The Eastern Partnership Christophe Hillion* JMWEN, University of Leiden

1. From Northern Dimension to Eastern PartnershipThe evolving neighbourhood policy in the eastAleksanteri Institute – Helsinki10 September 2009 TheEasternPartnership Christophe Hillion* JMWEN, University of Leiden *this presentation is based on the SEI working-paper co-authored with Prof. Alan Mayhew (JMWEN, SEI)

2. Background • Polish and Swedish initiatives • Fifth enlargement (UK + Sweden initiatives) • ENP shortcomings • ‘Union for the Mediterranean’ • Georgia • PL and S initiatives endorsed by European Council, which invites the Commission to come forward with proposals • COM(2008) 823 • Joint Declaration of the Prague Eastern Partnership Summit

3. The EaP countries

4. The basic EaP offer – as per COM(08) • AIMS: • A lasting political message of solidarity, through ‘political association’ • ‘Economic integration’ involving a broader regional trade approach, i.e. the possible establishment of a Neighbourhood Economic Community inspired from the EEA ‘where appropriate’ • MEANS: • New contractual (bilateral) relations: i.e. Association Agts • A new framework for multilateral cooperation • Institutional framework • New financial resources

5. New (bilateral) contractual relations • Association Agreements, i.e. beyond PCAs • ‘Political association’, i.e. more than political ‘dialogue’ • Gradual economic integration: towards a DCFTA • Enhancing mobility, visa liberalisation ‘as long term perspective’ • Multifarious enhanced cooperation (including Energy security, mobility) involving regulatory convergence with EU standards • Flanking policies: eco and social developments of Partners • New institutional structures: decision-making power + joint-monitoring

6. New framework for multilateral cooperation • Thematic platforms • Democracy, good governance and stability (institution building, ESDP participation) • Economic integration and convergence with EU policies (Regional DCFTAs => NEC) • Energy security (mutual support, harmonisation, interconnectedness, diversification) • Contacts between people • Flagship initiatives • Integrated border management programme • SME facility • Promotion of regional electricity markets , energy efficiency and renewable energy sources • Development of the southern energy corridor • Cooperation on prevention of, preparedness for and response to natural and man-made disasters • New institutional framework and governance • Meetings of EaP Heads of State or Government every two years • Annual Spring meetings of EU+EE Ministers of FA • Bi-annual platforms meetings at senior officials level • Meetings of panels supporting the work of the thematic platforms • Civil society forum • Possible participation of the CoR, EESC

7. New Ressources • A combination of fresh and re-programmed ENPI fund adding up to €600 millions for EaP initiatives • ENPI funding could be progressively increased from €450 Million (2008) to €785 Million (2013); i.e. need for additional €350 million of fresh funds • ENPI Regional Programme refocused to sustain EaP multilateral dimension • €250 million under the current ENPI envelop to be devoted to EaP initiatives • Possible Member States’ bilateral financial contributions • Ensure effective delivery and improve donor coordination (EIB, EBRD), and leverage more investment money

8. 4 ‘views’ on the EaP offer • The ‘enthusiast’ • The ‘skeptic’ • The ‘cynic’ • The ‘pragmatist’

9. The enthusiast • triggers new momentum in EU relations with East European Countries (EEC) • positive EU signal towards EEC • genuinely deepens EU-EEC links • shows ‘adaptability’ of EU policy towards EEC • is a comprehensive and coherent EU policy • shows EU diplomatic credentials BY • typifies that accession of new States triggers fresh ideas within the EU

10. The skeptic • yet another initiative in an already well, if not over-furnished, EU policy towards EE • no added-value • does not address the criticisms that were formulated towards the ENP • too timid on important symbolic gestures towards EEC • the DCFTA is not workable • the multilateral dimension is not expedient, let alone viable – only the bilateral dimension is attractive and workable • resources are too limited and are unlikely to get increased after 2013 • Further antagonises Russia

11. The cynic • essentially about addressing EU/MS security concerns • a vehicule to promote EU/MS economic interests at the smallest cost possible • a red herring to distract from the real question: i.e. membership prospect of EaPs

12. The pragmatist • the best formula the EU can offer at this stage • useful re-packaging of ENP that makes it more palatable • takes account of EEC wishes • EaP is a project based initiative with potential: towards ‘solidarités de fait’ between the EU and EEC • It leaves open the question of future relationship