Hrant Kostanyan: Russia and the EU will turn into ill-disposed friends

The European Neighbourhood Policy is decelerating. The EU needs more clear policy in geopolitical issues, as well as more reflexive and inclusive policy.

Within the framework of the European Intercultural Festival 2014 a discussion about “EU foreign policy in the Eastern European region” took place in Minsk.  Hrant Kostanyan, a researcher at the Centre for EU Studies (CEUS), in his statement emphasized that “the destruction of the old world order or the formation of a new one is not being discussed now; however, the situation is really new, and the EU was not ready for it”.

According to Kostanyan, “researchers of the EU problems shouldn’t be surprised with that”.

- Ten years ago marked the start of real constructive partnership between the Russian Federation and the EU that is of interest to both the sides. However, today we can see how these two actors changed, and original statements that this cooperation would be of interest for both the parties, are no longer true. While Russia is strengthening its cooperation with China and the East in general, the EU is now more actively developing trade relations with its transatlantic partners, i.e. the interests are now separated. But for now these two sides are not ready for the official “break-up” of relations, as over the past ten years their mutual relations (political, military, energy contacts, diplomatic relations, and so on) were developing, so now they are not that easy to break. Now we see Russia that is more confident and actively puts a challenge.

According to the expert, now Russia is identifying NATO expansion as the processes that are taking palace between the EU and a number of post-Soviet countries.

- Those countries that signed the EU Association Agreement pose certain threat for Russia; as such agreement is considered to be a first step for entering NATO in the future, and the border these countries are not to cross. That is why Russian Federation is ready for the military conflict at the moment; and the EU didn’t expect such reaction from Russia.

As Kostanyan notes, the EU disregarded the fact that until recently Ukraine and Moldova have been closely tied with the Russian Federation. And it was ready to use these connections in order to reach its geopolitical goals.

- Also, for the past 5-6 years the EU was deeply involved into its domestic politics, the consequences of the financial crisis, and torn apart by different interest groups. Countries-members of the EU can be divided into three groups: the group that has lively interest to the development of the “Eastern Partnership” initiative. The second group advocates less ambitious goals for the EU development. Third group that took a wait-and-see position is waiting for the results of the fight between the first two groups.

As Kostanyan believes, the European Neighbourhood Policy between the EU and Russia didn’t become their common policy.

- Unfortunately, everything is everything indicates that we can become ill-disposed neighbors. Obviously, the border between us is expanding; it is becoming more and more noticeable. On the one hand, there are three states what are going to sign the agreement – Ukraine, Georgia, and Moldova; and there is a different block – Belarus and Armenia, which are most likely to enter the competitive to the EU structure – the EEU. Azerbaijan is playing a waiting game and isn’t joining either of the blocks. But unfortunately, sometimes the border is not between the states, but right at the middle of the country, as we see it with Abkhazia, South Ossetia, and Transdniestria. Gagauzia in Moldova and the southeast Ukraine will, probably, join this list, too.

Hrant Kostanyan also noted the instability of situation in the countries that aim to deepen European integration:

- I would seriously question the real interest of those countries that expressed the desire to sign the Association Agreement with the EU or the EEU. Knowing the situation in Ukraine, Moldova, and Georgia, I’m not sure that they are ready and can fulfill all the requirements, which are stated on about a thousand pages with references to more 80 thousand pages. And all the implied reforms require huge economic expenses. These countries often make quick decisions, but don’t strive to fulfill all provisions. And I think that it can be mostly applied to the countries that have chosen Eurasian development path. We see certain unwillingness to sign a political agreement within the EEU on the part of Belarus and Kazakhstan; and if one day Armenia becomes a member of the EEU it is most likely to happen against its will. Thus, in the conditions of this entire unstable political situation and with all the inner tension in these countries, we see that the countries of the European Neighbourhood Policy are less and less willing to cooperate with each other.

Unfortunately, the EU doesn’t have a strategy as to how to resolve these conflicts. Of course, an ideal solution to these problem would be to turn these contradictions and conflicts into the bridge between the EU and Russia; but it is too naïve to think so, as now these two superpowers are competing with one another. And I don’t have an answer to the question as to what the EU can make in this situation; I can only give my reflections about it.

First, the EU can express its clear position on a number of questions, including Crimean annexation.

Secondly, the EU should learn and forecast inner situation ore carefully, it should provide bigger flexibility using its own methods and instruments. Initially, the European Neighbourhood Policy gave its results and was working pretty well for the first seven years. But situation in the world is changing much quicker than the instruments of the EU. As one has to go through a huge number of bureaucratic procedures, elaborate the regulations for introducing changes, go through the control of general departments, and so on, which requires a lot of time.

Thirdly, the EU should introduce more inclusive policy, by which I mean that not only countries-neighbors in the eastern direction can be partners, but more remote countries as well. The EU elaborated only one set of instruments for cooperation with the participants of the “Eastern Partnership” project, and an absolutely different one for Russia, which has led to the competition between these two structures.

My formula for the short-term perspective: clearer geopolitical policy; more reflective and inclusive policy.