EU DRAGGED EASTWARDS

At a recent session of the Council of EU foreign ministers, held recently in Brussels, one of the issues discussed was a joint initiative by Poland and Sweden to organize a new system of relations with the EU's eastern neighbours. Warsaw and Stockholm proposed building upon the format of the European Neighbourhood Policy by introducing an Eastern Partnership (EP) project which envisages more active and broader cooperation by the 27 EU countries with the EU's "eastern neighbours" - Ukraine, Moldova, Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan. Belarus and Russia are to be invited to join a more limited cooperation mode within the framework of the EP - the former only to involve experts and the latter to involve authorities "which deal with local problems," in particular, issues concerning the Kaliningrad Region.

The idea for this initiative was first voiced at the March summit of EU leaders which approved Nicolas Sarkozy's proposal on the "Mediterranean union."  Back then, Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk promised that Warsaw would respond to the French initiative with its own idea for a more active partnership within the framework of the ENP, but for a different geographical area, the east.

In the opinion of some Western experts close to the EU, these initiatives symbolise a rift within the EU about which geographic areas the foreign policy of the EU should concentrate on. In addition, they also signal the fact that EU members, especially its new members, increasingly regard the EU as an instrument for the promotion of their own national priorities, rather than of pan-European interests.

In particular France, supported by "old Europe," (which, however, enlisted Germany's support only with great difficulty) focuses on the geographically closer and, from France's point of view, more important Mediterranean direction to consolidate its influence in the region and in Europe in general. Poland and Sweden, which champion a deepening of EU cooperation with friendly, neighbouring countries to the east, are driven by the same motives. Both countries believe - and not without reason - that this initiative will help them increase their foreign political weight in the EU and counterbalance the "southern tilt" toward the Mediterranean which has occurred in EU policy thanks to President Sarkozy's efforts. As Mikolaj Dowgielewicz, adviser to the chairman of the European Law Committee of the Polish Parliament, said in his interview with International Herald Tribune, "We believe these countries should be part of the European family. It is in the interests of the EU to help them. The EU needs to develop a framework with these countries because of their economic potential and because there is a serious strategic interest for the union in terms of energy projects."

Diplomatic sources close to the EU revealed that the project for Eastern partnership proposed by Poland and Sweden will be based on the Action Plans which the above-mentioned countries were granted within the framework of the ENP. However, the new initiative intends to go further and deeper than is envisaged in these documents. The initiative is also based on a policy of differential strategies for the "eastern five," Ukraine, Moldova, Azerbaijan, Armenia and Georgia. The authors of the initiative make no secret of the fact that Ukraine should be its first beneficiary, whereas the rest will select their path for deeper integration into Europe depending on their ambitions and their implementation of reforms. The main components of the Eastern Partnership are arranged as follows.

First, this project envisages deeper cooperation on the broader migration agenda and movement towards the cancellation of the visa requirements of the EU and its "eastern partners." In the short term, emphasis will be placed on lifting visa requirements for certain types of travellers. To achieve the total removal of visa requirements, the authors propose a road map to indicate specific steps and commitments.

Second, they suggest the creation of a free trade zone (FTZ) and setting of a deadline for reaching this goal.

Third, EU assistance in carrying out sector reforms in the eastern five to attain European standards should be increased.

Fourth, the methodology of internal reforms in these countries should be improved and new action plans developed, corresponding more closely with EU laws, standards and norms.

Fifth, depending on the progress of reforms at national levels, the "eastern partners" should be offered new agreements on cooperation with the EU which go further than current agreements on partnership and cooperation.

Sixth, a more flexible distribution of the EU funds allocated to support reforms in these countries is proposed: it should depend on the success of reforms and involvement in cooperative projects.

And finally, a target is set for the intensification of the humanitarian component, with greater emphasis on more intensive student exchange programmes and contacts and projects within civil societies.

The important aspect of the new blueprint is its orientation toward stimulation of multilateral cooperation between the easternmost neighbours to strengthen regional ties. According to the plan, cooperation within the framework of eastern partnership will be based on the implementation of specific projects.

A number of leading European countries have already reacted positively to the new initiative. In particular the Czech Republic, which will head the EU in early 2009, has declared its support for the Eastern Partnership project. Ukraine, on the other hand, was quite reserved in its response. The point is that Ukraine considers itself not a neighbour, but an inalienable part of the EU and therefore insists on an official statement that Ukraine may join the EU in the future. As for the proposed Eastern Partnership project, in Kiev's opinion it does not give Ukraine any significant advantages over the situation which exists today and, most importantly, does not guarantee it or other participants in the new project any prospect of accession to the EU, even in the distant future. "We think that the initiative of so-called 'Eastern Partnership' should include a clear prospect of membership for those nations which prove that their membership ambitions are serious," read the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry's statement, which was disseminated in response to the decision of the EU ministerial council. The Ukrainian press reported that Member of Parliament Boris Tarasyuk, who headed the Foreign Ministry during 1998-2000 and 2005-2006, said that as the Eastern Partnership does not offer Ukraine membership and a lifting of visa requirements in the medium term, he "has doubts regarding the 'added value' of the new blueprint."

The reason for the scepticism of Ukrainian diplomats is that Kiev has been involved in talks with the European Commission and French leadership (France will be the next chairman of the EU) on a new format of cooperation between Ukraine and the EU, and that format is more interesting for Ukraine than cooperation within the framework of the EP. The dialogue now under way is based on a premise that, within the ENP framework, Ukraine should receive special status and maximum opportunities to pursue its own policies. There is talk about the introduction of a new 27+1 format, under which Ukraine would be invited to discuss issues of mutual interest with EU member countries. The practical details of this format are currently being nailed down. Kiev wants Ukraine to be continuously involved in discussions of European problems and to become a permanent member of all-European discussions. But, at this stage, its request has not been answered. Things are at the point of comparing notes on negotiating positions, and there is no agreement yet, even on the introduction of the new format. The French Ambassador to Ukraine, Jean-Paul Veziant, confirmed in an interview with the Ukrainian press that talks on the format for cooperation are under way.

As for our country, it seems, for now, to be "digesting" the Polish-Swedish initiative. Objectively, the declared goals and priorities of the new initiative are in Baku's interests, in terms of European integration. Cooperation on the issue of the gradual removal of visa requirements by EU countries is particularly important and promising for Azerbaijan and its citizens. Finding a solution to this issue would be a real gift for citizens of our country who travel to the EU for humanitarian purposes (sportsmen, businessmen, artists, scientists, youth and student exchange visitors, visits to relatives and so on) because this would once and for all obviate the need for humiliating queues at the doors of Western embassies, not to mention the cases of downright discrimination. Let us remember, for instance, the problems which the Azerbaijani national field hockey women's team had before its trip to Britain for an Olympic qualifier tournament and many other incidents of this nature when our citizens were knowingly denied visas. Taking into account the increasingly noticeable trends within the EU towards the tightening of its immigration policy, which will inevitably lead to a further complication of visa procedures, solving this issue is a matter of special importance and urgency for the citizens of our country.

It would also be important for us to begin a dialogue with the EU on this issue, to achieve a simplification of visa procedures - or, better still, achieve no-visa travel for persons travelling for humanitarian purposes.

Let us hope that Eastern Partnership will bring new impetus to Azerbaijan's policy of European integration and lead to a closer dialogue and cooperation between our country and the EU, both in a multilateral format - with the organization as a whole - and in bilateral ones - with individual EU member countries.