7 The EU Eastern Partnership
| (a)
(30248)
16940/08
COM(08) 823
(b)
(30249)
16941/08
SEC(08) 2974
|
Commission Communication: Eastern Partnership
Commission Staff Working Document accompanying the Commission Communication Eastern Partnership
|
| Legal base | — |
| Document originated | 3 December 2008
|
| Deposited in Parliament | 10 December 2008
|
| Department | Foreign and Commonwealth Office
|
| Basis of consideration | EM of 11 December 2008
|
| Previous Committee Report | None; but see (30107) 15299/08: HC19-i (2008-09), chapter 2 (10 December 2008)
|
| To be discussed in Council | 11-12 December European Council
|
| Committee's assessment | Politically important
|
| Committee's decision | Not cleared; further information requested; relevant to the debate recommended on EU-Russia relations
|
Background
7.1 The June 2008 European Council initially discussed the idea
of an Eastern Partnership (EaP), based on a Polish/Swedish proposal.
It envisaged "enhancing EU policy towards eastern ENP partners
in bilateral and multilateral formats", and agreed on:
"the need to further promote regional cooperation among the
EU's eastern neighbours and between the EU and the region, as
well as bilateral cooperation between the EU and each of these
countries respectively, on the basis of differentiation and an
individual approach, respecting the character of the ENP as a
single and coherent policy framework."
7.2 It
said that such cooperation "should bring added value and
be complementary to the already existing and planned multilateral
cooperation under and related to the ENP, in particular the Black
Sea Synergy and the Northern Dimension", and invited the
Commission to take the work forward and present to the Council
in Spring 2009 "a proposal for modalities of the "Eastern
Partnership", on the basis of relevant initiatives.".[21]
7.3 The Extraordinary Council on 1 September, which
met to discuss the crisis in Georgia, noted with concern the impact
of the crisis on the whole of the region, and considered that
it was "more necessary than ever to support regional cooperation
and step up its relations with its eastern neighbours, in particular
through its neighbourhood policy, the development of the "Black
Sea Synergy" initiative and an "Eastern Partnership".
The Council indicated that it now wished to adopt this partnership
in March 2009 and, to this end, invited the Commission to submit
its proposals sooner, in December 2008.[22]
The Commission Communication
7.4 The Communication presents proposals for an
ambitious and specific Eastern dimension within the European Neighbourhood
Policy (ENP).[23] It
advocates a "step-change in relations" with the six
Eastern neighbours — Ukraine, Moldova, Belarus, Georgia,
Armenia and Azerbaijan — "without prejudice to individual
countries' aspirations for their future relationship with the
EU." The Communication states that the Eastern Partnership
(EaP) "should bring a lasting political message of EU solidarity,
alongside additional, tangible support for their democratic and
market-oriented reforms and the consolidation of their statehood
and territorial integrity". This will, the Commission says,
serve "the stability, security and prosperity of the EU,
partners and indeed the entire continent", and "will
be pursued in parallel with the EU's strategic partnership with
Russia". The Commission sees the EaP as going further than
the present ENP:
"The guiding principle should be to offer the
maximum possible, taking into account political and economic realities
and the state of reforms of the partner concerned, bringing visible
benefits for the citizens of each country."
7.5 An essential component will be a commitment from
the EU to accompany more intensively partners' individual reform
efforts. The full political engagement of EU Member States will
be essential. Active parliamentary contacts and exchanges will
also play an important role.
7.6 The EaP will be based on mutual commitments to
the rule of law, good governance, respect for human rights, respect
for and protection of minorities, and the principles of the market
economy and sustainable development. The extent to which these
values are reflected in national practices and policy implementation
will determine the "level of ambition of the EU's relationship
with the Eastern Partners";[24]
Joint ownership is seen as essential, and both sides of the EaP
are to "have their responsibilities." Only with strong
political will on both sides will the EaP achieve its objective
of political association and economic integration.
7.7 The Commission sees work to achieve these goals
going ahead on a bilateral and a multilateral track. The bilateral
track will be designed to create a closer relationship between
the EU and each of the partner countries, to foster their stability
and prosperity. It will include:
- new Association Agreements
(AAs) between the EU and each partner country, to succeed the
existing Partnership and Cooperation Agreements due to expire
in 2008 and 2009. The AAs would aim to help encourage these countries
to adopt EU norms and standards, both in terms of democracy and
governance and technical standards for trade, energy and other
sectors. They should also advance cooperation on Common Foreign
and Security Policy and European Security and Defence Policy.
"A sufficient level of progress in terms of democracy, the
rule of law and human rights …. will be a precondition for
starting negotiations and for deepening relations thereafter";
- a deep and comprehensive free trade agreement
with each EaP country, once it has joined the WTO,[25]
and a longer term vision of creating a Neighbourhood Economic
Community;
- a Comprehensive Institution Building programme
(CIB) to help build partners' administrative capacity to meet
commitments and conditions arising from the Association Agreements;
- individual country mobility and security pacts,
encompassing both labour mobility and cooperation on tackling
illegal migration, border management aligned to EU standards,
and enhanced efforts to fight organised crime and corruption;
- talks on visa facilitation with partners;
improved consular coverage; roadmaps to waiving visa fees from
Schengen countries; and increased EU support for justice and law
enforcement, to tackle organised crime, trafficking and similar
problems;
- policies to promote energy security, taking
account of the Second Strategic Energy Review;[26]
and
- drawing on EU mechanisms and social policies
to reduce economic and social disparities and encourage regional
development.
7.8 The multilateral track will provide a
new framework to support each differentiated bilateral component,
providing a "forum to share information and experience on
partners' steps towards transition, reform and modernisation"
and facilitating the development of common positions and activities.
The EaP will thus "initiate a structured approximation process,
supported by the CIB".
7.9 There should be:
- biennial meetings of EaP Heads
of State or Government
- annual spring meetings of Ministers of Foreign
Affairs
- four Thematic Platforms:
- democracy, good governance
and stability;
- economic integration and convergence with EU
policies;
- energy security;
- contacts between people.
- Panels to support the work
of the thematic platforms in specific areas
7.10 A number of flagship initiatives are also suggested
(for example, an Integrated Border Management Programme, an SME
Facility, promotion of regional electricity markets, disaster
preparedness), to be funded through multi-donor support, IFIs
and the private sector.
7.11 The Communication also discusses funding —
"substantially increased financial resources are required
to achieve the objectives set out in this proposal" —
and monitoring and evaluation.
7.12 The Commission Staff Working Document examines
potential subjects for the Thematic Platforms and Panels and the
Flagship initiatives in greater detail.
The Government's view
7.13 In her Explanatory Memorandum of 11
December 2008, the Minister for Europe at the Foreign and Commonwealth
Office (Caroline Flint) expresses her strong support for the EaP,
in these terms:
"As an extension of the ENP in the region, it
will help us to secure its future following the Georgia/Russia
crisis this summer. It will also help us to deliver many of our
objectives for the Eastern neighbourhood: greater economic prosperity,
political stability and democracy, and climate and energy security.
This will be achieved by deepening integration with the EU and
the EaP countries, and offering support for further reforms of
priority areas — such as democracy and human rights, sustainable
development, and measures to tackle crime and energy security.
We also support the proposed strengthening of free trade agreements
with these countries.
"In particular we welcome the proposals on:
— "upgrading
bilateral contractual relations to Association Agreements with
free trade areas, and the progressive intensification of links
which will ensue, not least to help the partners reach EU legislation
and standards for example in agricultural and manufacturing exports;
— "the successor documents to ENP
Action Plans, incorporating milestones and benchmarks. We hope
these documents will give partners a clearer indication of reform
priorities and measures of success and help raise the visibility
and impact of ENP;
— "the Comprehensive Institution Building
Programme (CIB) to improve administrative capacity and help partners
implement commitments resulting from the AAs and free trade agreements;
— "the linkage between greater mobility
arising out of a secure environment wherein illegal migration,
corruption, organised crime and border management are tackled
effectively and to EU standards of effectiveness;
— "bilateral measures to enhance partners'
energy security and encourage their adoption of EU's energy legislation,
including 'energy interdependence' provisions in the AAs, early
entry of Moldova and Ukraine into the Energy Community Treaty
and MoUs on energy issues with Moldova, Georgia and Armenia, and
enhanced support for the full integration of Ukraine's energy
market with the EU;
— "the focus in the multilateral framework
on approximation to EU legislation and standards;
— "the increased political profile
for the Eastern partners which the EaP will bring, including Summits
of Heads of State/Government every two years and annual Spring
meetings of Foreign Ministers; and
— "the increased profile, and funding
within existing budgets, for building and establishing long-term
change in civil society through culture as a force for reform,
and mobility and reform programmes in education and research."
7.14 The Minister says that some of the proposals
will require careful attention:
- "On visa facilitation
and mobility, the UK is not in the Schengen area. We are broadly
in favour of Mobility Partnerships, and the strengthening of borders
is something which the UK is keen to develop.
- "The language on 'targeted opening of the
EU labour market' is not too much of a problem for us, although
it would be unlikely that the UK would opt in to [any] such arrangements
at this time.
- "There are certain Member States who may
want ENP socio-economic activity to be integrated into Cohesion
Policy, funded by the Structural and Cohesion Funds. We maintain
that Cohesion Policy should focus on EU MS only.
- "We have discussed the EaP proposals, including
finance … at a meeting with Whitehall partners and will continue
to consult them as proposals develop and come forward for EU agreement.
7.15 The Minister also notes, with reference to the
EaP being designed to complement it, that the Black Sea Synergy
Initiative has a wider membership and "a focus on promoting
more coherent programming in the region", and that third
parties (such as Russia and Turkey) could participate in some
of the EaP project, if agreed by consensus.
7.16 With regard to the Financial Implications,
the Minister says:
"Significant additional resources will be needed
to enable the EaP to meet its full potential both within this
and future financial perspectives. In this financial perspective
there are already significant pressures on the European Neighbourhood
& Partnership Instrument (ENPI) due to reallocation of funding
for the recent Georgia crisis and on-going support to the Palestinian
Territories. The Commission estimates it needs €600m extra
in this budget to support the implementation of the EaP of which
€250m has been found from the existing ENPI envelope (2010-2013)
— mainly through re-prioritisation of funds from the Regional
East Programme. An additional €350m of new money will also
be required to supplement the planned resources for 2010-2013.
We await detailed Commission proposals. There may be some scope
for further re-prioritisation in the framework of the budget mid-term
review, but this will need to be carefully balanced with the needs,
expectations and current initiatives (such as the Union for the
Mediterranean) for the Southern neighbours."
7.17 Finally, the Minister notes that she expects
the December European Council to welcome the Communication and
to give the Czech Presidency a mandate to take forward work. This
will, the Minister says, be a high priority for the Czech Presidency,
who are planning to launch the initiative at a summit conference
during their Presidency.
Conclusion
7.18 The "business case" for the proposed
Eastern Partnership is well made. But the Minister identifies
an immediate challenge, that of adequate funding. Beyond that,
it is plain that success will be achieved only over the long haul,
and that this will require the sort of commitment by all concerned
that has so far eluded the most well-established precursor, the
moribund Barcelona Process, which the Union is in the process
of endeavouring to reinvigorate. Thus the question arises as to
whether the Union can do both successfully when success with one
has so far been somewhat limited.
7.19 There is then the further question of what
Russia's reaction is likely to be.
7.20 We are minded to recommend the Communication
for debate in the fullness of time. But we would first like the
Minister to write to us — in good time ahead of the Spring
European Council, at which the December European Council envisaged
"this ambitious initiative being approved" — with
details of the Commission's eventual financial proposals and other
aspects of its response to the December European Council's invitation
to the Commission to "study [the proposals in the Communication]
and report back prior to that Council. "
7.21 For now, we consider that the Communication
is relevant to the debate that we have recommended, on the Floor
of the House, on the Commission Communication on EU-Russia relations,[27]
and retain this present Communication under scrutiny.
21 Paragraphs 68-70; see http://www.consilium.europa.eu/ueDocs/cms_Data/docs/pressData/en/ec/101346.pdf
for the full Council Conclusions. Back
22
See http://www.consilium.europa.eu/ueDocs/cms_Data/docs/pressData/en/ec/102545.pdf
for the full Council Conclusions. Back
23
See http://ec.europa.eu/world/enp/index_en.htm for full details
of the European Neighbourhood Policy. Back
24
For example: "The level of Belarus' participation in the
EaP will depend on the overall development of EU-Belarus relations". Back
25
Currently only Belarus and Azerbaijan have not yet concluded their
WTO negotiations. Back
26
"An Energy Security and Solidarity Action Plan" - COM(08)
744. Back
27
See headnote; (30107) 15299/08: HC19-i (2008-09), chapter 2 (10
December 2008). Back
| 
