A SELECTIVE APPROACH

Back in February of this year the leaders of the member-countries of the European Union spoke of their readiness to sign an Association Agreement with Ukraine, and also to complete talks on association with other countries in November. But at the end of May Brussels virtually disavowed this statement, saying that these countries still have a number of tasks to resolve in the matter of strengthening democratic values and human rights.

To be fair, it should be pointed out that such demands from Brussels contribute to the democratic changes in these countries and make the process irreversible. At the same time, unfortunately, an occasional excessive desire to force events and certain steps that are hard to explain harm the successful implementation of the processes of integration.

For example, a week before Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev's visit to Brussels, on a decision of only 32 of the 754 members of the European Parliament (EP - the legislative body of the EU), a tendentious resolution entitled: "Azerbaijan: the case of Ilqar Mammadov" was adopted. In the document a demand is put forward for the unconditional and immediate release of Ilhar Mammadov against whom criminal proceedings were instituted on two articles of the Criminal Code of the Azerbaijani Republic. In the resolution Baku is sharply criticized for alleged serious violations in the sphere of freedom of speech and assembly and human rights. Moreover, the Euro MPs who adopted this resolution urged the EC's chairman, Jose Manuel Barroso, to take a tougher line during his forthcoming meeting with the Azerbaijani president. Incidentally, the European Parliament also takes a similar position in the case of the former Ukrainian Prime Minister Yuliya Tymoshenko, demanding that official Kiev release her immediately. In demanding the release of individuals who have been convicted for specific crimes, Brussels is politicizing these issues.

In Azerbaijan, as one would have expected, the EP's resolution was seen as a biased approach and a single-minded attempt at interference in the internal affairs of a sovereign country in the run-up to the adoption of a decision on a new gas corridor and the Azerbaijani president's visit to Brussels. An address of the Milli Maclis to the European MPs points out that an independent and self-sufficient Azerbaijan is developing relations with the EU on the basis of equality of rights and that no power is strong enough to shift it from the path of democratic development. It also draws attention to the fact that no single international structure has the right to tell Azerbaijan what to do.

It is significant that the EP's position is out of tune with the statement by Barroso who highly praised Azerbaijan's achievements in developing democracy and human rights at a press conference with Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev. Noting that not all standards had yet been fulfilled, Barroso at the same time expressed confidence that President Aliyev, as the head of sovereign Azerbaijan, is committed to the modernization of his country and is particularly concerned about its image and prestige. Incidentally, the Azerbaijani president himself has in various interviews with the foreign media drawn attention a number of times to the fact that the situation is not ideal in this sphere, but Azerbaijan is pursuing a consistent policy of the development and strengthening of democratic principles, which demands an evolutionary approach. That is why the excessive obtrusiveness of the EU, which has reached where it is today over the course of centuries, is not contributing to the successful development of this process in its post-Soviet partner-countries which won their independence only a little more than 20 years ago. Furthermore, the European Union's haughty tone in its dialogue with the post-Soviet countries frequently has the reverse effect.  It often reminds one of the bad old times of the USSR which imposed its will on the now independent states.

Of course, Brussels' desire to acquaint the post-Soviet countries with common European values is natural and perfectly reasonable, especially as these countries have undertaken certain commitments in this sphere. But being over-assertive is hardly the right way to go about it. One has to take into account that in the majority of the post-Soviet countries traditional societies have developed over centuries and it takes decades to overcome certain stereotypes.

One's attention is also drawn to the fact that Brussels often demonstrates a selective approach both in European affairs and in its relations with the post-Soviet countries. Over the past two years the countries of the EU have been taking tough measures against the participants in protest actions who have been putting forward economic demands. In a number of countries laws are being tightened up in relation to the organizers of and participants in unofficial pickets, actions and demonstrations, which from a legal point of view is perfectly reasonable. But as soon as someone in one of the post-Soviet countries is held administratively liable for, say, openly calling for the forced overthrow of a legitimate authority, a barrage of accusations rains down on that country.

At the same time, in defending the rights of individuals in a political sense, Brussels frequently disregards the natural rights of the hundreds of thousands of forced migrants, who in the countries of the South Caucasus alone number over a million.

This selective approach of the EU may also be traced in its assessment of the situation regarding democratic norms and human rights in a country of the European Neighbourhood Policy and Eastern Partnership. While reacting angrily to the slightest shortcomings in human rights in other countries, the EU has shown, for example, a disproportionately soft reaction to the March 2008 events in Armenia when the incumbent president, Serzh Sargsyan, brutally suppressed the large-scale dissatisfaction with the outcome of the presidential election. The blood of innocent Armenians was spilt. 

On the strength of the conflict between Armenia and another country of the Eastern Partnership - Azerbaijan - one cannot help but compare the relations of these two countries with European values and partnership with the EU.

By the end of this year the EU intends to conclude talks on its association with Yerevan, which opposed the UN General Assembly resolution in support of the right of the Georgian refugees to return to their permanent places of residence - Abkhazia and Georgia's Tskhinvali Region. Monoethnic Armenia, which permanently makes territorial claims on all its neighbouring countries, is subjected to less criticism from the European Union than all the other participants in the Eastern Partnership project, whereas Armenian ethno-fundamentalism is a direct threat to European values and the integration processes. Meanwhile, the European Neighbourhood Policy and the Eastern Partnership project provide for a broadening and deepening of the integration processes both between the EU and the post-Soviet countries and between these countries themselves.

Azerbaijan, unlike Armenia, is not a burden but a self-sufficient partner and a poly-ethnic state with a high level of development of ethnic and religious tolerance. Baku is pursuing a consistent policy towards European integration and establishing itself as a stable and reliable partner. The latest evidence of this was the recent decision of the Shah Deniz consortium on the choice of the Trans-Adriatic Gas Pipeline (TAP) as the route to supply Azerbaijani gas to Europe. Speaking in praise of this move, the European Commissioner for Energy Guenther Oettinger said: "What's in it for Azerbaijan? What Azerbaijan has realized, and that is often missed elsewhere, is that Europe's laws are stable, the returns constant and stable. Azerbaijan commits its future to Europe." Today Azerbaijan is fully justifying the expectations of Brussels in the sphere of safeguarding Europe's energy security. But at the same time, there is the problem of safeguarding Azerbaijan's security, too, where the EU should be showing the necessary activity. In this context, the comments of the American Professor Michael Cain, which he made at the "Azerbaijan-USA: Vision for the Future" forum in Baku at the end of May are worthy of particular attention: "Without ensuring Azerbaijan's energy security it is impossible to speak about ensuring Europe's energy security". And the same will is demanded from Brussels in relation to Georgia and Moldova, who have encountered the problems of separatism and annexation of territories, because one of the key points of the European Neighbourhood Policy and Eastern Partnership projects is precisely the question of cooperation in the security sphere.