#18 - JRL 2008-122 - JRL Home
Russia Profile
June 26, 2008
Back to the Negotiating Table
Russia Continues to Fend for Its Interests in the Face of the European Union
By Dmitry Babich
The two-day-long Russia-EU summit that opened today in Khanty-Mansiysk is
seen as pivotal by many analysts who have been monitoring the relationship
between the two entities. On the agenda are negotiations on the formation of a
new Partnership and Cooperation Agreement which could have been launched a long
time ago, were it not for various fundamental disagreements ranging anywhere
from visas to meat imports. But have these differences been overcome?
Unlike the previous meetings between Russian and EU heads of state in the
last few years, analysts awaited the current summit in Khanty-Mansiysk with
cautious optimism. The frostiness and “war of values” in Russia-EU relations,
dating back to the time of the Ukrainian “orange revolution” supported by the EU
and denounced by Russia, is expected to give way to pragmatism. The agreement on
the start of negotiations on the new Partnership and Cooperation Agreement (PCA)
between Russia and the EU, due to replace the current one signed back in 1994,
is a good sign. However, the “thaw” in relations is evanescent, as both sides,
at least in their public statements, stick to their old positions. The new PCA
will need to be ratified by the parliaments of all 27 EU member states,
including such “friends” of Russia as Lithuania and Poland, which have been
blocking the start of these negotiations for over a year.
In fact, both sides have different visions of the new PCA agreement. “Russia
wants a short, businesslike document, which would spell out the economic rules
of the game between Russia and the EU businesses and government bodies,” Timofey
Bordachev, the head of the Center for European Research at Moscow’s Higher
School of Economics, said at a recent assembly of the Council for Foreign and
Defense Policy, a leading Russian think tank. “Meanwhile, the EU wants a long
and binding document, which would include chapters on values, human rights and
various political obligations, which Russia should undertake if it wants to be a
part of Europe.”
This discrepancy was one of the reasons behind the delay in the negotiations,
which could have in fact started even before 2007, when the old PCA, ratified
back in 1997, was due to expire. The Polish veto on negotiations, imposed in
2007 by the radical rightist government of Yaroslaw Kaczynski due to a sanitary
dispute with Russia, was just one of the stumbling blocks. The third and biggest
obstacle was the unrealistic demands from the EU side.
For example, there is the visa problem. In 2001, Russia’s president suggested
introducing a visa-free regime between the EU and Russia. The EU agreed in
principle, but set several conditions which the Russian side had to fulfill. The
terms included signing a readmission treaty with the EU, and introducing
controls on Russia’s borders with other former Soviet republics, making the
citizens of these republics full-fledged foreigners, requiring visas for trips
to Russia. “These demands are not only unacceptable for Russia, they are
technically impossible to fulfill,” said Olga Potyomkina, the head of European
Integration department at the Moscow-based Institute of Europe. “Kazakhstan’s
border with Russia is one of the longest borders in the world, and it was never
meant to be a border, since Kazakhstan and Russia were one and the same state
for centuries.”
Nurlan Kasymkulov, the head of Kazakhstan’s consular service in Russia,
agrees. “Making a border between Kazakhstan and Russia similar to the border
between Russia and the EU would mean cutting the human flesh, since there are
many families with members living in both Kazakhstan and Russia,” Kasymkulo
explained. “The United States can’t stop migration on a much shorter border
between itself and Mexico, so what do you expect from two much poorer countries
with a much longer border? Besides, Kazakhstan has no readmission agreements
with any countries, including Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan, which have high
migratory potential.”
But the EU stuck to its demands, resulting in blockage of the real
negotiations on a visa free-regime between Russia and the EU. However, Russia
also sticks to its plan of having a visa-free regime or, more realistically,
widening the circle of persons who are entitled to travel to the EU countries
without visas.
“For us, speedy introduction of a visa-free regime with European countries
remains a strategic goal,” Sergei Prikhodko, the Russian president’s foreign
policy advisor said on the eve of the summit in Khanty-Mansiysk. “We shall put
an accent on the fact that Russia is ready to go its part of the way.”
The situation where the “part of the way” envisioned by the EU for Russia
seems to be a bit too long is not limited to visa issues. The other major area
of disagreement is the activity of Russian companies in EU countries, where the
new “unbundling” regulations, imposed by the European Commission, may prevent
Gazprom and other “vertically integrated” Russian companies from privatizing
energy objects on EU territory. Some European Commission’s members, as well as
some of the EU member states, did not make a secret out of their opposition to
the Russian-German Nord Stream project, which consists of building a gas
pipeline between St. Petersburg and northern Germany via the Baltic Sea. Critics
of the project say that it could increase the EU’s “energy dependence” on
Russia, and demand that European governments find other solutions to the EU’s
energy problem.
“This demand is unrealistic,” Matthias Warnig, managing director of Nord
Stream AG, said at a conference organized last week in Stuttgart by the
London-based Institute for Strategic dialogue. “The only two possible new
sources of oil and gas for Europe are Russia and Iran. Which of the two do you
choose? By the way, if the EU had decided to replace 55 billion cubic meters of
annual Russian gas supplies via Nord Stream, it would have to build 38 new
nuclear reactors. So, which way of energy supplies is better for Europe’s
security?”
In his statement before the summit, the Kremlin’s spokesmen made it clear
that Russia was not going to give up on its big companies’ investment plans in
Western and Central Europe.
“We plan to raise the issue of removing unjustified obstacles in the way of
Russian investments into EU economy, including its energy sector,” the Kremlin’s
Sergei Prikhodko said. “We hope to overcome excessive politicization of the
Russia-EU energy cooperation problems, including such promising infrastructure
projects as Nord Stream.”
Whether Russia will be successful in pushing its EU partners to greater
openness remains to be seen. The summit will also test the foreign policy talent
of Russia’s new president Dmitry Medvedev. He remains a newcomer at the global
political stage, but pragmatists warn against expecting him to be soft on
Russia’s national interests.
|