Analysts heard by Lusa do not doubt the merits of what is also known as the 'Big Bang' enlargement due to its size, given that in 2004 the EU went from 15 to 25 Member States, pointing out that all the countries that joined 20 years ago -- Cyprus, Slovakia, Slovenia, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland and the Czech Republic -- are today in a situation in which they certainly would not be if they did not belong to the bloc, although they admit that there are cases of greater success than others. Among the various examples of success cases is Estonia, a small country with just over one million inhabitants that joined the EU just 13 years after its independence from the Soviet Union (1991), and which today leads the Baltic region in many economic and social indicators -- it appears in 19th place in the OECD's quality of life ranking, being the best of the 10 countries that joined the Union in 2004. It is pointed out as a model of economic reforms in the post-communism era, has an enviable reputation for dominating the digital world, and solid democratic institutions, after profound reforms that were careful to prevent the influence of oligarchs. As an inverse example, Hungary, governed uninterruptedly for 14 years by Viktor Orbán, has proven to be a constant and growing 'headache' for Brussels, given the deterioration of democracy and the rule of law in the country, which, in the most recent world index of perception of corruption released by Transparency International, appears in 76th place, being the worst country in the EU, and on an equal footing with nations such as Cuba and Trinidad and Tobago. Estonia, on the other hand, occupies the best position among the 10 countries that joined the EU 20 years ago, appearing in 12th place in this index. For Engjellush Morina, a policy specialist at the European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR), a pan-European think tank, the countries that joined in 2004, now part of what is currently the world's largest single market, today have much more robust economies than they would have had if they were outside the bloc, and points out among other examples of success the cases of Poland and Slovenia, a large and a small country. "Poland, despite having been led by PiS (Law and Justice, a radical right-wing party) for the past eight years, which meant some democratic setbacks", which are now being corrected by a pro-European government led by Donald Tusk, "presents very good results in various economic indicators". Slovenia, a small country in the former Yugoslavia, not only presents good economic indicators -- it is 15th among the 27 Member States in GDP per capita and 20th in the OECD's quality of life ranking -- but has also proven to be "a 'good' Member State in several ways, by not obstructing, by trying to see where it can help and build bridges, being today, for example, a political actor in terms of stability for the Western Balkans", he says. Berta Lopez Domènech, a political analyst at the European Policy Centre (EPC) think tank, considers that, among the 10 Member States that joined 20 years ago, "there is no country today that is worse off than it was before enlargement". "If we compare the countries that have joined since 2004 with those that are not in the EU", namely those in the Western Balkans and the Eastern Partnership, in terms of democracy, security and economic development, the gap is enormous", she observes. Admitting that "it is true that, within the EU, very sharp socio-economic gaps persist", the EPC analyst nevertheless stresses that the comparison with the Balkan countries that are still awaiting entry into the Community bloc, "clearly shows that the EU was the best alternative". However, both political analysts admit that not everything is positive and highlight, unsurprisingly, the case of Hungary, which over the past decade has witnessed an authoritarian drift and growing deterioration of the rule of law and civil liberties, which has led to recurrent 'arm wrestling' with Brussels and even the freezing of Community funds. For Engjellush Morina, this is "a disturbing example" of how countries undertake major reforms and efforts to comply with all the criteria "during the accession process, as there is great scrutiny and monitoring", but, once they are full members of the EU, they may experience setbacks, including the deterioration of democracy and attacks on freedom of the press, when they are no longer "so closely monitored". Also Berta Lopez Domènech, a political analyst at the European Policy Centre (EPC) think tank, stresses, regarding the "case of Hungary, obvious to all", the issue of "the transformative power of enlargement", questioning whether the EU "is still capable of bringing about democratic change". "The example of Hungary has shown that the EU does not have the tools, or those it has are not efficient, to deal with these cases", she says, noting that, throughout the accession process, the countries of Central and Eastern Europe "had incentives" to carry out the indispensable reforms, which then simply "disappear". The same opinion is shared by Engjellush Morina, according to whom the issue of dealing with violations of the rule of law is a matter in which "the EU is really, really falling behind", since countries tend not to be so closely monitored once they are already part of the Union, and "no one has been able or had the courage to follow the procedures to force Member States to respect the rule of law". Morina also notes that Hungary has 'inspired' others, and points out as two cases to be followed closely those of Slovakia, where there has recently been a "rise in pro-Russian sentiment", and Bulgaria, which has once again been left without a government, and which "may see the return of pro-Russian corrupt individuals, to put it bluntly". Also Read: EU extends sanctions on 11 individuals and entities from Moldova until 2025 (Portuguese version)