END-OF-THE-YEAR REPORT

On December 14, the European Union (EU) held its last summit in Brussels widely discussed recently both in the EU and Ukraine. The leaders of the EU member states decided to start the negotiations on the accession of Ukraine and Moldova to the organisation, as well as granting Georgia the status of an EU candidate. In addition, the EU also agreed to start similar negotiations with Bosnia and Herzegovina "as soon as the necessary degree of compliance with the membership criteria is achieved", European Council President Charles Michel said.

Overall, the summit was an event with probably the most complex, if not controversial, agenda in recent years. It eventually gave rise to a significant number of debates and discussions in the run-up to the event.

The creation of a single market for EU military products was one of the items on the agenda of the summit. The project is supposed to eliminate the national control of the EU states over their military industry and transfer the 'managerial rights' to Brussels in the future. This would be another step towards the creation of the European army and closely correlates with the EU's plans to provide long-term military assistance to Ukraine.

Eastern Partnership in the period of uncertainty

According to the tradition, a meeting of foreign ministers of the Eastern Partnership countries was held a few days before the summit. In recent years, five of six representatives have gathered in this format, as Belarus actually suspended its participation in response to the EU sanctions.

The meeting was chaired by High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Josep Borrell. It was also attended by EU Commissioner for Enlargement and Neighbourhood Policy Oliver Varhely.

Ministers reportedly discussed areas of co-operation including communications, transport, energy, green and digital transition, as well as human rights, civil society, rule of law and security issues.

At the meeting, Borrell stated that eastern borders of the EU were a zone of heightened tension, and Brussels needed to pay special attention to it.

"We have the whole Eastern Partnership in a difficult situation: Belarus, Ukraine and then the Caucasus. The good news is that Georgia is moving towards membership. But the situation in Armenia requires our strong support. Let's see how we can strengthen it and how we can put the Eastern Partnership on our agenda, because it is our eastern border. Our eastern border is the place with the growing number of hotspots," Borrell noted.

In a conversation with Armenian Foreign Minister Ararat Mirzoyan, he considered it necessary to support Armenia in security issues and announced his intention to increase the number of European observers on the Armenian-Azerbaijani border to 209 from the current 138. Baku has repeatedly made it clear that it did not welcome the idea. However, the EU leadership continues to ignore Baku's opinion and stubbornly increases the number of representatives of the mission.

Azerbaijani Foreign Minister Jeyhun Bayramov once again brought to Borrell's attention Baku's concerns about the activities of the observation mission. He pointed out that it was "widely used as a tool of anti-Azerbaijani propaganda. Destabilising initiatives such as arming Armenia, including through the EU, generally undermine the credibility of the EU as a 'neutral mediator'". Such steps also destroy efforts to normalise relations between Armenia and Azerbaijan.

EU priorities in the South Caucasus

What is the point of increasing the number of observers of an obscure mission when the negotiation process to resolve border issues is intensifying?

Apparently, Brussels has decided to intensify monitoring of the negotiation process on the delimitation of the Armenian-Azerbaijani section of the border. In fact, the process is being conducted by two national commissions, while the European observers are observing it from the Armenian side or even indirectly participating in it.

Borrell seems to avoid sensitive topics. He welcomed the agreement between Azerbaijan and Armenia on the exchange of hostages and expressed the hope that Azerbaijani-Armenian normalisation would open up prospects for the implementation of Eastern Partnership projects in the South Caucasus.

Previously, the EU has planned to allocate €2b to Azerbaijan and €2.6b to Armenia for these programmes. These projects are extremely important for Azerbaijan in terms of diversifying its economy, increasing its export potential, as well as more effective involvement of business entities in the European market.

Armenia apparently is trying to join the regional endeavours that Azerbaijan and Georgia are implementing together with the EU and its individual countries. Thus, Ararat Mirzoyan made a remarkable statement that Yerevan wanted to join the project of a green energy corridor from the South Caucasus to Europe.

This joint initiative between Azerbaijan, Georgia, Romania and Hungary is currently being substantially developed. Recently, a meeting of expert groups was held in Budapest to discuss the details of the project implementation. It is not clear how Armenia can be involved in the process. However, the statement of the Armenian Foreign Minister clearly shows that Yerevan wants to secure its place in the project and hopes that the EU will lobby for Armenia's participation. Either way, it is early to talk about Yerevan's possible participation in the project, as it requires the consent of all the participants, especially Azerbaijan, whose energy will be supplied to the European market.

As for Georgia, Borrell praised Tbilisi in its efforts to get an EU membership. This shows the desire of the EU leadership not to damage relations with Georgia, which hosts strategic transport and energy communications linking Europe with the Caspian and Central Asia.

Good news for Kiev, Chisinau and Tbilisi

A day before the summit, the European Parliament called on the European Council to start accession talks with Ukraine and Moldova, as well as Bosnia and Herzegovina, if the latter takes certain reform steps. Georgia was proposed a candidate status. At the same time, the EU was advised to set a clear deadline for finalising accession negotiations by the end of this decade, provided that the parties are not granted an accelerated accession procedure.

Interestingly, the members of the European Parliament welcomed the readiness of the Armenian government to move closer to the EU. However, none of them specified how the government of the country, which in 2024 will lead another integration union, the EAEU, would get closer to the EU.

Meanwhile, the real stumbling block was the position of Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban, who said that his country would not bow to pressure from other EU states to give the green light to accession talks with Ukraine.

In addition, the Hungarian prime minister warned long before the summit that he would veto the EU's plans to allocate 50b euros to Kiev over the next four years if his country's funding was not fully unblocked. It is about the €10b frozen by the European Commission because of Budapest's problems with the rule of law. Just before the summit, Brussels backtracked and unblocked the accounts.

However, before the summit opened, Viktor Orban held talks with the leaders of the EU, France and Germany. They tried to persuade him to support the accession talks with Ukraine, promising in return to provide funds for the development of Hungary's economy.

Apparently, they succeeded. At least the European Council's decision to start accession negotiations with Ukraine and Moldova and to grant a candidate status to Georgia indicates that Hungary has withdrawn its veto.

However, the media claim that Orban left the hall when EU leaders voted in favour of launching negotiations on Ukraine's membership. Before the vote, he said that Hungary considered the EU's decision to start negotiations with Ukraine wrong and that Budapest did not want to participate in it.

Nevertheless, whether the Hungarian prime minister took part in the vote or not, Budapest's veto was lifted in exchange for lifting the embargo on funding for the Hungarian government.

The European Commission stated that after a thorough assessment and several exchanges of views with the Hungarian government, it considered that Hungary took the measures it had committed itself to take. Therefore, the Commission considers that the horizontal condition of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights on the independence of the judiciary system has been fulfilled.  The statement underlined that "part of the Cohesion Policy funding will no longer be blocked and therefore Hungary can start claiming payments of around €10.2b".

Earlier, Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky also had a conversation with Viktor Orban and said that the Hungarian prime minister had no grounds to prevent Ukraine from joining the EU. Amid the reduction of arms supplies and cuts in the US funding to Ukraine, this step by the EU was essentially a "breath of fresh air" for the country's leadership.

However, Brussels could not open a credit line for long-term aid to Kiev. Viktor Orban managed to defend his position on this matter. He confirmed on X that he blocked the allocation of funds for Kiev at the summit. "We will return to this issue at the summit early next year, after the necessary preparations," he twitted. The negotiations may drag on for years, and in the context of the ongoing war, it is difficult to imagine their outcome. Do the negotiations on Ukraine's accession to the EU give a chance for a speedy end to the war? Hardly so. Do they create an opportunity for a real geopolitical transformation in Europe in the future? Most likely yes.