Eleven European Union countries have called for an overhaul of the bloc's foreign policy decision-making, urging it to explore a shift from unanimity to qualified majority voting as repeated national vetoes have exposed the difficulty of acting collectively in a more volatile geopolitical environment.

Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Romania, Spain and Sweden made the appeal in a joint letter to EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas, arguing that consensus should remain the preferred method but should not prevent the bloc from taking action, according to a letter seen by Euronews.

"The Union's culture of consensus is an important source of its legitimacy. Therefore, we continue to strive for consensus whenever possible," the countries said in the letter, Euronews reported.

"But we must also ensure that this culture of consensus fosters collective action rather than prevents it – otherwise we will have legitimacy but not strength."

Discussions on foreign policy decision-making have been ongoing, especially in the context of enlargement. Meanwhile, the EU is faced with Russia's war in Ukraine, instability in the Middle East, intensifying strategic competition between the United States and China and uncertainty over the future of transatlantic security. The signatories said the bloc needed to be able to deploy its political, economic and diplomatic weight more quickly.

"The Union's external action faces a fundamentally changed landscape, shaped by strategic competition, growing instability and efforts to undermine the rules-based international order," they said.

Under the EU treaties, most decisions in the common foreign and security policy require unanimity, allowing any one of the 27 member states to block a measure.

The problem became particularly acute during the 16-year premiership of Hungary's former prime minister Viktor Orban, who repeatedly used the country's veto to extract concessions from other governments. Earlier this year, he blocked a €90bn EU loan for Ukraine over a separate dispute with Kyiv concerning the Druzhba oil pipeline, according to the letter.

The 11 countries are proposing five principles to make the existing system harder to exploit. These include greater use of "constructive abstentions", respect for sincere cooperation and mutual solidarity, avoiding the linkage of foreign policy decisions to "essentially unrelated" issues and requiring countries that seek to block action to provide "valid and well-founded reasons”, reported Euronews.

They also called for the EU to examine provisions in its treaties that could allow a move towards qualified majority voting.

"The legal framework for the five principles is already in place. It is up to us to put them into action and thus advance our foreign policy," the letter said.

The unanimity dilemma

The most politically sensitive part of the proposal is the possible use of the so-called passerelle clause, which can allow certain decisions currently subject to unanimity to be taken by qualified majority without a full treaty change.

A single government would no longer be able to prevent the other member states from acting, while a case-by-case approach could allow governments to retain unanimity for the most sensitive foreign and security policy decisions. However, moving from unanimity to qualified majority itself requires unanimous agreement, giving opponents of reform the same veto that reformers are seeking to remove. The joint letter therefore calls for meaningful consultations when disagreements arise, with the aim of reaching compromises rather than allowing a single objection to automatically halt action.

Larger member states have increasingly argued that the bloc needs to be able to act with the speed expected of a geopolitical power. Smaller states, by contrast, have traditionally regarded unanimity as an important safeguard against decisions being dictated by the EU's largest members.

None of the three Baltic states signed the letter, even though the document was reportedly circulated to all other member states, including those that did not endorse it.

The debate previously surfaced during disputes over the EU's response to Israel and the Middle East. In June and July, some member states sought to pursue trade restrictions on goods from Israeli settlements through trade policy, where qualified majority voting can apply, rather than through foreign policy sanctions that require unanimity.

Enlargement poses new dilemma

The foreign policy dispute is part of a wider discussion about whether the EU's institutions are equipped for another round of enlargement.

The bloc currently has 27 members, while Albania, Bosnia & Herzegovina, Georgia, Moldova, Montenegro, North Macedonia, Serbia, Turkey and Ukraine are among the countries seeking membership, with several already engaged in accession negotiations.

A recent analysis by Danish think-tank EUROPA argues that the question is not simply whether the EU should expand qualified majority voting, but whether the voting system itself will remain workable as the bloc grows.

The EU's current qualified majority system requires at least 55% of member states, representing at least 65% of the EU population, to approve a measure. A blocking minority requires at least four countries representing more than 35% of the population.

The think-tank says previous enlargement rounds were accompanied by changes to Council voting rules, but no comparable pre-emptive reform has yet been agreed for the next wave of enlargement. "With enlargement on the horizon, the question of how to govern efficiently is once again pertinent," its report says.

The effect of new members would vary significantly according to their size. The accession of smaller countries such as Montenegro or Iceland would have relatively little effect on the population threshold, while Ukraine and Moldova would substantially alter the arithmetic of coalition-building in the Council.

The analysis says the accession of Ukraine could create new possibilities for blocking minorities and would shift the balance of power eastwards, although it would not by itself create a coherent "Friends of Cohesion" bloc capable of setting the EU's agenda.

It also concludes that the influence of France and Germany would decline with each enlargement round, providing an additional incentive for the two countries to consider institutional reform.

Beyond foreign policy

The EU has wrestled with the question of voting rules for decades. The bloc progressively expanded qualified majority voting as European integration deepened, while unanimity remained for areas regarded as particularly sensitive to national sovereignty.

The Lisbon Treaty established the current double-majority system for most Council decisions subject to qualified majority voting. Foreign and security policy, however, remains among the principal areas where unanimity applies.

Calls for reform intensified after Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine, when disagreements between member states repeatedly slowed or complicated decisions on sanctions, military support and financial assistance.

The departure of Orban from Hungary's premiership altered the political circumstances but has not removed the institutional problem. The experience of the past several years has demonstrated how a government with a fundamentally different foreign policy position can use unanimity to influence decisions involving the rest of the bloc.

At the same time, eliminating the veto would not necessarily eliminate political disagreements. Governments opposed to a measure would still be able to seek blocking minorities under qualified majority voting, while the higher threshold for agreement would continue to require broad coalitions.

EUROPA argues that the EU therefore faces two related questions: whether to expand the use of qualified majority voting and whether the existing thresholds remain appropriate for a larger union.

A Franco-German proposal has previously suggested changing the double-majority threshold from the current 55% of states and 65% of population to 60% for both. No such reform has been adopted.

The European Commission is expected to publish a long-awaited pre-enlargement review later this month, potentially giving fresh impetus to the debate over how the EU should operate if it grows beyond its current 27 members.