The European Union’s enlargement strategy has come under renewed scrutiny as Ukraine’s bid to join the bloc faces strong support from EU institutions but increasing criticism from some lawmakers. The latest controversy was ignited by Irish Member of the European Parliament (MEP) Michael McNamara, who issued a stark warning in July 2025, claiming that Ukraine’s entry into the EU could facilitate the spread of “more organised crime” across European borders.
McNamara’s remarks came during a debate on Ukraine’s progress in aligning with EU standards, and they have reignited concerns about corruption, governance, and criminal infiltration that have long plagued Ukraine’s political and economic institutions. His comments highlighted the tension between geopolitical solidarity with Ukraine and the fundamental standards the EU demands of candidate countries.
As the EU continues to provide massive political, financial, and military support to Ukraine in its war against Russia, the question remains whether Ukraine’s reform efforts are robust enough to warrant a fast-tracked path to EU membership.
MEP Michael McNamara’s Concerns Over Anti-Corruption Rollbacks
During his address in the European Parliament, MEP McNamara focused on a controversial bill passed by Ukraine’s parliament that, according to critics, weakened the operational capacity of anti-corruption agencies. The law, passed in early summer 2025, made key changes to the structure and autonomy of institutions like the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU), raising alarms among EU observers.
“It is sad but not surprising that Ukraine has passed laws which seriously weaken institutions designed to fight corruption,”
McNamara said.
“This will inevitably lead to more organised crime entering EU territory should Ukraine be admitted.”
His remarks echoed a growing concern that Ukraine’s governance reforms are losing momentum under the pressures of war and internal political challenges. The implications, according to McNamara, could be grave if Ukrainian criminal networks find easier access to the European market, exploiting the freedoms that come with EU membership.
Ukraine’s Ongoing Struggle with Organised Crime
Organised crime has long been a shadow over Ukraine’s political and economic landscape. Syndicates involved in arms trafficking, cybercrime, narcotics, and human trafficking have operated with a degree of impunity, often in collusion with corrupt officials. Despite multiple reform attempts over the past decade, watchdog organisations have warned of limited enforcement and weak judicial systems that allow illicit networks to thrive.
The Russian invasion has further complicated this landscape. While martial law and international aid have helped Ukraine survive militarily, the internal strain has made it more difficult to implement sweeping governance reforms. Some analysts argue that wartime conditions have created loopholes, enabling corrupt actors to regroup and even infiltrate reconstruction projects.
Recent reports from independent organisations and EU monitoring bodies suggest that while Ukraine has made notable progress in digital transparency and public procurement, deeper structural reforms are needed to address entrenched corruption and criminality.
European Parliament’s Dual Message: Support and Caution
The European Parliament adopted a strong resolution in May 2025 affirming its commitment to Ukraine’s EU path. The resolution stated that Ukraine’s accession should be seen as a
“geostrategic investment in a united and strong Europe”,
but it also emphasized the need for
“irreversible progress on democratic reforms, rule of law, and anti-corruption measures.”
MEPs overwhelmingly supported continuing negotiations and integrating Ukraine into the European political family, while highlighting that accession should remain conditional on meeting all Copenhagen criteria. These include functioning democratic institutions, a market economy, respect for human rights, and the ability to take on the obligations of membership—including fighting organised crime.
This dual approach seeks to balance strategic necessity with principled governance, especially as Ukraine is seen not just as a future member, but as a frontline defender of European values against Russian aggression.
Diverging Views Within the EU
Not all voices within the EU share McNamara’s degree of concern, but his comments have found an audience among lawmakers and officials in countries like Hungary and Austria, where scepticism toward rapid enlargement is more pronounced.
In Budapest, officials have pointed to Ukraine’s crime and trafficking issues as reasons for caution. Some Hungarian lawmakers even claimed that Ukraine’s accession could amount to inviting a mafia state into the EU, citing reports of drug smuggling and weapon trafficking through Ukrainian border regions.
Conversely, many Western European lawmakers have rejected this framing, cautioning against what they call “alarmist narratives that play into Russian propaganda.” They argue that Ukraine should not be penalized for fighting a war while undergoing reform, and that the EU has mechanisms in place to monitor and enforce compliance with its legal standards.
“Ukraine cannot be treated differently when it comes to reform and adherence to the rule of law,”
one German MEP said during the debate.
“But we must not undermine our own strategic goals by allowing fear to dictate policy.”
EU Crime-Fighting Priorities: Preparing for Enlargement
In response to rising concerns about organised crime within and beyond EU borders, the Council of the European Union has outlined a new 2026–2029 strategic framework targeting serious and organised crime. The plan focuses on:
- Strengthening Europol’s mandate and cross-border intelligence sharing
- Enhancing judicial cooperation via Eurojust
- Boosting cybercrime prevention
- Intensifying surveillance of high-risk sectors like logistics and finance
These mechanisms are expected to serve as key tools for managing potential risks from future enlargement, particularly if Ukraine and other candidates like Moldova or Georgia are granted full membership in the coming years.
Political groups like the European People’s Party have pushed for the creation of a “European Security Pact” aimed specifically at enhancing cooperation among member states and accession candidates to fight organised crime and corruption.
Ukraine’s Reform Track: Between Promise and Setback
Despite the setbacks, Ukraine has demonstrated some successes in its reform journey. Recent EU Commission reports cite advancements in digital governance, tax transparency, and judicial reform. The establishment of the High Anti-Corruption Court and improved public access to political finance records have earned Ukraine praise from civil society and international partners.
However, the rollback of key anti-corruption legislation and lack of progress in asset recovery efforts have tempered optimism. European officials warn that symbolic reforms are not enough; tangible institutional independence and prosecution of high-level corruption cases are essential.
Ukraine’s leaders continue to pledge full alignment with EU standards. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, in a June address to the Parliament, reaffirmed his government’s commitment to “zero tolerance for corruption” and insisted that Ukraine’s reform momentum remains intact.
Strategic Imperative vs Security Concerns
The tension at the heart of this debate lies in reconciling Ukraine’s strategic importance to the EU with the legitimate internal security concerns raised by MEPs like McNamara. The war has cemented Ukraine’s role as a partner, but its domestic challenges pose risks that EU policymakers cannot ignore.
Analysts argue that a phased and monitored accession, supported by targeted investment in law enforcement capacity and judicial independence, could help Ukraine transition safely into the EU framework. This would require both sustained EU oversight and robust domestic commitment from Ukraine.
What Lies Ahead
The European Council’s endorsement of Ukraine’s formal accession talks has placed the country firmly on the EU’s enlargement track. However, final membership remains years away, contingent on meeting stringent conditions.
In the meantime, Ukraine will need to rebuild war-torn regions, safeguard its institutions from internal subversion, and maintain reform integrity under immense pressure. The EU, for its part, must manage domestic scepticism while upholding the integrity of its standards.
“The road to membership is not just about ticking boxes; it’s about trust and shared values,”
an EU Commissioner for Enlargement said recently.
“We support Ukraine, but we will not compromise on the fundamentals.”
MEP Michael McNamara’s warning about the potential rise of organised crime following Ukraine’s accession serves as a potent reminder of the complex interplay between security, reform, and geopolitical strategy. As Ukraine navigates its European aspirations, the EU must remain vigilant, principled, and prepared.
The coming months will be crucial in determining whether Ukraine can meet the expectations of its supporters while addressing the valid concerns of its critics. One thing is certain—Europe’s future security and political shape are being defined right now, and Ukraine lies at the very heart of that transformation.
