BLUEPRINT FOR A NEW RELATIONSHIP WITH RUSSIA

To say that the European Union has no policy towards Russia is inaccurate. The European Commission’s 2007-2013 strategy paper for Russia declares “a strategic partnership” between the two. After a lengthy internal review process, the Union is now lumbering towards a negotiation with the new (or, more precisely, reshuffled) administration in Moscow about a successor to the 1997 Partnership and Cooperation Agreement (PCA). The EU’s current approach to Russia was forged in the mid-1990s, and was imbued with benign aspirations. These were to encourage the building of (to quote the EU’s Common Strategy of June 1999) “a genuine strategic partnership, founded on common interests and shared values ….” As a long-term vision of the sort of relationship we would like to have with Russia, this seems entirely right. But where the approach went wrong was to confuse the long and the short term, and to ignore what was actually happening in Russia. The 1997 agreement declared that a strategic partnership had been established. Patently it hadn’t. But the EU has remained on autopilot to this day, flying on the wrong compass course and heading further and further away from reality. It’s time to re-set the compass. Reality means accepting that with Russia (as with China,) the EU has a hugely important relationship with a powerful state that does not share our value system; and a state which will pay serious attention to the Union when it stands as one, but will treat it with contempt and insouciance when it fails to do so. The Russian leadership has been telling us loud and clear for the past five years that it wants Russia to be accepted and respected as an independent sovereign power. It will act according to its own perception of its natural interests, and make hard-headed use of Russia’s natural advantages. . So we need a new paradigm for the EU-Russia relationship. Or, rather, the EU has a choice. It could allow inertia to carry it forward into a new, grandiose Partnership and Cooperation Agreement. Or both sides could stop for a reality check, and decide to fly back from outer space to planet Earth. First, we should ask ourselves what is the orientation of the new administration? The short answer is that it is too soon to tell. The Medvedev/Putin tandem has moved Russia into uncharted waters. Power is being redistributed within the ruling elite. It may be another year before it is clear where authority lies, who aligns with whom, and how the administration is going to address critical questions in the Russian economy and society. . Second, we need to be clear about the hierarchy of the Union’s interests. Our most vital interest is in ensuring the peace and stability of the European continent. This means that we need to cooperate with Russia on a wide range of security issues. The EU’s economic relationship with Russia, including energy but not only that, is for both sides another vital interest. But what about values? From a Western European point of view, the development of democracy and the better protection of human rights in Russia would be highly desirable; but these are not vital interests, their absence does not threaten us or prevent cooperation in security or trade. Does this mean that the Union should take “values” out of the relationship? Not at all. But we should stop pretending that values are shared where they are not. Third, what instruments should the EU employ? The EU needs a single energy policy, not a plethora of bilateral deals undercutting the common interest; and an energy relationship with Russia which recognises the interdependence of the two parties. The Union is by far Russia’s largest export market. The two-way interaction of business has an educative effect, and the EU should therefore facilitate increased trade and investment links , along with Russia’s entry into the WTO. In place of “strategic partnership”, the EU and Russia need a new paradigm grounded in reality. For now, we should seek hard-headed, law-based, pragmatic constructive cooperation on specific issues. There will be more than enough of these issues to keep us busy.

Text is based on the article by Sir Roderic Lyne in the Summer 2008 issue of Europe’s World www.europesworld.org