Monday, February 13, 2012


Commentary

EU Poised To Shelve Its Grievances, Return To Business As Usual With Russia

Russian President Dmitry Medvedev (left) with his French counterpart, Nicolas Sarkozy (right), and European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso outside Moscow on September 8
TEXT SIZE - +
By Ahto Lobjakas
BRUSSELS -- When European Union leaders convene in Brussels for a summit meeting on October 15-16, they will have little option but to conclude to bury the hatchet with Russia over Georgia.

When that happens, the EU will have gone -- in a matter of two months -- from an aspiring global player to a regional scrapper struggling to hold its own against a large and assertive neighbor. Georgia's territorial integrity and international law will be the most notable casualties, but the EU's own self-conception as a global defender of universal values is also bound to take a severe blow.

The overwhelming feeling in Brussels now is that Russia's determination to pry South Ossetia and Abkhazia from Georgia is too great for the EU to thwart, and the EU's need for dialogue with its largest neighbor too urgent, for the current confrontation to be sustainable for long.

Diplomats say France and Germany are campaigning to relaunch talks, suspended in early September, on a new EU-Russia partnership agreement.

Their argument is that by pulling its troops out of Georgian territory outside Abkhazia and South Ossetia, Russia has upheld its end of a September 9 deal with the EU that set October 10 as the deadline for the move. EU foreign-policy chief Javier Solana issued a statement on October 10 acknowledging that a full Russian pullout had taken place.

'Enormous' Pressure

Officials from Eastern Europe describe the Franco-German pressure to resume talks as "enormous." On October 13, the German head of the EU monitoring mission in Georgia, Hansjorg Haber, will brief EU foreign ministers in Luxembourg on the Russian pullout. German officials said in Brussels on October 10 that this should settle the issue for the EU.

Poland, the Baltic countries, and Britain disagree.

They argue that before EU-Russia relations can normalize, Russia must pull at least some of its troops out of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, as per the so-called Medvedev-Sarkozy plan of August 12, which commits both Georgia and Russia to withdrawing their forces to preconflict lines. The EU's own decision to suspend partnership talks with Russia, adopted at an emergency summit on September 1, is unequivocal in making the link: "Until troops have withdrawn to the positions held prior to August 7, meetings on the negotiation of the Partnership Agreement will be postponed."

The bloc appears increasingly tempted to reach for the opponent's playbook in ways which may in the long run damage its own moral standing.
Baltic officials say neither France nor Germany is addressing this point while pressing to resume partnership talks. According to one diplomat, Paris and Berlin have merely reiterated in recent meetings in Brussels that "Russia has done a lot," and that the EU should therefore "say at the summit it is ready to unfreeze the partnership talks."

The Franco-German argument proceeds from the September 9 accord between the EU and Russia, which -- although it formally addresses the "implementation" of the August 12 deal -- no longer makes any reference to a Russian pullout from Abkhazia and South Ossetia. The injunction on Georgia to barrack its troops remains present in the September 9 text, however.

But even Baltic officials concede that the best they can do is to delay the resumption of Brussels-Moscow talks by no more than a month. The EU and Russia will hold a summit in Nice on November 14; that date is widely accepted as an ultimate deadline for the EU to drop its defiance.

Eyeing A Compromise

There were signs on October 10 that the EU's French presidency is eyeing a compromise. Its initial draft summit declaration, released to member states on October 8, said the EU "could" resume talks with Russia in November. The latest wording of the same paragraph, however, says the EU will wait until the European Commission and the EU Council of Ministers have completed an "audit" of EU-Russia relations ahead of the Nice summit before making its decision.

Part of the reason why Poland and the Balts feel they will not be able to force the EU's hand for much longer is their growing sense of isolation. The depth of British support remains difficult to gauge, and Sweden's enthusiasm for dragging out the showdown with Moscow is on the wane.

But Russia's Baltic and Polish detractors also fear that if they bloc EU-wide action, other channels will be found by member states vitally interested in reviving contacts with Moscow. These channels would, by definition, not be subject to any objecting member state's veto, and as such would be put outside their control.

Poland and the Baltic countries are also increasingly isolated within Eastern Europe. Hungary and Slovakia are traditionally more accommodating of Moscow, and the Czech Republic is keen to see the controversy disappear before it takes office as the next EU presidency after France on January 1, 2009.

Russia's assertiveness does breed resentment across the EU. But when hitting back, the bloc appears increasingly tempted to reach for the opponent's playbook in ways that may in the long run damage its own moral standing.

Easing Belarusian Sanctions

In a bid to play a counterweight to Moscow, EU foreign ministers are set on October 13 to ease sanctions on Belarus, despite having joined the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe and the United States in condemning the country's September 28 parliamentary elections as undemocratic. A visa ban that currently affects some 40 Belarusian officials accused of human rights abuses will be "selectively" suspended and high-level political contacts with the country restored.

To mark the thaw in relations, Belarusian Foreign Minister Syarhey Martynau will be present at the margins of the EU meeting in Luxembourg.

EU politicians and officials openly admit the turn away from longtime efforts to isolate Minsk stems from an urgently and widely perceived need to "counteract" Russia's influence in the country.

Similarly, the EU foreign ministers will on October 13 extend the proverbial olive branch to Uzbekistan and revoke the last eight visa bans -- currently already suspended -- originally imposed in the aftermath of the massacre of civilians in Andijon in 2005.

Officials in Brussels struggle when quizzed about the possible impact of these policy U-turns on the EU's self-understanding and its view of its role in the world. Most evoke the need to adapt to changing circumstances, but all are adamant that democratic reforms and human rights remain the EU's foremost priorities in the region.
This forum has been closed.
Comment Sorting
Comments page of 2
    Next 
by: Richard from: Canada
October 13, 2008 07:25
It is absolutely disgusting that France and Germany think the issue with Russia and Georgia is complete. Are they that afraid of losing the Russian energy? or is there something more corrupt at play?

by: mike from: usa
October 13, 2008 09:41
Russia could be wrong, but US lately set a bad examples invading in Iraq (more then 500.000 civilians died in Iraq), Kosovo, and so on. Our government should worry more about state of the economy more, otherwise we'll be in deep shit very soon.

by: Alec from: USA
October 13, 2008 14:23
Finally, the EU leaders got back to normal from their hysterical state of mind. They should cooperate with Russia and create a new security and economic agreements. As for Abkhazians and Osetians: they will never live with Gergians in one country: just accept it.

by: Martin Bright
October 13, 2008 14:47
The west must freeze the bank accounts and impose travel bans on the saudis and other countries notorious for their human rights abuses and their totally undemocratic credentials. This is the only way to uphold the upper hand in human rights and democracy issues.

Otherwise, people and governments in the CIS and the third world will see those freezings and bans merely as weapons of sorts in the struggle for the control of oil resources.Same say for the Kosovo issue.

I travel a lot in the third world, and government officials and private bussinesmen alike repeatedly point me of the inconsistencies and double standars of the west policy on human rights and democracy.

by: Ian Watson from: UK
October 13, 2008 15:44
What we are seeing is the EU breaking away from US control, that the EU is not so keen for a conflict to develop between the US and Russia using mainland Europe as its battleground.

And what of Kosovo, the author remonstrates on the international law issues but the Russians are doing EXACTLY what the EU, US etc did in regards to tearing a huge chunk off Serbia, the EU and US were hoisted badly by their own petard it seems and prefer a case of "Do as we say, not do as we do".

by: truth
October 13, 2008 15:52
Whenever I see "France" I know it's meant to say Israel and I cringe as they were arming and training the aggressor Georgia in this whole affair.

by: gmathol from: USA
October 14, 2008 00:15
Russia has to be cautious. We hear more and more from Western sources that a 140 million population should not own so many energy or natural resources. That means war.

by: Richard from: Canada
October 14, 2008 02:14
In response to "Truth". Yes there was training going on in Georgia and BTW they have the right to do so, and the training was part of their pre-NATO bid, for IRAQ and to protect themselves from S.O. militia attacks that have been going on for a long time which were encouraged by Russia. But what of the "TRAINING" by Russia and suppling of arms to the S.O. militia, and allowing the burning and destruction of Georgian homes and villages near S.O. under Russian control?? Go to www.hrw.org. Russia's goal now is to divide the EU and to turn as many as they can against the US, and to control all your energy so Putin and his corrupt friends can get richer. Do you really think the average Russian's quality of life is any better with the Petrol Dollars? (BTW, I've have friends in Russia, and I have been there a number of times. I have first hand knowledge of corruption).

To Ian Watson; The deal that was brokered by France/EU was complete withdrawal to "PRE"conflict lines, that means Russian troops out of Georgia, all of it! They have failed to do so; so are we to overlook this? Wow, it's like bad parenting. You mentioned Kosovo, I do not think a comparison is valid in this case especially since the EU or the US didn't take any land! BTW, I do not support what happened with Kosovo either, but, again it is a different situation.

I agree there is some merit to your view that the EU doesn't want a war in the backyard, who does, but, I believe it has more to do with energy and the selfish interest of some EU members. Germany for one is afraid of losing the energy. After all, the winters are cold. Once again the worries of one's own, out way the overall lives of others. Personally I think the EU will never be an effective security body (Russia already knows this). You cannot effectively run as a committee of countries with different interest and concerns. This conflict has shown this if nothing else, and ditto for NATO.

It also would be interesting to see what business is imported/exported and how much energy is imported from Russia for the EU members that want to "forget" this every happened....

by: rICHARD
October 14, 2008 08:21
"the EU's own self-conception as a global defender of universal values is also bound to take a severe blow"

You bet! When it comes to standing for "universal values", there's nothing like siding with someone who launches a surprise nightime artillery and GRAD attack against Ossetian civilains . Maybe they should send EU bombers to help out next time. When you want a job done right you have to do it yourself - those silly Georgians left 30% of Tshkinval still standing. In any case, the EU's self-conception is as a US lapdog, a big US lapdog. That hasn't changed so no worries. And by the way, does anyone here know how to spell K.O.S.O.V.O?

by: Cantona from: Madrid
October 14, 2008 13:15
"Surprise nighttime artillery and GREAD attack"? Clearly you only know the Russian media version. And international observers have already debunked the Russian propaganda that Tskhinvali was levelled. Just not true. Just the area where the Ossetian/Russian were firing their artillery from, roosky rICHARD.
Comments page of 2
    Next 

Most Popular

               
 
 
 
 
Being Discussed Now

Jolie Earns Serbian Scorn For War Film

Latest Comment (83 total)

writer: Serbians did not start the war in Bosnia but they were killed and ... More

Athens Mops Up In Wake Of Violence

Latest Comment (1 total)

Eugenio: Here is one of those countries - Greece - that joined the EU ... More

Azerbaijani Aviation Engineer Seeks Niche In Civilian Drone Market

Latest Comment (3 total)

ferrum: if i see a machine like this on the sky, i will surely ... More