The EU Eastern Partnership program: lessons for Russia

Russia's role on te Post-Soviet space

 

Disintegration of the Soviet Union, political and economic crisis, colorful revolutions in the former soviet republics,  EU expansion to the East - these factors substantially weakened positions of Russia on the Post Soviet space in the beginning of the 2000th years and created new chalenges for the country's foreign policy. Out of 10 countries which became the new members of the EU in 2004 8 were located in the Central and Eastern Europe and 3 of were the former Soviet republics. Gradually the countries capable to ensure their energy security (such as Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan) were becoming more independent in their foreign policy, Georgia and Uzbekistan fell under a zone of influence of the USA, and Moldova and especially Ukraine that of European Union. Even in Armenia and Belarus oppositional forces shuffled Russia's positions. Thus, the role of Russia has been gradually decreasing. That is why it would be an oversimplification to say that the creation of the Eastern Partnership(EaP) has considerably changed Russian role in the CIS.

 

However, refusal of Armenia to sign the association agreement with the European Union, renewal of the relations with Georgia, return of the Crimean peninsula and the creation of EAEU became "victories" of Russia over the West and gave hope that Russia still remains the key player in the former Soviet Union space. Yet, Georgia and Moldova still remain the westernized countries. Obviously, the situation in Ukraine doesn't promise strengthening of Russian positions and image in the region as well.

 

  In my opinion Russia has two main problems on the Post-Soviet space. The first is that the integration with the CIS countries is based on primitive resources dependant approach of the latter (the most striking example is Belarus which receives huge annual grants from the Russian Federation), and the second is that partners of the Russian Federation don't perceive the Euroasian integration as a strategic and long-term goal, but rather as a transitional stage for development of the country. Therefore, at emergence of more 'attractive' offers from the West 'fraternal peoples' can easily reorient their foreign policy (like Georgia, Ukraine and Moldova did).

 

So, the EaP became the result of a failure of the Russian diplomacy, and also revealed the weakness of the "soft power" towards member countries of EaP. The matter is that unlike the EU which gives preference to "soft power" and positive motivation, Russia during a long time after the USSR collapse placed emphasis on negative motivation and the use of economic and political levers of pressure upon the countries, traditionally leaning on raw sector of the economy. As a result, it appeared that the EU has, indeed, become the attracting prospect for countries of Eastern Europe and South Caucasus, capable to exempt from pressure of "tyrant".

 

Eastern partnership: a danger or a chance?

 

The question whether the EaP was created and oriented against Russia or not doesn't represent a great interest any more. Though it would be fair to note that it was harlдy by accidnet that the program was put on the agenda just after the armed conflict between Russia and Georgia, and it is not incidentally within the "Eastern Partnership" the EU traditionally supported oppositional forces of the member-states, in particular, the anti-Russian. One shouldn't forget also and that all three Post-Soviet republics which became members of the EU in 2004 were included into NATO the same year. The example of Turkey, Georgia, and also Azerbaijan also proves that the transatlantic vector of policy of the state is inseparably linked to alliance within NATO. Therefore, it is obvious that, considering logical consequences of signing of the agreement on association by Ukraine, Russia couldn't step away from the occurring events. А logical question is risen by our European colleagues here: should the EU countries consult with Russia while making agreements with he sovereign states? The answer quite logical as well: yes, in order to avoid conflict situations the European leaders have to consider and Russia's national interests and national security while taking the foreign policy decisions directly linked to the Russian Federation Not all remember, may be, that before the entry of Denmark and Sweden into the EU, controversial economic and political issues connected with thes consequences of European integration were discussed on joint talks with Norway and considerable concessions for the purpose of prevention of emergence of conflict situations were made. The same should be done in this situation. The invitation of representatives of the Russian Ministry of Economics to the summit in Riga (which is planned to be held in May 2015) could become one of such steps offered, I.D. Soltanovsky at the RIAC conference devoted to prospects of the relations of Russia and the EU.

 

Nevertheless, "Eastern Partnership" with its "positive" and "negative" consequences has become an important lesson for Russia. Moscow activated its policy towards the Central and Eastern Europe, and also South Caucasus in order not to lose to such global players as the EU and the USA in the competition for political influence in the region.

 

Recommendations

 

One of the most important conclusions which should be made by Russia is realizing the importnace of the use of "the soft power" to expand its influence in the region. Especially the South-Osetian armed conflict the image of Russia in South Caucasus and in Eastern Europe, undoubtedly, needs to be rehabilitated. One of a the sources of such form of power can be the common historical past and close cultural ties. The theory of 'eurasianism' within which Russia is perceived as a special civilization to which people gravitate in a "natural" way for political consolidation, interpreted by Alexander Dugin as the anti-European ideology in the context of geopolitical counteraction of great powers can be a ideological basis of such approach. This ideology has had an influence on the eurasian integration processes and was considered to become the cornerstone of it.

 

One shouldn't underestimate also a role of Russian Orthodox Church. After recognition of supremacy of the Moscow Patriarch of ROC beyond borders of the Russian Federation, one of the main objectives of the patriarch Kirill has become the strengthening of the Moscow jurisdiction in the former Soviet Union. Today the Moscow Patriarch can become one of the most effective sources of soft power of Russia in "neighboring countries".

 

As opposed to the European programs education and distribution of Russian, educational programs and Russian-language telecasts has to play an important role. Only one of illustrations of Russia's weakness in this field can be the Armenian Diplomatic Academy which is fully supported and the US government. The Russian diplomacy in the region itself also needs strengthening and activization.

 

Besides the activization of "the soft power", it is obvious and that Russia needs to use traditional levers of pressure upon the countries falling within the scope of strategic interests of the country. Military capacity of Russia also has to be used for control of reorientation of the countries of the former Soviet Union. Almost all members of the EU are at the same time members of NATO therefore the pro-European orientation of the countries of the Eastern Partnership is also reached by means of creation of an image of safety and cooperation in the military sphere. Russia has to become more attractive and convincing guarantor of security for rather weak countries.

 

At last, the most important is that Russia has to place emphasis on intra economic development of the country so as to be capable to offer its partners something more than stability of energy transitions. Today the role of Russia in the former Soviet Union and in the world in general depends on, whether it will be able to be it the real center of force both political, and economic and cultural, capable to attract countries on the basis of mutual cooperation.

 

1.    Латвия намерена внести изменения в программу "Восточного партнерства" //РИА Новости, 23.01.2015

           http://ria.ru/economy/20150123/1043954566.html

               2.    EU Neighbourhood Info Center, 29-09-2011

           http://www.enpi-info.eu/maineast.php?id=269&id_type=3

3.    Выступление И.Д. Солтановского семинаре «Перспективы отношений России и ЕС в контексте председательства Латвии»//РСМД, 17.03.2015

4.    Бабынина Л.О. Особенности участия скандинавских стран и Финляндии в процессе европейской интеграции// Институт Европы Российской академии наук 2010, 3(1), с. 296–303

5.    Armenian Diplomatic Academy. Official website http://www.diplomaticacademy.am/en/mission/