This report, co-edited by Dana Dolghin (PATRIR), Claudia Bădulescu (ULB), & Luca Tomini (ULB) analyzes how EU instruments fare against these tendencies, but also how they confront, manage, and at times reproduce dissensus within autocratising contexts. It demonstrates that, although many initiatives exhibit innovation in both design and societal reach, they often circumvent rather than address the fundamental political conflicts that shape power in the Neighbourhood. Through sectoral case studies on preventing and countering violent extremism (P/CVE), information integrity, human rights, and anti-corruption, the report traces how dissensus functions simultaneously as a target of governance, a resource for authoritarian adaptation, and a potential catalyst for democratic renewal. Recognizing this ambivalent role of dissensus is crucial for evaluating both the limitations and prospects of EU engagement in an increasingly contested political landscape of the Neighbourhood.