Embracing the east

In the wake of the rejection of the Lisbon treaty by Irish voters, on the eve of the French presidency of the EU and with the attention of most EU observers on the Mediterranean union, one development has gone fairly unnoticed: in June, the EU Council has given the go-ahead to a new initiative aimed at the eastern borders of the EU, the “eastern partnership”.

The main engine providing the thrust being Sweden and Poland, the eastern partnership will therefore find its natural place within the European Neighbourhood Policy in the growing field of EU initiatives aimed at some of its immediate neighbours such as the much talked about new Mediterranean union.

Before even summarizing its aims and content, it is worth stressing the fact that this initiative will not involve any new EU budgetary effort, neither will create new structures. Here is the evidence that EU member states can work in cooperation with some of their non EU neighbours using existing structures and means.

This new partnership involves on one hand all the EU member states and on the other hand six other countries (Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Moldova, the Ukraine, and, to some extent, Belarus).

Its main aim is to foster cooperation between the EU and the “target countries” east of Europe. Though some could feel entitled to wonder why such an initiative is needed when the European Neighbourhood Policy has been in full motion for many years, it is worth stressing that the European Neighbourhood Policy has often been criticized for what was perceived as a lack of effectiveness and its dispersed approach. Furthermore, it focuses mainly on south eastern Europe.

Once this point is taken, it becomes obvious that although the EU has been engaged for many years in opening or strengthening a dialogue with its neighbours in the south and in the south east, what I would call our eastern neighbours could be forgiven for thinking that they have received less attention. The eastern partnership could therefore be labelled the missing piece in the jigsaw of the EU’s relationship with its neighbours.

Equally important is the fact that one single neighbourhood policy encompassing all of the EU’s neighbours would have its limits due to the extreme different political and economic situations of these countries stretching from the Baltic Sea to the Mediterranean. Concretely speaking, the eastern partnership envisages a range of areas of cooperation.

Facilitating movement of goods and persons takes the lion’s share with sub-categories such as visa facilitation, a free trade zone for services and agricultural projects, cross-border cooperation, student exchanges, border infrastructure, improving transport networks. Promoting democracy and the rule of law as well as cooperation in the field of the environment are equally important areas covered by the new initiative.

So, the main question is fairly simple: what now? Where do we go from here? Since the eastern partnership is actually not officially born yet, everything remains to be done with no immediate prospect for budgetary support. This, in itself, far from being a hindrance, could be a positive factor. We have until the next financial perspectives (2014) to give this initiative a run trial, to explore the best actions to develop and the best ways to do so within the framework of the European Neighbourhood Policy. By that time, we will be several years wiser and in a stronger position to argue for proper support measures.

Support measure indeed would be needed sooner or later. The eastern neighbours of the EU share strong common historical and cultural links with it. At a more regional level, a number of EU member states also have a long tradition of political and economic converging interests with the non EU members of the new initiative. The eastern partnership could, perhaps should therefore become the centerpiece of the EU’s neighbourhood policy with its eastern partners.

It is crucial to bring the south east of Europe closer to us; and it is true that the EU cannot afford to ignore its southern borders, but this should not be done at the expense of relations with eastern Europe. The eastern partnership should be the way forward.