Tweet
news.az, Azerbaijan
April 3 2010
Azerbaijan is a key point of transit between Europe and Asia - analyst
Sat 03 April 2010 | 05:00 GMT Text size:
Sinikukka Saari News.Az interviews Sinikukka Saari, researcher on
Russian foreign policy and EU's Eastern Partnership at Finnish
Institute of International Affairs.
What should be done to convince Russia that European integration of
its neighbors doesn't contradict Russian interests?
I think that in principle it's not such a huge challenge to convince
Russia that the EaP is not against its interests as such. Lavrov has
already given more positive remarks on EaP after the initial harsh
criticism. What will be a huge challenge, however, is to get Russia
contributing to the multilateral framework ('thematic platforms')
positively and constructively. This is due to the fact that Russia is
irritated by the fact that it was not consulted in advance and that it
has not been granted any special status in the process. Although
Russia can be invited to take part to the thematic platforms on ad hoc
basis, Russia is unlikely to view this kind of cooperation positively.
Russia craves formal recognition and inclusion in permanent
institutions as an equal decision-maker. Russia does not want to be
invited to take part in cooperation when the decisions have already
been made by other actors in Russia's "sphere of privileged
interests". Due to this, it is unlikely that Russia will be
constructive stakeholder in the EaP multilateral platforms even if and
when invited to take part. This is unfortunate because EaP could be a
real success with Russia's positive engagement. It seems that Russia's
current position on EaP is now more skeptical than aggressive --
basically that it's a BUMAGA (first letter of each Eastern partner
state) - a piece of paper - and nothing more.
Can we say that Eastern partnership is a step towards membership in EU
or it is just form of partnership cooperation?
For the time being it is just a form of partnership cooperation for
all the EaP states. However, at some point in time we could see more
differentiation between the EaP states. I think it is plausible to
think that eventually - after many, many years - Moldova and Ukraine
could apply for membership (assuming that their internal development
would have evolved favourably, i.e. they would have been
'Europeanized' to a much higher degree than currently). In principle
one could think that even Belarus could potentially -- if really big
things start happening there at some point -- try to follow the suit.
In comparison, I don't think Armenia would ever like to pursue this
goal. So at least for Armenia, the EaP is likely to remain a form of
partnership cooperation indefinitely.
Which of six participators of Eastern partnership program most of all
meets European standards?
I think that they are all far from that goal.
How do you think, when the EU be ready for visa abolition agreement
with this republics?
It is impossible for me to state a year. There are many things to
consider and it will be a gradual process. This issue is linked with
issues of security and the eastern partnership will include some kind
of mobility and security pacts making this link explicit. I would
assume that visa freedom with Russia will proceed on the same pace
than with Eastern partner states.
They talk a lot about energy resources of Azerbaijan. And in what else
is Europe interested in cooperation with Azerbaijan?
In addition to energy related cooperation, the EU is interested in
democratization, socio-economic reforms and poverty reduction in the
country as well as conflict-resolution. Azerbaijan is also
strategically important and a key point of transit between Europe and
Asia. In addition, the EU is interested in encouraging regional
cooperation within the wider Black Sea region.
Aliyah Fridman
News.Az
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress
April 3 2010
Azerbaijan is a key point of transit between Europe and Asia - analyst
Sat 03 April 2010 | 05:00 GMT Text size:
Sinikukka Saari News.Az interviews Sinikukka Saari, researcher on
Russian foreign policy and EU's Eastern Partnership at Finnish
Institute of International Affairs.
What should be done to convince Russia that European integration of
its neighbors doesn't contradict Russian interests?
I think that in principle it's not such a huge challenge to convince
Russia that the EaP is not against its interests as such. Lavrov has
already given more positive remarks on EaP after the initial harsh
criticism. What will be a huge challenge, however, is to get Russia
contributing to the multilateral framework ('thematic platforms')
positively and constructively. This is due to the fact that Russia is
irritated by the fact that it was not consulted in advance and that it
has not been granted any special status in the process. Although
Russia can be invited to take part to the thematic platforms on ad hoc
basis, Russia is unlikely to view this kind of cooperation positively.
Russia craves formal recognition and inclusion in permanent
institutions as an equal decision-maker. Russia does not want to be
invited to take part in cooperation when the decisions have already
been made by other actors in Russia's "sphere of privileged
interests". Due to this, it is unlikely that Russia will be
constructive stakeholder in the EaP multilateral platforms even if and
when invited to take part. This is unfortunate because EaP could be a
real success with Russia's positive engagement. It seems that Russia's
current position on EaP is now more skeptical than aggressive --
basically that it's a BUMAGA (first letter of each Eastern partner
state) - a piece of paper - and nothing more.
Can we say that Eastern partnership is a step towards membership in EU
or it is just form of partnership cooperation?
For the time being it is just a form of partnership cooperation for
all the EaP states. However, at some point in time we could see more
differentiation between the EaP states. I think it is plausible to
think that eventually - after many, many years - Moldova and Ukraine
could apply for membership (assuming that their internal development
would have evolved favourably, i.e. they would have been
'Europeanized' to a much higher degree than currently). In principle
one could think that even Belarus could potentially -- if really big
things start happening there at some point -- try to follow the suit.
In comparison, I don't think Armenia would ever like to pursue this
goal. So at least for Armenia, the EaP is likely to remain a form of
partnership cooperation indefinitely.
Which of six participators of Eastern partnership program most of all
meets European standards?
I think that they are all far from that goal.
How do you think, when the EU be ready for visa abolition agreement
with this republics?
It is impossible for me to state a year. There are many things to
consider and it will be a gradual process. This issue is linked with
issues of security and the eastern partnership will include some kind
of mobility and security pacts making this link explicit. I would
assume that visa freedom with Russia will proceed on the same pace
than with Eastern partner states.
They talk a lot about energy resources of Azerbaijan. And in what else
is Europe interested in cooperation with Azerbaijan?
In addition to energy related cooperation, the EU is interested in
democratization, socio-economic reforms and poverty reduction in the
country as well as conflict-resolution. Azerbaijan is also
strategically important and a key point of transit between Europe and
Asia. In addition, the EU is interested in encouraging regional
cooperation within the wider Black Sea region.
Aliyah Fridman
News.Az
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress