Tweet
THE KREMLIN TRIES CHARM TO COUNTER EU
Carnegie Europe
Aug 7 2013
Judy Dempsey Op-Ed August 5, 2013 New York Times
When President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia visited Ukraine last month,
he said the historical ties between both countries mattered as much
today as they had in the past.
"Our forebears lived for centuries together, worked together, defended
their common homeland and made it strong, great and invincible," Mr.
Putin told Russian and Ukrainian naval forces in the port of
Sevastopol. "Our blood and spiritual ties are unbreakable."
He suggested that the armed forces of both countries be integrated.
Ukraine's president, Viktor F. Yanukovich, was less than noncommittal.
He said there was scope for cooperating in modernizing the armed
forces.
Mr. Putin's comments reflect ever more urgent attempts to woo Ukraine
into Russia's Common Economic Space, an economic bloc that Belarus
and Kazakhstan have already joined and that Russia uses to consolidate
its influence in the region.
These attempts come at a time of intense competition between Russia
and the European Union for influence over the new Eastern Europe,
analysts say, including Belarus and Ukraine as well as Moldova,
Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan.
These countries belong to the European Union's Eastern Partnership,
known as the EaP, whose goal is to integrate them within the bloc
through democratization and free market economies. In return, the
European Union will expand trade, liberalize the visa systems and
give financial assistance.
Russia, however, opposes these countries' moving closer to the
European Union. "Moscow clearly fears losing influence over this
region. But is the EaP so great that it can counter the pull of the
Kremlin?" said Eugeniusz Smolar, a regional expert at the Polish
Institute of International Affairs in Warsaw.
So far, the Eastern Partnership's record concerning political and
economic liberalization has been mixed. Moldova, Georgia, Ukraine
and Armenia are partly democratic, while Belarus and Azerbaijan are
authoritarian, according to the Economist Intelligence Unit.
"The Eastern Partnership has turned out to be a predominately
bureaucratic instrument with limited political significance," said
Rafal Sadowski, an Eastern Partnership expert at the Center for Eastern
Studies in Warsaw. "This shows the limits of the E.U.'s ability to
influence its eastern neighborhood," he added in a new report.
Despite that, Lithuania, which last month took over the European
Union's rotating presidency, is doing everything possible to draw these
countries closer to Europe. Vilnius has invited the six countries to
an Eastern Partnership summit meeting next November.
For Lithuania, and its neighbor Poland, which has pushed hard for
a closer relationship between the European Union and the Eastern
Partnership countries, the crowning moment of the summit meeting would
be the signing of an association agreement between the European Union
and Ukraine, the Eastern Partnership's biggest member.
Such an agreement would bring economic and political advantages to both
sides. It would also encourage Ukraine's reformers and pro-Western
political movements to pursue the modernization of its economy and
strengthen the rule of law.
The association agreement with Ukraine is "not just technical
negotiations with just another partner; it is a geopolitical process,"
said Lithuania's foreign minister, Linas A. Linkevicius.
The European Union and Ukraine initialed the agreement more than a
year ago, but it has not been signed. Ukraine still has to introduce
more reforms.
The German government has been the most vocal in insisting that
Ukraine release from prison the former prime minister Yulia V.
Tymoshenko, who is ill. She was sentenced in 2011 for abuse of office.
On a visit to Ukraine last June, Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle of
Germany said that Ms. Tymoshenko had not been given a fair trial. He
offered to transfer her to Germany for medical help.
"Mrs. Tymoshenko, in our opinion, has the right to a fair trial and
appropriate medical assistance," Mr. Westerwelle said. Germany was
expected to veto signing the association agreement unless Ukraine
introduced reforms that included dealing fairly with political
detainees like Ms. Tymoshenko.
Mr. Yanukovich's failure to resolve Ms. Tymoshenko's status is not
the only sticking point between the European Union and Ukraine. The
other is Ukraine's lack of commitment.
Over the past several years, Mr. Yanukovich has repeatedly played
the European Union and Russia against each other in order to extract
concessions from both: better trade access in the case of the European
Union; and access to cheaper energy from Russia.
Ukrainian public opinion by a small margin supports the country
moving closer to the European Union. A survey carried out last May
by the International Republican Institute, an American nonprofit,
nonpartisan organization that promotes democracy, showed that 40
percent of Ukrainian respondents wanted an "international economic
union" with the European Union, while 37 percent favored Russia's
Customs Union.
With such a divide, Mr. Yanukovich will have to weigh the political
costs of taking a stance before 2015, when the next presidential
elections are planned.
Ukraine's decision - and what happens politically and economically to
the other Eastern Partnership countries - matters to Europe. It is not
just about countering Russia's influence. It is about whether these
countries are prepared to embrace democracy, which Russia has little
interest in. Mr. Smolar says the European Union's offer of better
trade access and closer political contacts is helpful, but not enough.
During the 1990s, the countries of Eastern Europe were motivated to
introduce reforms because they had the prospect of E.U. membership.
That was the most important catalyst for reform. Eastern Partnership
countries, however, are denied that promise.
Because of that, many of the region's elites and oligarchs see no
need for reform, and reformers are frustrated, said Mr. Sadowski of
the Center for Eastern Studies. In the competition over the Eastern
Partnership countries, that could benefit Russia. It could also lead
to instability if the European Union allowed the new Eastern Europe
to drift.
This article was originally published in the New York Times.
http://carnegieeurope.eu/2013/08/05/kremlin-tries-charm-to-counter-eu/ghoa
Carnegie Europe
Aug 7 2013
Judy Dempsey Op-Ed August 5, 2013 New York Times
When President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia visited Ukraine last month,
he said the historical ties between both countries mattered as much
today as they had in the past.
"Our forebears lived for centuries together, worked together, defended
their common homeland and made it strong, great and invincible," Mr.
Putin told Russian and Ukrainian naval forces in the port of
Sevastopol. "Our blood and spiritual ties are unbreakable."
He suggested that the armed forces of both countries be integrated.
Ukraine's president, Viktor F. Yanukovich, was less than noncommittal.
He said there was scope for cooperating in modernizing the armed
forces.
Mr. Putin's comments reflect ever more urgent attempts to woo Ukraine
into Russia's Common Economic Space, an economic bloc that Belarus
and Kazakhstan have already joined and that Russia uses to consolidate
its influence in the region.
These attempts come at a time of intense competition between Russia
and the European Union for influence over the new Eastern Europe,
analysts say, including Belarus and Ukraine as well as Moldova,
Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan.
These countries belong to the European Union's Eastern Partnership,
known as the EaP, whose goal is to integrate them within the bloc
through democratization and free market economies. In return, the
European Union will expand trade, liberalize the visa systems and
give financial assistance.
Russia, however, opposes these countries' moving closer to the
European Union. "Moscow clearly fears losing influence over this
region. But is the EaP so great that it can counter the pull of the
Kremlin?" said Eugeniusz Smolar, a regional expert at the Polish
Institute of International Affairs in Warsaw.
So far, the Eastern Partnership's record concerning political and
economic liberalization has been mixed. Moldova, Georgia, Ukraine
and Armenia are partly democratic, while Belarus and Azerbaijan are
authoritarian, according to the Economist Intelligence Unit.
"The Eastern Partnership has turned out to be a predominately
bureaucratic instrument with limited political significance," said
Rafal Sadowski, an Eastern Partnership expert at the Center for Eastern
Studies in Warsaw. "This shows the limits of the E.U.'s ability to
influence its eastern neighborhood," he added in a new report.
Despite that, Lithuania, which last month took over the European
Union's rotating presidency, is doing everything possible to draw these
countries closer to Europe. Vilnius has invited the six countries to
an Eastern Partnership summit meeting next November.
For Lithuania, and its neighbor Poland, which has pushed hard for
a closer relationship between the European Union and the Eastern
Partnership countries, the crowning moment of the summit meeting would
be the signing of an association agreement between the European Union
and Ukraine, the Eastern Partnership's biggest member.
Such an agreement would bring economic and political advantages to both
sides. It would also encourage Ukraine's reformers and pro-Western
political movements to pursue the modernization of its economy and
strengthen the rule of law.
The association agreement with Ukraine is "not just technical
negotiations with just another partner; it is a geopolitical process,"
said Lithuania's foreign minister, Linas A. Linkevicius.
The European Union and Ukraine initialed the agreement more than a
year ago, but it has not been signed. Ukraine still has to introduce
more reforms.
The German government has been the most vocal in insisting that
Ukraine release from prison the former prime minister Yulia V.
Tymoshenko, who is ill. She was sentenced in 2011 for abuse of office.
On a visit to Ukraine last June, Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle of
Germany said that Ms. Tymoshenko had not been given a fair trial. He
offered to transfer her to Germany for medical help.
"Mrs. Tymoshenko, in our opinion, has the right to a fair trial and
appropriate medical assistance," Mr. Westerwelle said. Germany was
expected to veto signing the association agreement unless Ukraine
introduced reforms that included dealing fairly with political
detainees like Ms. Tymoshenko.
Mr. Yanukovich's failure to resolve Ms. Tymoshenko's status is not
the only sticking point between the European Union and Ukraine. The
other is Ukraine's lack of commitment.
Over the past several years, Mr. Yanukovich has repeatedly played
the European Union and Russia against each other in order to extract
concessions from both: better trade access in the case of the European
Union; and access to cheaper energy from Russia.
Ukrainian public opinion by a small margin supports the country
moving closer to the European Union. A survey carried out last May
by the International Republican Institute, an American nonprofit,
nonpartisan organization that promotes democracy, showed that 40
percent of Ukrainian respondents wanted an "international economic
union" with the European Union, while 37 percent favored Russia's
Customs Union.
With such a divide, Mr. Yanukovich will have to weigh the political
costs of taking a stance before 2015, when the next presidential
elections are planned.
Ukraine's decision - and what happens politically and economically to
the other Eastern Partnership countries - matters to Europe. It is not
just about countering Russia's influence. It is about whether these
countries are prepared to embrace democracy, which Russia has little
interest in. Mr. Smolar says the European Union's offer of better
trade access and closer political contacts is helpful, but not enough.
During the 1990s, the countries of Eastern Europe were motivated to
introduce reforms because they had the prospect of E.U. membership.
That was the most important catalyst for reform. Eastern Partnership
countries, however, are denied that promise.
Because of that, many of the region's elites and oligarchs see no
need for reform, and reformers are frustrated, said Mr. Sadowski of
the Center for Eastern Studies. In the competition over the Eastern
Partnership countries, that could benefit Russia. It could also lead
to instability if the European Union allowed the new Eastern Europe
to drift.
This article was originally published in the New York Times.
http://carnegieeurope.eu/2013/08/05/kremlin-tries-charm-to-counter-eu/ghoa