The Prospects of EU-Russia Relations: A Dutch Perspective

Early July the Netherlands’ Advisory Council on International Affairs*1 released a report on the relations between the European Union and the Russian Federation*2. The publication of the report coincided with the start of negotiations about the new Partnership and Cooperation Agreement (PCA). Not surprisingly, the PCA is at the center of the report. The main thrust of the argument elaborated is that the new accord not only should be based on the principles of equality and reciprocity, but must also reflect a sense of realism of what the parties really want to achieve. At the start of the current agreement (which entered into force in 1997) expectations were raised that have been barely met. Thus, the four common spaces for cooperation that had been installed over the years remained, on balance, rather empty. Trade relations between EU member states and Russia have largely evolved outside the framework of the economic space, which was filled mainly by dialogues on a variety of subjects (investment, intellectual property, public tenders, regulations etc.). In the “common space of freedom, security and justice” the two parties have engaged in a useful exchange of information on fighting terrorism and organized crime. However, EU attempts to challenge Russia for abuse of the rule of law and violations of human rights have prompted growing resistance, with Russia accusing the EU of interference in its domestic affairs. Furthermore, the external security space has produced hardly more than general declarations about the dangers of WMD proliferation and other topics of mutual concern. But apart from Russia’s logistical support for the EU’s humanitarian operation in Chad, the record is very small in substantive terms. Only in the apolitical “common space on research, education and culture” a number of valuable programs have been implemented.

What has to be done? With the EU being Russia’s most important trading partner and Russia being a main energy supplier to a dozen of EU countries, economic cooperation is bound to be the backbone of the new agreement. The report recommends the realization of a Free-Trade Agreement (FTA), in tandem with arrangements for the protection of foreign investment. At the same time the advisory group argues that it is pointless to pursue the goal prior to Russia’s accession to WTO. Once Russia joins this organization a level economic playing field will be gradually created, with binding non-discrimination obligations and anti-dumping rules. Obviously, the report devotes much attention to energy as a key-part of trade relations. It is pointed out that the refusal of Russia to ratify the Energy Charter, with the Transit Protocol, underscores the need for separate investment safeguards that were supposed to be provided by the Charter. While making the case for wider access of European companies to Russian oil and gas fields, the report also shows understanding of Russian demands for opening up the EU energy market to Russian companies. It takes a rather critical stand on the Commission’s proposals for unbundling the ownership of the production, transport and distribution of oil and gas while welcoming the decision by the EU Council of energy ministers of June to soften EU’s position on this matter. The report asserts that a more flexible approach may be instrumental in finding practical solutions to accommodate non-EU state-controlled monopolies like Gazprom on the internal market. Although the report is focused mostly on the economic dimension of EU-Russia relations, it is not silent on other topics as well. For example, the paper does not endorse the suggestion, rather popular in Russian circles, of establishing a permanent EU-Russia Council to deal with matters of foreign en security policy. Should Russia be willing to participate in EU peace support operations ad-hoc arrangements for consultation could be made in order to give due weight to Russian interests and views. As for the issue of human rights, the reports states that there is no need for new rules and obligations; all necessary legal mechanisms are in place. What really matters is their implementation. The advisory group joins all those who are concerned about infringements of civil and political rights, breaches of the rule of law and wide-spread corruption in Russia, but is reticent to recommend the employment of traditional methods of finger-pointing, delivering sermons and holding tribunal-like meetings. It believes that supporting Russia’s transformation towards a more open and pluralistic society is the most effective humanrights strategy in the long run.
No doubt, as shown by the recent crisis over Georgia, relations with the common neighbors in Eastern and South Eastern Europe as well as the Caucasus represent the most sensitive part of the EU-Russian relationship. The report takes issue with the Russian inclination to put the parties’ interests in zero-sum terms. Rather, the view is taken that the EU and Russia share interests in promoting stability and prosperity in the border areas. The advisory group counsels prudence on the issue of further enlargement of NATO, considering the value of article 5 likely to be diminished by commitments most allies are not willing or able to fulfill. The dual problem of abandonment and entrapment which had dominated the debate on alliance formation for a long time has become relevant again.

Pursuant to their decision at the EU summit of September 1, EU countries have postponed the second round of PAC negotiations (scheduled for mid-September) in protest against Russia’s military intervention in Georgia. At this writing it is not clear whether the agreement the EU reached with Russia on September 8 about the withdrawal of Russian troops might lead to a reconsideration of EU’s position. Regardless of one’s reading of the outbreak of hostilities in Georgia early August, overriding common interests will compel the two parties to resume negotiations in due course.

-----

*1 The Advisory Council is an independent body composed of experts in the field of foreign policy, defense and international development, which is established by Dutch law and mandated to prepare policy reports at the request of the Dutch government and the Dutch parliament. The Council may also issue reports on its own initiative.

*2 The full English title of the report reads The cooperation between the European Union and Russia: A Matter of Mutual Interest. Both an English and a Russian translation of the report are available. Copies may be obtained through the Secretariat of the Council, which is located at the Netherlands’ Ministry for Foreign Affairs, The Hague (e-mail: aiv@minbuza.nl; website: www.aiv-advies.nl).

Alfred van STADEN

The Authors
Alfred van Staden, Professor of international relations at Leiden University, chairman of the working group of the Netherlands’ Advisory Council which prepared the report on the Cooperation between the European Union and Russia, The Hague

For Further Reading:
Cooperation between the European Union and Russia: A Matter of Mutual Interest, Advisory Council on International Affairs, No 61, July 2008 (http://www.aiv-advies.nl).
Anne Harmaste, The European Union’s policy towards Russia since 2004 and the Estonian-Russian relationship in this context, Tallinn, International Centre for Defence Studies, 2008 (www.icds.ee).

Kontakt:
Cornelius Ochmann
Programm Europas Zukunft
Bertelsmann Stiftung
Telefon: 0049 30 52 00 99 102
Fax: 0049 52 41 81 681 198
Email: cornelius.ochmann@bertelsmann.de
Internet: www.bertelsmann-stiftung.de

№11(27), 2008