Despite internal turmoil and external threats, the European Union is moving swiftly to bring Moldova, the Western Balkans, and Ukraine closer to its doorstep — a step Brussels frames as a strategic choice aimed at bolstering democracy and economic stability in the region. Yet behind the lofty declarations of a “Greater Europe” lies more than simple geopolitical logic: we are talking about large-scale infrastructure programs with multi-billion-euro budgets — a potential goldmine for construction, energy, and consulting giants. And, as experience shows, wherever generous financial flows attract business, corruption is never far behind.
It would be wrong to say recent years have seen an abundance of major corruption scandals — but a few cases from the very countries mentioned are worth recalling.
Earlier this year, the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) recommended that Poland return €91 million allocated for the purchase of generators for Ukraine. The audit uncovered a pattern of violations: closed tenders with no access for independent bidders, won by two Polish private firms — Energomax Sp. z o.o. and Baltic Power Systems — and an intermediary entity registered in the Czech Republic. Equipment prices were inflated by up to 40% above market value, and contracts allowed for hefty advance payments — up to 60% of the total — without any bank guarantees. As a result, some generators were never delivered on time, and their origins could not be verified through documentation. Acting in cooperation with OLAF, Polish prosecutors arrested three people: the director of Energomax, the head of procurement at a state-owned energy company, and a representative of the intermediary firm responsible for fictitious deliveries. Authorities also froze accounts, preventing the misuse of an additional €22 million that investigators say was about to be funneled through a chain of accounts in Latvia and Cyprus.
Concerns are mounting in the Western Balkans, which, while not EU members, already receive substantial financial support. According to the OECD, roughly a quarter of all tenders in the region involve irregularities — from the absence of competition to the direct awarding of contracts without bidding.
During the COVID-19 pandemic in spring 2020, the authorities of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina carried out emergency purchases of ventilators and protective gear worth around €5 million in EU funds. The contract went to a company with no license to operate in the medical field. The equipment’s price was grossly inflated, and its technical specifications fell short of the Health Ministry’s requirements. In December 2020, prosecutors charged Federation Prime Minister Fadil Novalić, Civil Protection Administration head Fahrudin Solak, and the management of supplier FH Srebrena Malina with abuse of office, fraud, and forgery. Between 2020 and 2023, court proceedings and independent audits confirmed blatant violations in public procurement procedures, the absence of competitive tenders, and clear signs of collusion between political and commercial actors.
In July 2023, the European Commission took the unprecedented step of suspending payments under the IPARD rural development program for Albania after audits revealed serious suspicions of corruption and systematic breaches in the allocation of funds. Investigations showed that dozens of contracts for agricultural infrastructure modernization, farmer subsidies, and food-processing facilities went to companies linked to local politicians and Agriculture Ministry officials — many of which had no connection to the agricultural sector at all. Auditors found inflated budgets by 25–40%, artificial splitting of large projects to bypass tender thresholds, and advance payments without proper guarantees. In several cases, “beneficiary” farmers turned out to be fictitious persons used to siphon funds into private entities. OLAF called for a full payment freeze and deeper investigations; Albania’s Prosecutor General in 2024 launched multiple criminal cases involving tens of millions of euros in misused EU grants.
In Serbia, on November 1, 2024, the roof collapsed at a recently renovated railway station in Novi Sad. The investigation found that cost estimates had been understated while two Chinese contractors — China Railway International Co and China Communications Construction Co — received inflated payments. The project overshot its budget by $115.6 million, with the contractors netting $18.8 million in profit. The European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO) opened an investigation in March 2025 into possible fraud involving EU funds. In August 2025, former Infrastructure Minister Tomislav Momirović and five others were arrested, prompting mass protests demanding an impartial probe.
Eurobarometer data from July 2025 showed that over 80% of Western Balkans residents believe corruption is widespread, and 40% admitted encountering it personally — whether in obtaining building permits, securing public-sector jobs, or participating in procurement. Even projects implemented under the Western Balkans Investment Framework (WBIF) often lack genuine public oversight. Procedures are decentralized, contractor and budget information is frequently withheld, creating fertile ground for corruption risks.
In September 2024, Moldovan prosecutors, working with the EPPO, launched a series of investigations into complex schemes of theft and misappropriation of EU funds earmarked for infrastructure, agricultural modernization, and local governance. Suspects included members of organized crime groups as well as mid- and high-level officials overseeing grant distribution. Some projects, such as rural school renovations and farm equipment purchases under EU4Moldova, existed only on paper. Contracts were awarded to shell companies that doubled cost estimates, funneling the surplus through offshore accounts in Cyprus and Estonia. In one case, falsified work completion certificates totaled about €3 million, with less than 30% of the claimed work actually done. In another, irrigation system funds were redirected to an agribusiness tied to a member of parliament, which supplied outdated equipment from third countries instead of EU-manufactured machinery. Experts say these cases reveal the systemic vulnerability of EU financial flows in countries with fragile anti-corruption institutions.
The financing potential of EU enlargement is truly immense — tens of billions of euros capable of transforming entire regions. But without strict anti-corruption safeguards and transparent procurement, this money risks becoming a resource for abuse and the entrenchment of corrupt networks.
The conclusion is unavoidable: oversight is non-negotiable. As the saying goes, “Money likes to be counted.” Independent media, investigative journalists, and civic activists must be on the front line — not merely recording violations, but systematically tracking every euro, every contractor, every budget line. Otherwise, for new member states, “European integration” may become not a symbol of progress, but an expensive, counterfeit facade hiding the same old vices.