Brussels is ready to continue developing relations with Kyiv, but is reluctant to commit to any legal obligations with respect to Ukraine’s prospective entry into the EU. This was the message of the meeting of the EU’s General Affairs and External Relations Council, which approved a decision to issue a mandate for negotiations with Ukraine on a new broader agreement.
It is well known Ukrainian diplomacy was gambling on the inclusion in the text of the new agreement of the prospect of some form of membership in the EU for Ukraine. It should be noted that some EU countries have suggested making a political declaration of Ukraine’s European prospects, while others prefer to be confined to implementing the action plan.
Since no consensus was reached on this issue, the EU joint statement recognizes Ukraine’s European ambitions and welcomes Ukraine’s progress in consolidating democracy. “The European Union will strive for building closer relations with Ukraine, aimed at gradual economic integration and deepening political cooperation,” the European Council’s statement emphasizes. But this document does not contain any hints of prospects for Ukraine’s membership in the EU. “Concluding the new agreement will not hamper other ways of developing relations between Ukraine and the EU in the future,” says the statement of the General Affairs and External Relations Council.
The European Commission expects the new agreement with Ukraine to boost joint cooperation, although it will remain within the framework of the European Neighborhood Policy (ENP). Benita Ferrero-Waldner, the EU Commissioner, stated that although the negotiations on Ukraine’s membership in the EU are not on the agenda, this does not limit Ukraine’s prospects. “The EU’s doors are not open to Ukraine, but they are not closed either, so Ukraine has to use its position to achieve progress in drawing closer to the EU. This will encourage Ukraine to intensify the reforms necessary for integration processes,” the BBC quotes the commissioner as saying.
Frank Steinmeier, Germany’s foreign minister, considers the adoption of the mandate to start negotiations on the new broader agreement between the EU and Ukraine a “step forward.” He announced that the negotiations on this issue will start on Feb. 6 during the meeting of the Big Three-Ukraine-EU.
Meanwhile, Ukraine’s Minister of Foreign Affairs Borys Tarasiuk does not exclude the possibility that Ukraine’s prospects for EU membership will be included in the future broader agreement. “The clock has not struck yet. One should not react to decisions of a temporary character because that same Council can make a different decision,” the Interfax quotes the minister as saying.
COMMENTS
Can we consider the absence of prospects for our country’s membership in the EU in the mandate issued by the EU Council for negotiations on the future agreement between Ukraine and the EU a defeat? Or is it a step forward, as the German Foreign Minister claims? Why are some major European countries so reluctant to include the prospect of Ukrainian membership in the future agreement? How can it influence the views of the government and the parliamentary coalition on European integration?
Arkady MOSHES, Finnish Institute of International Relations:
The very fact that negotiations have begun on the new agreement should be treated positively. This new document can be filled with content, which will be a step forward in comparison to the partnership agreement that has been valid up to now. It is significant that progress and bureaucratic inertia are obvious here. Despite certain complicating internal political preconditions that exist in Ukraine, the EU remains interested in implementing the obligations that it has had towards Ukraine.
As for Ukraine’s reaction, there are certainly grounds to be dissatisfied with the vagueness of the language of the resolution, which is so watered down and vague that the prospect of membership is not even declared. This is no surprise because the EU position was known in advance, as well as that of individual European countries. Today work should first be done to conclude this agreement, then to fill it with substance, and later to bring Ukraine closer to meeting membership requirements. Then, in the medium— and long-range perspective, this decision can be reconsidered.
I don’t think that the issue of Ukraine’s joining the EU is closed forever. But Ukraine will have to do its homework on progressing towards membership standards, unfortunately in conditions that are far less comfortable than those once created for Central and East European countries. This is unpleasant, but it’s a reality, and there’s no point in perceiving it as a tragedy. The fact that France and some other veteran members of the EU do not support the prospect of Ukrainian membership is explained by various reasons. The Russian factor, of course, influences some countries that do not want to complicate their relations with it over Ukrainian issues or see no reason to overload their own agendas.
There are also some fears of being unable to cope with the process of expansion, as the EU’s integration capability is not clear to its representatives. Thirdly, Ukraine and the Eastern agenda as a whole are not a priority for such countries as France and Italy. To summarize, one may say that the rejection of prospects for Ukrainian membership in the EU is predetermined by a number of internal political factors in the above-mentioned countries.
In addition, it has become clear that the opposition group has made its position very clear, and it will be very difficult to overcome their resistance any time soon. The EU’s decision to start negotiations with Ukraine should not affect the Ukrainian government’s integration aspirations. In my view, no radical changes have taken place. It was known in advance what sort of decision it would be.
The factors that are spurring the coalition and economic business circles of Ukraine, including those that are standing behind Yanukovych, to develop relations more vigorously, particularly with Europe, and obtain access to its markets, are still active today. That’s why I think that in Ukraine there is a combination of economic interests and a pragmatic view of what is actually achievable today. Of course, the most essential factor here is for the Ukrainian elite not to “disagree” with Europe’s current negative position and not view it as the ultimate one. I don’t see any objective reasons for this to happen today.
It’s difficult to tell how the situation will develop in future. Of course, there might be some misunderstanding connected with the speed of developing democracy in Ukraine, maintaining real progress in its movement along the path to democracy, and its transformation into a state with functioning rule of law. If this will be taking place and receiving support, including from the current coalition, one way or another Europe will have to recognize this. But if Ukraine retreats even from the level of democracy and the struggle against corruption that was achieved before the coalition was formed, of course Europe will respond accordingly, and then Ukraine’s European prospects will in fact freeze.
