Encouragement of sorts

If a string of comments on the resolution the European Parliament passed the other day is anything to go by, Ukraine and the European Union have made a breakthrough in their relations. Yet the analysis of the not-so-simple domestic situation in both the EU and Ukraine shows that the “integration breakthrough” is, rather, another dose of encouragement for Ukrainian politicians. Indeed, the Strasbourg resolution spotlighted a positive tendency: the EU still keeps its door ajar for Ukraine. At least a considerable part of EU politicians (especially those from the new EU member sates) are prepared to act as chief lobbyists of Ukraine’s prospective membership.

The MEPs decided to encourage Kyiv for having held a parliamentary election in full compliance with the commonly recognized standards of democracy and transparency (although the picture is not so rosy if looked at from inside). EU parliamentarians urged the two highest executive bodies, the European Commission and the Council of Ministers, to increase the level of support for the “further democratic development of Ukraine” and launch “negotiations about reaching an association agreement between the European Commission and Ukraine.” The call is quite to the point because the current bilateral Agreement on Partnership and Cooperation expires in two years’ time. Instead, Brussels and Kyiv are planning to sign the so-called reinforced agreement. To tell the truth, the two sides cannot so far reach an understanding on what provisions and promises the new document must contain. Ukraine insists that it include, in no uncertain terms, the prospect of eventual EU membership. Meanwhile, far from all EU capitals are prepared to take such a step.

The Strasbourg parliamentarians also called upon the member states “to introduce relevant initiatives and projects in order to ensure concrete support” for Ukraine. Another MEP proposal is that the EU continue to make efforts to finalize the agreement on a relaxed visa treatment of Ukraine. Moreover, politicians expect the Ukrainians to travel visa free to EU countries in the future. The agreement also expresses a hope that Ukraine will make headway in its aspiration to be a full-fledged WTO member.

Where is the breakthrough and what is the downside of the resolution? It is positive that the European Parliament has again showed a favorable attitude to Ukraine. At first glance, there is nothing new in this, but let us remember that MEPs recently urged European commissioners to decide on the EU’s future borders. Many observers gained an impression that the MEPs were thus hastening to shut the door to Ukraine. For it is clear now that the European Commission is not inclined to give Kyiv any promises of prospective membership.

So there is a very serious danger that the private opinion of EU Vice-president Guenter Verheugen that former USSR republics will be unable to join the EU in the next 20 years may be quite officially documented. Conversely, the resolution in question showed that the European parliamentarians would like to have a clear picture of the European Union’s future borders, with Ukraine being part of this space. Will the European Commission heed this logic?

It is rather positive, too, that the EP’s resolution clearly mentions two things: an association agreement and a visa-free regime in the future. Especially attractive is the proposal that Ukrainians will be able to travel to the EU without visas. As is known, Ukraine and the European Commission are holding rather difficult talks on reaching an agreement on at least a relaxed visa treatment. So what visa-free regime can be now on the agenda? Maybe, the parliamentarians are just more far-seeing. While the European Commission is still to map out a strategy in the relations with Ukraine, the European Parliament is displaying greater progressiveness in this matter.

The MEPs look like absolute idealists at first glance because they seem to be speaking about very fantastic things that are not exactly popular among many Europeans. But what if their idealism is in fact realism with a remote prospect?

We wish it were so. So far, however, this version does not look very convincing — first of all because the EU itself is being dogged by crises. The EU perhaps does not object to admitting Ukraine into its fold, but no one can predict the problems that the union will face in this case. Besides, Ukraine should not even hope to come closer to the EU unless it carries out some indispensable reforms. Do the MEPs understand this? Does this mean that, under the circumstances, their resolution is just a pot shot that will never hit the target?

Natalia VIKULINA, correspondent of Radio Liberty’s Ukrainian service in Brussels, said to The Day, “The European Commission would not like, of course, to talk about Ukraine’s European prospects. But we must admit that it is now an unsuitable moment for this body’s representatives to speak on this topic,” “In a situation, when the EU is still unable to sort out the problems that arose after recent enlargement, it is too early to speak about the accession of Ukraine, a 46-million-strong country that would have become one of the union’s largest member states. The European Commission does not want to take up this commitment,” the journalist concludes after interviewing a lot of Brussels functionaries. She stresses that the signing of an association agreement, which the latest resolution mentions, will change nothing in EU-Ukraine relations. The journalist notes that Ukraine “wrongly interprets this document, calling it associated membership agreement,” although nothing of the sort exists in the EU legal practice. “There is such thing as association agreement which calls for an intensified dialogue on political and economic matters, establishing a free trade area, etc. The EU has association agreements with Mexico and Israel, and, naturally, there is no question of those countries joining the European Union. This kind of agreement with those countries has been in force for several years. In some cases, the association agreement can really be a steppingstone for EU membership, as was the case with Eastern European countries,” Vikulina says. The journalist also notes that, although the European Parliament is mostly composed of those who favor Ukraine’s European integration, we should not overestimate the clout of this institution. “The European Parliament cannot pass concrete resolutions on the admission of one country or another to the EU. It is the European Commission and EU member states that have to shoulder the whole process. The European Parliament can only shape public opinion about Ukraine; it has no effective powers to force the EC to fulfill the MEPs’ resolutions,” Vikulina said.

Oleksandr Chaly, former first deputy foreign minister of Ukraine, in charge of European integration, said in a comment for The Day that the European Parliament had been passing this kind of resolutions before. They also contained appeals to sign an association agreement with Ukraine, but no consensus was reached in this matter owing to the stand taken by some EU countries (e.g., Germany) at the European Council and the European Commission. “The new resolution is undoubtedly a positive political signal. It shows that we have considerably improved work with the EP after the Orange Revolution. Still, the resolution is of an advisory nature and cannot really compel the EC and EU member states to change their attitude,” Chaly said. He also recalled that the European Union has concluded a lot of association agreements, including ones with African and Latin American countries, which does not call for their membership. “However, the European Union signed association agreements with Central and Eastern European countries in the early 1990s. Those were new-generation documents, the so-called European-type association agreements, which envisaged a membership prospect. What Ukraine really needs today is a European-type association. It was sometimes called ‘associated membership,’ although such a term does not exist in the European law terminology. In any case, a European-type association agreement in fact launches a process of negotiations on granting these countries the status of a candidate and, later, a member state,” said Chaly, a well-known expert in EU matters.

Is it possible to sign this kind of agreement with Ukraine in the nearest future? Most experts believe that it is a very long-term prospect. The internal situation, both in the EU and in Ukraine, is not conducive to an early rapprochement. Kyiv and Brussels still have a large amount of work to do, so rapprochement ands integration depends on how fast they will be able to do it.