for the fundamental values ​​of the Union, through a more guaranteed reform of the democratic system, but also on the security of market economic systems that are sustainable for the population and the alignment with foreign policy Community. It is understandable that this is a message for the Eurosceptic states and also for the critical movements with the Union, which have developed in a sovereign sense precisely to counter the inadvertence of European standards. The French attitude is shareable in terms of the contrast towards the states that compress civil rights within them, but it should be integrated with rules and actions in favor of the economic rights of the European peoples, too often crushed by budgetary constraints, which have provoked a reduction in the qualitative conditions of life of European citizens, with the perception, too often become certainty, of a shift in incomes in favor of finances and the wealthier classes, thanks to the increase in inequality and the absence of redistributive policies. Making accession to Europe more difficult is only the first step of a process that must be completed with the possibility of excluding states that do not accept the charges and do not guarantee the application of fundamental rights, but which must also include a change of attitude and policy of the European Commission itself. Without these steps, the reform wanted by Paris appears incomplete and cannot succeed as it wants to find.