The Black Sea beckons

The EU needs to give equal if not greater attention to the countries in the Black Sea region, and must involve Russia and Turkey in the process, Jan Marinus Wiersma tells Matt Williams

As Nicolas Sarkozy’s Mediterranean union was launched at a high-profile summit in Paris earlier this month, some MEPs have raised concerns that there should be an equally committed effort towards developing relations with Europe’s neighbours to the east.  
Prominent among those calling for stronger regional cooperation with countries such as Georgia, Moldova and Armenia is Dutch socialist MEP Jan Marinus Wiersma. He says that the means already exist for Europe to develop strong relations with these countries, and that the lessons that the EU has learnt throughout its short history might potentially help towards solving some of the problems currently faced by Europe’s eastern neighbours.

“We underestimate our possibilities. We have the advantage that we are seen by these countries, and also by Russia, as a soft power. This would make it easier for us to work there. If NATO tried to adopt this kind of role, it wouldn’t work. We can, however, because we have the trade, we have the money and we know how to help promote reform. We did so in Poland and in other member states, and we have a lot to offer. The bilateral relations we have developed in the framework of the European Neighbourhood Policy and the bilateral actions plans are OK, but it’s not enough.”

In May this year, together with fellow socialist Hannes Swoboda of Austria, Wiersma proposed the idea of a union for the Black Sea, an idea which involves linking the countries of this region together to focus on regional issues and also wider issues such as migration, crime and, importantly, energy. Wiersma says that it is the right time to draw attention to the fact that more needs to be done if Europe’s eastern neighbours are to deal effectively with these challenges.

“A cooperation agreement goes somewhat further than a ‘Black Sea synergy’. A ‘synergy’ can mean anything. The commission did not have to do anything new. If we are going to have an EU Mediterranean union, what happens to the east? In the Mediterranean there is already an European Neighbourhood Policy…the east is just as important for the EU, maybe even more important because these are European countries.”

The key difference with the idea of a union for the Black sea, however, would be the involvement of both Turkey and Russia in the partnership. This is essential, says Wiersma, if there is to be a realistic chance of dealing with major issues such as energy and security.

“If you look at the energy issues, if you look at the security issues, the problems in Georgia and in Moldova, they cannot be solved without Russia. Turkey, too, is a key player when it comes to energy distribution. Turkey is also very important economically, which is why it also has a role in the new EU Mediterranean union. Our idea offers Turkey opportunities to show how important it is for the EU, by playing this role in linking the two regions.”

Wiersma says that it is important to be cautious about how the idea is perceived by Russia, and that this was one of the dangers of another Eastern partnership idea, presented by Sweden and Poland to the council of Ministers’ GAERC meeting in May.

“The proposals by Sweden and Poland don’t involve the Russians, so the Russians might see this as an attempt by the EU to strengthen its role in the shared eastern region, and so the EU is expanding its sphere of influence in countries that are surrounding Russia, and that at one time belonged to the former Soviet Union. Our proposal is more inclusive, we are saying that we need Russia to be part of the process.”

When it comes to involving Russia, Wiersma says he has so far been unimpressed by the commission’s actions in this area. “Benita Ferrero-Walder says that the Russians don’t want to go any further than the Black Sea economic cooperation that already exists. We’re not convinced. I think we can explain to the Russians that this is a shared neighbourhood for which we both carry responsibility and that we should avoid turning this into spheres of influence. If we isolate Russia from this process, they will see this as an attempt by the EU to expand its influence.”

The suggestions put forward by Wiersma and Swoboda are important, he says, because of the ideas that they promote, and he is optimistic that things are starting to move in the right direction.

“If we show a greater engagement and commitment, and responsibility, and put our money where our mouth is to address the problems in the region such as the rule of law, energy, migration, we can help create a climate in which Armenia can cooperate with Azerbaijan, for example,” says Wiersma“

“People we have spoken to, whether from Turkey, Ukraine, Georgia, Russia, are all open to the idea. We can create a higher level of development in these countries which will, in five or ten years’ time, make their demands for EU membership much more credible. It’s an idea, and in politics you have to keep repeating your ideas.”