This is the first in a series of articles published by IntelliNews on the EU enlargement process, an issue that is set to feature prominently in EU discussions over the coming months. More than four years after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine gave fresh impetus to efforts to expand the bloc, European Commissioner for Enlargement Marta Kos has described autumn 2026 as the “autumn of enlargement”.

After years of political deadlock between Skopje and Sofia, a new idea has entered the debate over North Macedonia’s stalled European integration: the involvement of a European mediator in talks with Bulgaria.

The proposal, raised by North Macedonian officials, comes at a moment when both sides continue to insist that they are open to dialogue, while remaining far apart over the conditions for moving the accession process forward. Whether a mediator could actually change that equation is still an open question.

“Any attempt to unblock Macedonia’s European integration process is welcome, including the idea of a European mediator between Skopje and Sofia,” political analyst Dimitar Nikolovski from Skopje-based Eurothink Institute told IntelliNews in a written statement.

He argued that such a mechanism could help restore dialogue and confidence if the mediator had a clear mandate and political backing from key EU institutions and member states.

But Nikolovski also pointed to the central risk: mediation could become another mechanism for managing the stalemate rather than resolving it.

“The real test will not be whether there will be a mediator, but whether his engagement will bring concrete progress towards unblocking the accession process,” he said.

“Of course, there is a risk that this could become another attempt to ‘paint’ the process — creating the impression that progress is being made without fundamentally changing the positions of Skopje and Sofia," Nikolovski stated.

"However, it would be premature to assume that this will be the case. Much will depend on the mediator’s mandate, the concrete objectives they are expected to achieve and, above all, whether there is political will on both sides to reach a compromise,” he added.

Why is North Macedonia still blocked?

North Macedonia has been an EU candidate since 2005. The European Council agreed in March 2020 to open accession negotiations, and the first Intergovernmental Conference was finally held in July 2022. The European Commission subsequently launched the screening process, which was completed in December 2023.

But the formal opening of negotiations did not mean that North Macedonia could immediately begin opening negotiating clusters.

Under the negotiating framework agreed by the EU in 2022, North Macedonia committed to constitutional amendments aimed at including citizens belonging to other peoples, including Bulgarians, in the constitution. The Commission continues to identify adoption of those amendments as necessary for progress towards opening the first negotiating cluster.

The issue is politically sensitive in North Macedonia because the current government of Prime Minister Hristijan Mickoski argues that there is not a sufficient guarantee that the constitutional amendments would be the final bilateral condition imposed on the country.

Mickoski has proposed that the amendments could be adopted but their implementation postponed until the accession process is completed and all EU member states have ratified North Macedonia’s accession. His argument is that Skopje needs a predictable guarantee that it will not be confronted with additional bilateral demands later in the process.

The EU position, however, remains that North Macedonia needs to implement the commitment it made in the 2022 framework.

European Commissioner for Enlargement Marta Kos said that North Macedonia must amend its Constitution if it wants to move forward on its EU path.

Dialogue, but also commitments

Sofia's response to the idea of a European mediator has so far been cautious rather than dismissive.

Bulgaria's foreign ministry said on September 25 that it remains open to constructive dialogue with North Macedonia and stressed that the country's accession process is a European issue that should be handled within the framework of European institutions and established procedures, BNT agency reported.

At the same time, Sofia reiterated that good-neighbourly relations are an essential part of the accession process and said it expects North Macedonia to fulfil the commitments it has undertaken.

That position is important because Bulgaria does not present the issue simply as a bilateral dispute outside the EU framework. Instead, Sofia argues that the commitments made in the 2022 European consensus are already part of the EU accession framework.

Bulgaria has also repeatedly linked progress to the implementation of the 2017 Friendship  Treaty and to the rights of Bulgarians in North Macedonia.

Why does the mediator idea matter?

The idea of a mediator is significant because the problem is no longer simply a question of finding another technical formula.

The two governments appear to have a deeper problem of trust.

North Macedonia’s Foreign Minister Timcho Mucunski said during the UN General Assembly in New York that there was a fundamental lack of trust between Skopje and Sofia and that there were currently no working talks between the two delegations at the UN.

Mickoski has similarly argued that North Macedonia should not enter negotiations without a clearly defined and predictable outcome.

For Nikolovski, this is precisely where European involvement could potentially make a difference.

A mediator backed by Brussels and EU member states could provide a structured political channel in which both sides could discuss not only the constitutional amendments but also the question of what happens afterwards.

North Macedonia's EU path has been repeatedly delayed by disputes with neighbouring countries. The most recent and consequential chapter began with Bulgaria's objections over historical and identity-related issues and the implementation of the 2017 Friendship  Treaty.

The EU eventually became directly involved in finding a compromise. In 2022, after intense French-led diplomacy, the Council approved the negotiating framework and the first intergovernmental conference was held in July. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen personally travelled to Skopje and urged lawmakers to support the revised French proposal. She also stressed that the EU respected the Macedonian language and identity and described good-neighbourly relations as an essential element of enlargement.

The compromise allowed the accession process to formally begin, but it also incorporated the constitutional amendment requirement into the path ahead.

The screening process subsequently moved forward and was completed in 2023. Yet the political process has effectively remained stuck before the opening of the first cluster.

That is why the current proposal for a mediator should be viewed against a rather unusual background: North Macedonia and the EU have already gone through an elaborate diplomatic compromise once. What remains unresolved is whether that compromise can now be politically implemented.

Could this time be different?

Bulgaria's latest statement does not reject greater EU involvement. Instead, Sofia explicitly says North Macedonia's accession is a European issue and that Bulgaria supports the European Commission's work with candidate countries.

That leaves room for European involvement, although it does not amount to agreement on the substance of the dispute.

For Skopje, the challenge is equally clear. The government wants greater European guarantees and a predictable process, but the EU's current negotiating framework contains commitments that North Macedonia has already accepted.

This creates the central paradox: Skopje wants a guarantee before taking the next step, while Brussels and Sofia point to a commitment that Skopje made as the necessary next step.

A mediator could potentially help bridge that gap if the mandate goes beyond simply bringing the two foreign ministries back to the table.

Nikolovski argues that the forthcoming engagement of European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen will therefore be important. If her message contains a concrete European initiative or stronger political involvement in resolving the impasse, the mediator proposal could acquire real significance. If the message simply repeats existing positions, questions will remain about whether the initiative represents a genuine new mechanism or simply another way of managing the status quo.