Corrupting EU Citizenship through the “Anti-Corruption” Smoke-Screen: Eurowhiteness Solidarity vs Investment Naturalisations

Abstract The EU chose “anti-corruption” to target a particular mode of citizenship acquisition: citizenship by investment. The fact that no other mode of acquiring citizenship has been actively stigmatised through “corruption” rhetoric, including discretionary naturalisations based on economic contributions, suggests that corruption was by no means the European Commission’s main concern. The high importance of citizenship could indeed carry corruption risks associated with it. This, however, cannot be the sole ground for closing particular avenues for naturalisation. Improving the enforcement of the rule of law and the effective implementation of anti-corruption mechanisms are more suitable approaches. Fighting “corruption” served as a rhetorical device deployed by the Commission to stop the supposedly corrupting effects of investment naturalisations on the ethno-nationalist Eurowhiteness model, which this institution, together with the Court of Justice, has chosen for Europeans in direct departure from the law in force. “Anti-corruption,” thus, helped achieve institutional ends unrelated to either fighting corruption or reinforcing the rule of law and other values in the EU.