by
Martin Banks
The signing of association agreements with Georgia and Moldova in Vilnius last month was a meagre consolation for EU leaders who had hoped for the big prize of drawing Ukraine, a strategically located potential market of 46 million, into its orbit.
The fiasco at an Eastern Partnership summit in Lithuania has been blamed mostly on Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovich's post-Soviet governance and on pressure from Russian President Vladimir Putin.
But some say that after four years, the EU's Eastern Partnership, which covers Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine, has not delivered any tangible political or social results.
Polish centre right MEP Sidonia Jędrzejewska, for example, says that in future the EU needs to guarantee that “scarce” EU funds for the Eastern Partnership countries are well-targeted and spent according to democratic rules.
Others say that EU efforts to "export" democracy and the market economy to countries on its eastern and southern fringes have long been hampered by unrealistic expectations.
The requirements set by Brussels for partners to adopt EU standards of business regulation, governance and human rights are too high given the relatively small financial and political rewards.
This is the view of Michael Leigh, a senior adviser to the German Marshall Fund, a transatlantic think-tank and one of the architects of the European Neighbourhood Policy.
Supporters of the policy remain convinced that it will ultimately succeed in drawing the EU's neighbours into its economic orbit provided Europeans have the strategic patience to ride out short-term disappointments.
But Leigh, who was director-general for enlargement and neighbourhood policy at the European Commission until last year told Reuters recently. "For the EU, the 'nyet' of Ukraine and Armenia, taken together with the situation in most Arab countries around the Mediterranean, mean the end of a 10-year effort to put into place a European Neighbourhood Policy."
It was former European Commission President Romano Prodi who first floated the idea of building a special relationship with the EU's neighbours shortly before 10 central and east European countries joined the bloc in 2004.
In his vision, a "ring of friends" from Russia to Morocco would share "everything but institutions" with the EU.
The idea was that free trade and common rules in areas such as environmental protection, public procurement and investment security would give those countries the benefits of the EU's single market and make them attractive to foreign investors.
Through a network of association agreements, they would adopt large chunks of the EU's rulebook and build democratic, clean governance structures with technical help and limited financial assistance from Brussels.
Launched in 2009 with the Prague Declaration, this ambitious and forward-looking project aims to support reforms and bring Europe´s Eastern partners closer to the EU, at the same time expecting them to commit themselves to undertaking the necessary political and economic reforms.
But Leigh says, "This was misconceived from the outset and I was one of the culprits. Too closely modelled on the enlargement process but without the incentive of membership, the ENP provided too few benefits in exchange for political reforms which partner governments anyway had no intention of carrying out."
"In retrospect, the EU made a number of serious mistakes. It was not necessary or appropriate to present Ukraine with an incredibly demanding Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Agreement."
Further comment on the ENP comes from UK Independence Party MEP William Dartmouth, a member of the committee on international trade, who said,“The EU has poured a huge amount of money into both neighbouring and distant states but has achieved in many of them, little return on investment.
"When we look at what has happened in Egypt, Tunisia. Belarus, Libya and Algeria – can we really say the lot of the people here has been improved? I think not.
"The ENP is caught between two stools of being a fund to induce EU enlargement and a tool of EU foreign policy. For states that do not wish to become EU members, it cannot exercise conditionality in the full sense of the word and has therefore failed in many countries. The proper response should be 'trade not aid'.
"The ENP is also a reckless waste of taxpayers’ money which has bought few results, in many states which the peoples of Europe clearly do not wish to become members anyway – Turkey with a population of 75 million in a clear case in point.”
Elsewhere, senior Liberal MEP Sir Graham Watson told EBR, "There is certainly no reason to think that EPN has failed. Vilnius succeeded in initialling two ambitious Association Agreements – with Moldova and Georgia, the signing of EU-Azerbaijan visa facilitation agreement and EU-Georgia framework agreement on military operations and civilian missions.
"However, after the pull-out of Armenia and backpedalling of Yanukovich (which has cost him dear in popularity), the EU should reflect and revise the bottlenecks of its Eastern approach.
"One of the main problems with ENP is Russia, and how we deal with the rise of the Eurasian Union, which have become the elephant in the room. We need to be cannier in how we respond to Russia's overtures to our Eastern neigbours which are likely to be in full gear from the Sochi Olympics up to the launch of Eurasian Union in January 2015.
"This means making full use of easing trade regimes and providing economic assistance to our Eastern partners – and in doing so, being ahead and not behind. This might mean, for example, further opening our markets to Moldovan wine and giving greater access to the EU market under GSP+ regime to Georgia."
"I also think that the swift implementation of visa liberalisation if of utmost importance. Allowing people to travel back and forth across borders plays a huge role in widening horizons and strengthening connections between countries. The visa dialogue needs speeding up – an injection of political will from the EU's side – to really get it going."
More comment came from Brussels-based analyst Amanda Paul, of the European Policy Centre, who said, "It is almost ten years since ENP was created. The aim of ENP was to create a more stable, secure and prosperous neighbourhood – both to the East and to the South - through the democratic transformation and modernization of the region.
"During this time the EU developed and intensified its relations with its neighbours with the degree of interdependence in trade, security and political domain between the two increasing significantly with the EU become considerably more involved in the political developments in its neighbourhood. However, in terms of democratic transformation it has hardly managed to ‘change’ them nor has it succeeded in changing it growing presence into power."
She added, "Ten years down the line both neighbourhoods are in chaos. In the South, the aftermath of the Arab Awakening continues to rock the region, with Syria locked down in a civil war and Egypt in disarray. Despite Baroness Ashton’s efforts at dialogue in Egypt for the most part the EU’s role has been rather weak and ineffective.
"Meanwhile, in the East the picture does not look much better. Russia has well a truly taken the shine off the EU’s Eastern Partnership, using coercion and punitive measures to stop EaP partner states from deepening their ties with the EU through Association Agreements including DCFTAs, with the most devastating case being that of Ukraine."
She declared, "Indeed so far the EU does not have one single success story of its ENP.
"Hence we can hardly say the ENP has delivered on its goals. While the EU has stated that the neighbourhbood policy is a top priority what it should say is that it is a key challenge. Because the EU has certainly not given it the sort of priority it should have done, particularly to its eastern neighbourhood. This can be put down to many facts including ambivalence of member states, financial and economic woes, a complete lack of a strategic vision or objectives for the region. Furthermore the pace of decision-making also remains an issue as it is far too slow for quick diplomatic and military responses to crises.
"The fact that the EU is a club where consensus is required means that we often arrive at the lowest common denominator. "
She goes on, "The national interests of member states often end up watering down foreign policy. This means the EU frequently squanders its political capital, for example in its eastern neighborhood, where it has the opportunity to play a key role in the transformation of the region. Europe's influence in global issues, particularly related to security and defense, as becoming increasingly ineffective. Hence, I would say it is time to take another look at the ENP and how it could be reshaped to better deal with the challenges we face today.
Another renowned expert, Shada Islam, Director of Policy at the respected Friends of Europe think tank, said, "The ambition to create a “ring of friends” around the European Union is proving to be more of a challenge than expected. The key weaknesses of the neighbourhood policy are:
* The EU’s lack of leverage given that it cannot offer its neighbours full membership in return for improvements in areas such as democracy, rule of law and human rights.
* The EU faces intense competition for influence in its neighbourhood – in the case of the former Soviet “satellites” such as Ukraine, the rivalry is with Russia. In the Arab Spring countries, the EU is losing out to countries such as Saudi Arabia, Qatar and others which have more money and more religious influence.
* Russia has the energy resources many countries in the EU’s neighbourhood need.
Islam adds, "Although the initial EU vision is to share “everything but institutions" with the neighbourhood, this has meant that countries in the neighbourhood have to adapt to tough EU rules as regards free trade, environmental protection, public procurement and investment with little money or incentive of entry into the EU club. The policy is modeled on the EU’s successful policy of encouraging reform and bringing former communist countries of central and eastern Europe into the EU- but without the incentive of membership.
"Without the reward of full EU accession, the EU’s demand for reform and change do not carry the same weight."
A spokesman for EU enlargement commissioner Stafan Fule commented, ‘The Eastern Partnership is our offer to the 6 post-soviet countries that builds on the will of our Eastern neighbours to come closer to the EU. We provide opportunities and we respond to the ambitions of our partners and respect their decisions.
"The substance of the partnership is determined by shared aspiration for political association and economic integration. The partnership also allows for a high degree of differentiation, tailored to each partner country's sovereign choices. While we respect Ukraine's decision to suspend preparations for AA/DCFTA, we are disappointed for the people of Ukraine, thousands of whom have rallied in recent days in support of getting closer to the EU."
The spokesman went on, "We believe that the future of Ukraine lies in a strong relationship with the EU and stand firm in our commitment to Ukrainian citizens who would have been the main beneficiaries of the Agreement through the enhanced freedoms and prosperity the agreement would have brought."
"At the same time, the EU is strongly committed to other Eastern partners, including Republic of Moldova and Georgia, to ensure they all benefit from necessary support to implement important reforms on the road to a closer political and economic relationship with the EU."
EPP MEPs have also spoken of the need for a "fundamentally redesigned" ENP in light of the Arab revolutions.
They have proposed numerous measures for the bloc's Eastern partners including increased funding, more comprehensive free trade agreements and visa liberalisation.
A paper drafted by European People's Party MEPs Jacek Saryusz-Wolski (Poland), György Schöpflin (Hungary), Andrey Kovatchev (Bulgaria), Eduard Kukan (Slovakia) and Traian Ungureanu (Romania), concedes, "Recent tectonic changes in the EU Southern neighbourhood made us realise that EU policy, although focused on building peace and security as well as on strengthening prosperity and stability at the EU borders, has not reached its deliverables and therefore must be fundamentally redesigned."
The MEPs say, "It is thus not only our moral duty, but also in our vital security and economic interests, to build around us a ring of democratic and prosperous countries. We should care to the same extent about every neighbour, whatever its geographical position. Both East and South require symmetric attention and financing."
Meanwhile, a draft European Parliament resolution calls for MEPs to have a greater say on ENP.
In a motion for a resolution published on 26 August, MEPs demand to be “fully associated” in the implementation of the new ENP and kept regularly informed about progress in the partner countries.
Guillaume Van der Loo, of the European Institute of Ghent University who is researching EU-Ukraine relations, says, "The EU is loosing its grip on its most important partner in the region."
He said, "The success of this strategy stands or falls with the participation of Ukraine. Since Yanukovych became president in 2010, Russia has been trying to entice Ukraine to join the customs union with cheap gas prices and other trade benefits. Such a move would be incompatible with the EU-Ukraine Association Agreement and the DCFTA."
Writing for the Institut für Europäische Politik, Barbara Lippert calls for an intensification of ENP, saying, "The EU is in a dilemma. The current 25 member states can neither work up the courage to collectively say “Yes” to further enlargement, nor can they sustain a collective “No” over the long term. In such a dilemma, it is imperative for the EU to win back its power to shape developments by investing more confidence and wider appeal in its neighbourhood policy."
By: N. Peter Kramer
