EU membership but no concessions: Polarized society, cultural fears, and economic dilemmas

The country has been in pre-accession limbo for 20 years, and support for EU entry has been declining year by year due to blockages, internal political problems, and what citizens see as unfair conditions imposed by the EU and its members. Such delays only increase disappointment and apathy despite high levels of support in the past, with many believing that the “European dream” is fading into a nightmare of unfulfilled promises and continued stagnation, regardless of whether and how much we might gain from joining the Union

 

Due to the high degree of polarization in society, partisanship, and general apathy prevailing in the country, it can rarely be said that citizens agree on anything. One of the few things that citizens agree on is that the European integration process has slowed down. Additionally, compared to previous years, an increasing number of citizens believe that the country should become a member of the EU, but without any concessions towards Bulgaria.

These are just some of the results of a public opinion survey conducted by the Metamorphosis Foundation, in collaboration with the Indago agency, from October 6 to 17, 2025, which included a representative sample of 1,100 respondents through a telephone survey.

What did the research show?

According to the survey results, 82 percent of respondents agreed that “the process of joining the EU is slow.” This dissatisfaction is seen by citizens as the EU imposing unfair conditions for the country’s accession, a view with which more than two-thirds of respondents (69%) agree, and almost the same proportion of respondents (68%) think that the EU has double standards in the accession process towards our country.

 

Similarly, more than two-thirds (67%) of citizens believe that joining the EU will mean increased economic costs and price increases in the country and that this will further risk accelerated emigration from the country (63 percent agree).

Additionally, another fear of citizens is that the European Union imposes liberal, leftist, and LGBT values ​​contrary to our tradition, a view shared by 59 percent of respondents. And, similarly, EU membership will lead to the loss of our traditional family values ​​– a view with which 40 percent of respondents agreed, compared to 30 percent who disagreed. A similar proportion of respondents agree that EU entry means a loss of sovereignty or identity (40%).

On the other hand, respondents participating in the survey are under no illusion that there is an alternative grouping that would be preferable to the European Union, such as BRICS. Accordingly, a larger proportion of respondents (41%) disagree with the statement that “there are better alternatives for the country than joining the EU,” compared to one-third (33%) who agree. Similarly, far fewer respondents believe that the European Union will disintegrate (25%) than those who disagree with this claim (43%).

Comparison with previous years

Entry into the European Union–yes, but without concessions has been the consensus of citizens for many years. In 2022, when asked whether “the country should become a member of the EU as soon as possible, even if it requires additional compromises with its neighbors” more than half (53%) disagreed, compared to almost a third who agreed (32%). In 2024 and 2025, when asked differently, i.e. whether “the country should change the Constitution in order to become a member of the EU as soon as possible”, almost the same proportion of respondents agreed: that is, 50 and 51 percent were against, and 26 and 28 percent were in favor of opening up and changing the Constitution as soon as possible. In other words, this trend has been fairly stable over the past four years, as there has been no significant change in public opinion on this topic at all.

When the question is posed in reverse, namely “The country should become an EU member, but without concessions to Bulgaria”, the results are the same, but inversely proportional to the previous responses. In 2022, 60 percent of those surveyed agreed that no concessions should be made, and only 19 were against. The results were slightly different in 2024, but maintained the same trend: half (48%) of respondents agreed, compared to 25 who disagreed, that no additional concessions should be made to neighbors.

According to Prof. Dr. Ivan Damjanovski from the Faculty of Law at UKIM, these results are completely consistent with other research on this topic (see here and here). He states that research examining in more detail where citizens see the problem behind the stagnation of the European integration process indicates that it lies in bilateral disputes.

“And those [bilateral disputes] are more prominent than any internal problems. That’s why when you see such results, citizens see the blame more outside rather than inside,” Damjanovski says.

The fairly high rate of agreement among citizens is that the European Union imposes liberal, leftist, and LGBT values ​​contrary to our tradition and that joining the EU will lead to the loss of our traditional family values. Damjanovski says that the results depend more on what information citizens are exposed to. In previous analyses on this topic, Truthmeter.mk wrote extensively that such “cultural threats” are most often imported to us mainly from Serbia and Russia through the narratives of Christian Democratic ideology. The disinformation campaign is the same, claiming that the West and the EU are destroying our family and our traditional values.

“This pressure of cultural threat has always been a major factor among Eurosceptic voices in the country, and this negative attitude toward the EU spills over to those who support the European Union. However, citizens perceive this attitude through the prism of how the EU’s conventionality is positioned on the political front,” Damjanovski explains.

Allergic to Western winds, receptive to Eastern ones

However, the cultural threat is only perceived when it is of the “Western” variety. When it comes from Russia or international religious groups, then it finds fertile ground in the country without any problem.

Let us recall the events of June 2023 when the MOC-AO organized a large protest in Skopje against the draft law on gender equality and changes in the rules for civil registration, attracting several thousand supporters. Various religious symbols could be seen at the protest, including the old Macedonian flag, which is most often used by nationalist-minded flag-bearers, as well as the Russian flag.

The protesters were joined by members of the Macedonian branch of the Russian motorcycle club “Night Wolves” and several members of the MОC-OA who did not miss the chance to be among the guests at the celebration of “Russia Day” organized by the Russian Embassy in North Macedonia.

Then-President Stevo Pendarovski later stated that domestic and allied security services had warned him about cooperation between some MOC-OA bishops and Moscow’s security services, while the protest itself brought together conservative parties (including VMRO-DPMNE MPs who had previously voted for the gender equality law), the openly pro-Kremlin Rodina Makedonija party, and the Coalition for the Protection of Children supported by the American fundamentalist group Family Watch, all demanding the withdrawal or radical change of the gender equality and civil registry laws.

At the same time, the rhetoric of Metropolitan Petar and Serbian Orthodox Patriarch Porfirije portrayed gender equality and feminism as a “blasphemous” and “poisonous ideology.” These positions are almost mirrored by long-term narratives coming from the Kremlin. They are often used to portray national, cultural, and gender identities, as well as traditional social and spiritual values, as being destroyed by liberalism and the West. Specifically, they claim that there is a subversion of patriarchal and Christian society, that the task of the “Western agenda” is to promote the LGBT community in order to destroy everything that is “good and moral.”

Prof. Dr. Nenad Marković from the Faculty of Law “Justinianus Primus” at UKIM, in an interview with Truthmeter.mk, analyzes not only the data from the survey, but also why these narratives fit so well into the Macedonian public discourse.

Given that Macedonian public opinion is extremely conservative, this is a topic that can be widely and long-term exploited, and easily sold, especially in this tightly linked form. The EU becomes a symbol not of economic progress, not of the four freedoms (free movement of goods, services, people and capital within the EU, ed.), not of political alliance, but a symbol of something that is distorted and unacceptable in the perception of local citizens. This leads to the provocation of a “politics of disgust” that is meant to make citizens feel disgust toward the idea of some kind of European alliance. The cultural threat is reinforced by the two bilateral disputes, which makes it even easier to “threaten” the identity of the average Macedonian citizen. Certain EU member states, due to their meticulous whims, actively contribute to creating such a hostile environment. The threat to national identity is equated with Europe, and Europe is seen as a deviant entity that tolerates “unnatural fornication.” The equation is complete, Prof. Marković explains.

Unfounded fear of higher costs

Regardless of whether there will ever be an agreement on cultural issues in the country, what concerns almost all citizens is whether the money we have will “cover” them from year to year. Especially when inflation, even in 2025, is one step ahead of economic growth.

However, the experience of the 2004 enlargements shows that once new members enter the single market, they experience significant economic benefits. Analyses published in Intereconomics and the International Monetary Fund show that accession and integration into the single market have reduced trade costs, deepened participation in cross-border value chains and increased GDP in the new member states by around 1.4-2.4 percent or more, along with higher labor productivity and export growth.

Data from the European Commission highlights that enlargement has increased the EU’s overall economic power, while a Euronews survey reports that citizens of the member states that joined in 2004 and 2007 identify economic growth and new job opportunities as the main benefits of accession.

According to the Observatory of Economic Complexity, a platform for visualizing economic data, the most common export destinations from North Macedonia are Germany ($3.96 billion), Serbia ($869 million), Bulgaria ($419 million), Greece ($351 million), and Hungary ($330 million).

 

Given that the EU already absorbs the bulk of North Macedonia’s trade, similar reductions in border and regulatory costs and full access to the single market would translate into greater investment, better-paid jobs, and faster income convergence.

“In both the short and long term, the benefits are always greater than the costs. There may be some costs and mild inflation, but if you look at GDP, GDP per capita, GDP growth and general economic growth– those economic parameters are always higher than the negative parameters,” explains Damjanovski about the economic benefits of joining the EU and the internal market.

Prof. Marković gave a different interpretation. He says that candidate countries are the most disciplined and put the most effort into fighting corruption until they join the EU itself. After that, this discipline declines.

Yes, the EU has a certain transformative power, especially while the country is a candidate, but even this is not an omnipotent mechanism that can eradicate centuries-old habits of stealing from one’s own state and sabotaging one’s own economic life. Certain changes in habits and institutional attitudes towards corruption and related phenomena may occur, but whether the effect will be long-lasting, we can only assume. Knowing ourselves in this sense gives rise to cynicism which, although present, does not prevent any citizen from being an equal participant in this same corruption (and nepotism) at all levels. Unfortunately, social inertia often defeats common sense. With us, this has become the rule, not the exception, Marković says.

However, the current anger over the stalled EU integration process makes it difficult for citizens to focus on these long-term material benefits. That’s why two-thirds of citizens fear that joining the EU will mean increased economic costs–whether that’s the case or not.

The Euro from a macroeconomic perspective

The mass protests that can be seen in Bulgaria in the past period are mainly directed against the new budget, but also against the introduction of the euro as the national currency. However, if we take the example of Croatia, in the first year, despite real concerns about price increases, the introduction of the euro brought clear economic benefits, greater than the initial spike in inflation.

For example, in 2023 Croatia recorded one of the highest growth rates in the EU of around 3.8%, unemployment fell to its lowest level since 1996, average wages increased by more than 30% compared to the period when the kuna was the national currency, and the central bank estimates that around 160 million euros are saved annually in currency conversion and transaction costs. As Deutsche Welle writes, the skepticism that preceded the adoption of the currency has largely faded.

For an economy dependent on tourism, the euro has also simplified travel, removed exchange rate uncertainty and made prices more transparent for visitors from the eurozone, with Croatian businesspeople stressing that cross-border trade and tourism now benefit from lower costs and a stable, widely trusted currency. Therefore, Croatian economists quoted in Politico argue that the main lesson is not to underestimate planning, but also not to panic. Much of the recent price pressure in both countries has come from global shocks, they say, rather than from the adoption of the euro itself, and Bulgaria is preparing to join in a calmer inflationary environment than the one Croatia faced in 2023.

Some period of emigration can be expected

Unlike economic concerns that are not justified, citizens’ concerns that EU accession will trigger a new wave of emigration are somewhat understandable when looking at the experiences of the last three countries that joined the Union. For example, data from the Croatian National Bank show that emigration from Croatia to other EU countries in the period 2013-2016 was about 2.6 times higher than official figures, with approximately 230 thousand people leaving the country in the first four years of its EU membership.

Romania has also experienced a large wave of emigration since joining the EU. The number of people leaving the country increased from around 1.3 million in 2001 to around 3.4 million by the mid-2010s, and other analyses estimate that at least 1 million people left the country in the years after 2007, confirming that free movement within the EU may initially intensify emigration trends.

However, these waves have not led to an endless one-way exodus. In Bulgaria, World Bank data shows that emigration increased sharply after 2007, but then began to stabilize. The Open Society Foundation found that about 35,000 people returned to Bulgaria in the four years leading up to 2017, describing this as a turning point in the waves of emigration. Similarly, recent OECD data also shows an 11 percent annual decline in the number of Bulgarian citizens emigrating from the country to OECD countries in 2024.

When we look at the trends (according to World Bank data), i.e. the total migration in these three countries, we can see that after a few years, the total migration (the number of people moving into the country minus the number of people moving out) in the first few years after joining the EU is in deficit. This means that a larger number of people moved out than moved into the country. But then it stabilizes and, for Bulgaria and Croatia, almost equalizes to an almost equal rate of people moving out and moving in.

From these examples it can be seen that although it is likely that in the short to medium term there will be an increase in emigration after joining the EU, over time these waves tend to stagnate and change. Consequently, circular and return migration of emigrant citizens may also occur. As for the fears of citizens, Prof. Marković is decisive:

“Let us first join the EU so that we can even discuss whether the EU is the main culprit for this situation. It is evident that brain drain existed long before EU accession, so in the Macedonian case it will be difficult to blame the EU for brain-drain tendencies that would likely accelerate thereafter. The real situation we could find ourselves in is, on the one hand, a huge outflow of labor and, on the other hand, a society that has had and continues to have a strong fear of an influx of migrants; this combination of factors could lead us into an economic vacuum that we would neither be able to fill nor know how to address. We are still a society that, a few years ago, was collecting signatures against migrants who did not exist and never came. What more can be said?” Marković points out.

Blockades by member states against candidate countries–nothing new

The analysis by Truthmeter.mk, based on data from this public opinion poll as well as polls from previous years, shows that Bulgaria is seen as the biggest enemy of our country. Despite the fact that the EU emphasizes that constitutional amendments are a mandatory step for the start of negotiations, while the government insists on the position that there will be no constitutional amendments, this blame is still shifted to Bulgaria. Regardless of whether it is justified or not for Bulgaria “to set a condition” or demand that the obligations to which the country has committed itself in the Treaty of Friendship, Good Neighborliness and Cooperation be fulfilled, such “blackmail” by an EU member state on a candidate country is not without precedent.

Not so long ago, although Croatia had no problem starting accession negotiations with the Union, by the end of this process, in 2009, Slovenia blocked Croatia’s negotiations on several occasions. The main reason was several unresolved territorial and border issues that the two neighbors resolved through arbitration two years later. Although the arbitration was completed and negotiations formally concluded in 2011, Slovenia again blocked Croatia’s accession to the EU, becoming the last EU member to sign and ratify its neighbor’s accession treaty in 2013.

More recently, we also have the example of Hungary actively blocking the start of Ukraine’s negotiations, mainly due to their concerns about the Hungarian minority in Ukraine and the functioning of the single market in the country.

The country has been in pre-accession limbo for 20 years, and support for EU entry has been declining year after year due to blockages, internal political problems, and what citizens see as unfair conditions imposed on us by the EU and its members, such as Bulgaria. Such delays only increase disappointment and apathy despite high levels of support in the past, with many believing that the “European dream” is fading into a nightmare of unfulfilled promises and continued stagnation, regardless of whether and how much we might gain from joining the Union.

 

 

All comments and remarks regarding this and other Vistinomer articles, correction and clarification requests as well as suggestions for fact-checking politicians’ statements and political parties’ promises can be submitted by using this form