Although the European Union (EU) is considered unrivaled in its democracy promoting abilities, democracy is being challenged within its borders. Over the last decade, Hungary’s ruling party has debilitated or eliminated liberal democratic institutions; similar trends have emerged in Poland and other new democracies in the EU. What explains these surprising cases of democratic backsliding? Researchers have identified the limits of conditionality and the EU’s inability to counteract backsliding. However, given the EU’s extensive role in democracy building in its member states, it is critical to also consider the EU as an initial source of backsliding. This paper argues that the EU’s post-Maastricht policy structure, accession process, and membership requirements have made democratic backsliding more likely in new democracies by simultaneously increasing executive power and limiting states’ domestic policy space, which stunts institutional development. This combination of factors creates opportunities for executives to manipulate already weak institutions to increase their power, and democratic backsliding becomes more likely. A comparative analysis that combines typical and control cases provides support for this argument. These findings extend beyond the EU to contribute to emerging research on the limits of international democracy promotion and the related long-term effects that international organizations have on domestic democratic institutional development.

尽管欧盟（EU）在促进民主的能力方面被认为是无与伦比的，但民主在其境内正受到挑战。在过去十年中，匈牙利执政党削弱或消除了自由民主制度；波兰和欧盟其他新民主国家也出现了类似的趋势。如何解释这些令人惊讶的民主倒退案例？研究人员已经确定了条件的局限性以及欧盟无力阻止倒退的情况。然而，鉴于欧盟在其成员国民主建设中发挥的广泛作用，将欧盟视为倒退的最初根源也至关重要。本文认为，欧盟后马斯特里赫特的政策结构、加入程序和成员资格要求，在增加行政权力的同时限制了各国的国内政策空间，从而阻碍了制度发展，从而使新民主国家更有可能出现民主倒退。这些因素的结合为高管们创造了操纵本已薄弱的机构以增强权力的机会，民主倒退的可能性也更大。结合典型案例和对照案例的比较分析为这一论点提供了支持。这些发现超出了欧盟范围，有助于对国际民主促进的局限性以及国际组织对国内民主制度发展的相关长期影响的新兴研究做出贡献。