Civil society in the Eastern Partnership: in search of specifics and the right place

Today, on the 29th of November, the fourth Eastern Partnership Civil Society Forum opens in Stockholm.

 The day before EuroBelarus Information Service asked the participants from the Belarusan side of the event to share their expectations from the Forum as well as their speculations about the problems of the civil society participation in the Eastern Partnership program.

Uladzimir Kariagin, the chairperson of the “Minsk Capital Association of Entrepreneurs and Employers” open society:

- Unfortunately, we haven’t yet reached the project stage within the scope of this structure. That is why some exchange with the colleagues is necessary. Recently I was in Armenia and talked to people – there people think in project categories of the Eastern Partnership collaboration.

We have project as well as certain initiatives suggestions. I wish there was better integrity of small and medium-sized business into European programs. There seems to be no hindrances for that. Therefore, this idea should be actively promoted.

We also try to run more actions: we held a forum in Finland and Sweden recently, participated in the world-wide week of entrepreneurship in Belarus. And in this connection I wish we would feel the atmosphere of European integration and listen to our partners from the Eastern Partnership within the scope of the Forum.

One of the problems is the lack of information and communicative process. We lack some more accurate supranational governing structure. If within Belarus there exists certain discussion and the conference of the National Platform has recently gone off quite efficiently and democratically, then coordination on the supranational level is poor at the present.

Yaugen Preigherman, research director of the “Discussion and analytical community “Liberal club” open society:

- First, I wish to understand where we stand now. And not only Belarusan participants, but the whole Civil Society Forum in general as well. Because now there exists certain feeling of detachment from all that was before or, at least, it was outlined before. In this connection I wish to understand what stage this project at level of the civil society is at.

Besides, I visit this event for the first time; that is why I wish to meet as many people working in our sphere in the partner countries as possible.

The difficulties of the Eastern Partnership program at level of the civil society, as I see it, lie in the program always being in the interposition. We all realize that there are countries which are classical actors in the international relations. On the other hand, resounding talks about the Forum possible becoming a certain supranational player are going on. But I think that even from the mouth of the European politicians it sounds no that sincere. And we realize that this way or another there exist certain limitations. And because of these limitations, as well as the overestimated expectations formed by the European politicians and diplomats as well, the situation of certain incomprehensibility has emerged.

To overcome this incomprehensibility, organizations should remember that no one will ever talk to you until you are someone. It seems to me that a lot of organizations during the recent years have nearly made the Forum their central area, forgetting about some statutory things they have liked to do when the organizations were created.  And the strength of the organization and the strength of the civil society derived from it should be attained at the expense of the principal activity.

Aleh Hulak, the chairman of the Belarusan Helsinki Committee:

- I hope that the Forum will help in understanding how and where can the subject area of the Eastern Partnership move on to and, accordingly, what can be done in this direction and what can we expect from it. Besides, I wish to move forward in understanding the interest to this process of the other people and building possible collaboration on that. And my main fear is the perspective of the Forum may be too administrative.

The question how to breathe new life into the Eastern Partnership that at least in Belarus develops very poorly remains topical. In this sense it is interesting to see what’s going on in other countries and how it can be interesting to us, how we can cooperate in this process, what practices we can adopt.

It seems to me that it is also important to build collaboration of the civil societies of the Eastern Partnership countries, as the authorities of our countries collaborate pretty well.

Siarhei Drazdouski, the coordinator of the "Office on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities":

- To say frankly, so far I have ambiguous feelings about the forthcoming Forum. To a large extent they are connected with reading documents with suggestions of the institutionalization of the Eastern Partnership Forum. For me the fact that the significance of the national platforms is underestimated there is rather controversial. And, on a large scale, the form it presupposes can raise up the question of the return to the idea of some adjunct to the European dialog. And in this sense I see big problem.

The decision of the National Platform to adopt the Concept is, on a large scale, a reason to understand what is necessary for the Belarusan civil society in the scale of the Eastern Partnership. And not very optimistic thoughts about how much our idea will be supported and reflected within the EaP occur in my head. That is why this forum appears to be a serious test for the Eastern Partnership on the side of how well it will continue to remain a perspective instrument for the possible realization of politics in relation to Belarus.

On the other hand, there are, of course, some initiatives from the side of the other national platforms that can be assessed not in the process of correspondence but only after first-hand communication.