Experts call for "rethink" of EU Eastern Partnership Programme

by Martin Banks

 

The comments, by Richard Tibbels, of the European External Action Service, come in the wake of the disappointing outcome to a summit in November where the EU hoped to sign an Association Agreement with Ukraine.

 

The country has since descended into major civil disorder with daily street protests triggering this week´s resignation by the Ukraine PM and government.

 

The Vilnius Summit which was held late November in 2013, aimed to enhance cooperation between  Eastern Partnership countries, but appeared to make no progress on reviving far reaching association agreements with countries like Ukraine.

 

The summit’s centrepiece, would have been a major step towards eventual integration.

 

The failure to conclude a landmark agreement between the EU and Ukraine has raised questions about a policy many argue has done little so far to stabilise its eastern neighbourhood.

 

The signing of association agreements with Georgia and Moldova in Vilnius in December 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 perceived fiasco at the 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.

 

Recent events in Ukraine, including the deaths of protestors in Ukraine following a major police crackdown, have raised fresh concerns.

 

Opening the debate on Thursday, Richard Tibbels, Head of Division for the Eastern Partnership, Regional Co-operation and OSCE at the European External Action Service, provided an overview of the Eastern Partnership and discussed the lessons learned, claiming that the EU needed to focus on democracy, rule of law, and would only pursue further relations with partner countries depending on the level of reform."

 

Tibbels highlighted the lack of the EU’s diplomacy and emphasized the need to work much more intensely with broader civil society, businesses, local and regional authorities and not just engage with the government.

 

The event, at the Centre for European Policy Studies in Brussels, examined the EU’s relations with its geographical neighbours and the prospects for Association Agreements in countries like Moldova and Georgia.

 

Co-hosted by the EU-Ukraine Business Council, in light of the Vilnius Summit’s shortcomings,  the panel aimed to answer the question of whether a rethink of the EU’s Eastern Partnership policies is needed and what steps should be key to improving relations with Russia.

 

Providing a legal point of view, Steven Blockmans, Senior Research Fellow at CEPS, maintained that the EU should not abide by a ‘one size fits all approach’ in regards to the partner countries, saying that ‘’there is a clear lack of promoting an actual ‘partnership’.

 

Elements of the programme could be used to structure the relations. However, forcing something ’down the countries’ throats is not effective.’’ Blockmans also expressed his disappointment with the Vilnius Summit claiming it was a ‘missed opportunity’ for the EU to demonstrate its end goals for the partner states.

 

Focussing on Ukraine, Iryna Solonenko from the European Integration Index for Eastern Partnership Countries, described the Eastern Partnership programme as a ‘’Pandora’s Box’’ which has opened up the countries´ participants, and Ukraine in particular, to many issues such us a clear lack of transparency, freedom of press, accountability and allocation of the EU funds.

 

She said, "The Commission has no inventory to see what could be done in regards to what authorities are doing – specifically when there is a conflict like in Ukraine. There is a need for a different emphasis in Eastern Partnership countries."

 

Vitali Chiurciiu, a representative of the Moldovan Region of Gaugazia, questioned what was the ‘’success story’’ of Moldova – an example often used by the EU as a beacon of the ENP. Chiurcciu emphasized a lack of reforms of concrete sections such as the judicial system, electoral system, and rule of law amongst others. 

 

He also emphasized the concerns regarding lack of funding in key areas, saying, ‘’Moldvans don’t see the effects of the previous years of Eastern Partnership policies. There needs to be a revision of strategy and tactics. There have to be key initiatives such as support of economic infrastructure."

 

Closing the debate, Italian EPP MEP Fabrizion Bertot provided a wider view of ENP agreeing that it was not a perfect programme, but rather a work in progress.

 

‘’EU needs to reconsider its relationship with Eastern Europe, especially in light of events in the last two months with Ukraine. Relations should not exclude relations with Russia. There should be a good relationship between EU and Eastern states and this needs to be re-examined."

 

Furthermore, Bertot added, "It’s an opportunity to also improve relations with Russia and take the opportunity to change the relations between single states and Russia,’’ referencing the Russian market as a key economic target for southern Europe states.

 

After the debate, Moldovan MP Gregoriy Petrenko said that there was no consensus on programmes such as the ENP, and raised the question of what will the EU do when there is a new government in Chisnau which might be against something such as the Association Agreement.

 

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.

 

Prodi`s vision was for a "ring of friends" from Russia to Morocco who 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 Easternpartners closer to the EU, at the same time expecting them to commit themselves to undertaking the necessary political and economic reforms.

 

But some say that after four years, it is the EU's Eastern Partnership, which covers Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine, which is at fault for failing to deliver any firm political or social results.

 

The EU-Ukraine Business Council is an independent CEO-level forum for European and Ukrainian business leaders that is set up as a non-profit making organisation in order to promote trade and investment between the EU and Ukraine.