LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
Tessier-Stall on Radoslaw Sikorski’s “The EU’s 'Eastern Partnership' with former Soviet states holds the key to relations with Russia"
Autumn 2009
Sir,
Selling the new Eastern Partnership (EaP) to Russia is likely to prove trickier than Radoslaw Sikorski suggests. This Polish-Swedish initiative, which adds little to the European Neighbourhood Policy and is to be funded by a mere €600m through 2013, is essentially a political signal – and one that is unlikely to soothe Russia’s prickly diplomatic relations with the European Union.
The EaP means different things to different countries. To EU member states sceptical about further enlargement, it is sold as a way of meeting demands for stronger links with eastern neighbours without offering them membership. To pro-enlargement member states and aspiring candidates, such as Ukraine, the EaP promises enhanced political and economic relations, without ruling out eventual accession. As for Russia, it has been told by European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso that this new initiative is simply a tool “to support prosperity and stability” in the region.
Sikorski argues that closer EU ties with six of Russia’s neighbours – Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine – will help make Moscow pro-European. This seems more like wishful thinking than a serious strategy. Despite attempts to persuade Moscow that the EU does not intend to hide behind the EaP to sneak into Russia’s backyard, President Dmitry Medvedev left the EU-Russia summit in May stating flatly that “we tried to convince ourselves, but in the end we couldn’t.” It is not difficult to see why. The EaP is the brainchild of vigorously pro-Western Poland and of Sweden, whose foreign minister Carl Bildt has stated that the EU and Russia share “common interests but not common values.” The initiative was first proposed in June 2008, then fast-tracked following the August war between Russia and Georgia.
Sikorski argues that the EaP could improve EU energy security by supporting European investment in the energy transmission infrastructures of partner countries. This is probably true, but it is difficult to see how Russia could take unilateral EU investment in this sensitive sector as anything other than a threat. Indeed, the EU and Ukraine signed such an agreement in March, sparking fury in Moscow and threats by Prime Minister Vladimir Putin to ‘review’ Russian relations with the Union.
The EaP is not part of an anti-Russian strategy, but failing to understand Moscow’s concerns can only cause friction. Russian anxieties must be addressed, rather than dismissed as misplaced. If the EaP is the ‘key’ to future EU relations with Russia, as Sikorski suggests, then Europe must turn it with care if it wants to unlock any benefits at all.