European Scrutiny Committee Contents


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 originated3 December 2008
Deposited in Parliament10 December 2008
DepartmentForeign and Commonwealth Office
Basis of considerationEM of 11 December 2008
Previous Committee ReportNone; but see (30107) 15299/08: HC19-i (2008-09), chapter 2 (10 December 2008)
To be discussed in Council11-12 December European Council
Committee's assessmentPolitically important
Committee's decisionNot 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


 
previous page contents next page

House of Commons home page Parliament home page House of Lords home page search page enquiries index

© Parliamentary copyright 2008
Prepared 2 January 2009