Francois ROCH: “The EU should admit Ukraine as soon as possible”
Francois Roch, the director of the French edition of the US weekly Foreign Policy , watches Ukraine not just from his Paris office. He was one of the participants of the Fourth Yalta European Strategy Summit recently held in Lyvadia Palace. Readers of The Day will be interested in learning what this French expert on international relations thinks about Ukraine’s prospects for membership in the European Union. When does he think Ukraine may become a member of the EU? Why is Ukraine’s speedy accession to the Union important for the EU? These and other questions are answered in the following interview with Francois ROCH
“It’s hard to tell when Ukraine may become a member of the EU. That’s a difficult question. You can hear a lot of speculations today about when the EU will be ready, and when Ukraine will be ready. You know, there are many questions inside the EU about institutional reforms.”
Have these problems been resolved since the recent EU summit?
“I think so. Under normal circumstances the EU should admit Ukraine as soon as possible. I can’t say whether this will take 10 or 15 years. I hope not. To my mind, it depends on how quickly Ukraine manages to modernize its economy and overcome the current political crisis. The Ukrainian people should not be told that the country will join the EU in 2020. That’s not reasonable. The outlook should be a short-term one - say five or even four years, no more.”
When do you think the EU may be ready to start negotiations on further expansions?
“I can say that the expansion negotiations may start as soon as the EU resolves its internal institutional crisis. Two weeks ago we saw certain progress there. That’s why I think that the negotiations with Ukraine may start any time now. It may happen very soon. As soon as the EU is ready with the new supplementary agreement and new rules are specified, their implementation will start. Both Ukraine and the EU will obviously benefit from that.”
Since Sarkozy has become president of France, has the attitude of the old founding members of the EU changed towards Ukraine?
“I think it has. But there are still some problems. One of them is public opinion in other European countries. Their citizens have to be convinced that further expansion will be useful for the European Union. As you know, the problem with Turkey is quite obvious. So we have to convince public opinion that EU expansion is a long-term process and that the EU has to admit the countries situated in the eastern part of the continent. I mean that Ukraine, obviously, has to have every right to submit an application to become a full member of the EU.”
Can you indicate what benefits the EU, France in particular, and ordinary Frenchmen, may derive from Ukraine becoming a member of the European Union?
“This issue should be viewed not only from the standpoint of its French perspective. It is important for the EU to be more balanced eastwards than westwards. Because in future there will be more economic development in the eastern part of the continent than the western one. So it’s important for the EU to take that into consideration. Secondly, it is obvious from the cultural point of view.
It is essential to demonstrate that the former Soviet Union does not exist, not even in people’s minds. All this belongs to the past. One cannot talk about Ukraine by referring to its proximity to Russia. It is an independent country. It differs from Russia greatly both in political and human aspects, and also in its people’s vision of their future. Ukrainian society is very different from the Russian one. And all that should be considered. Ukraine should be treated as an independent European state that is looking for its own future, and at the same time is a part of the larger European community.”
What can you say about the Russian factor, about the energy influence control levers? Can such instruments have an impact on Ukraine’s accession prospects?
“You know that Russian diplomacy can influence a lot of things. The Russians will obviously try to ensure that Ukraine as an EU member does not cancel out Russian interests in Europe. I think it will take a lot of effort to convince Russia that it does not. But I don’t think it can stop the process of Ukraine’s integration into the EU. The best that the Russians can do after Ukraine joins the EU is to follow Ukraine’s example. Then Moscow would be able to solve all the outstanding problems between Russia and NATO, and between the US and Russia. It will be a good beginning, and under new circumstances and conditions too.”
How may relations between Russia and the EU develop after the Samara summit?
“I think that we in Europe must realize that from the point of view of energy resources there is no alternative to our coexistence with Russia with which we will have to live in Europe. But energy problems should not be the only issue. Energy is just one part of the game, a very important one, but just a part. I think that this will be the key to the future. A lot has to be done both in Europe and Russia. You know, where Russia is concerned, especially the executive branch of power in the Kremlin, we are bit convinced that Russia’s future will be connected with the European Union. Some people see the future Russia with China, or India, or Iran — with the old allies of the Soviet past. But I am sure that Russia’s future lies in its being together with Europe. And many Europeans think that way too. That’s why we have to talk and not make the gas issues the focus of the discussion. As you know, Europe’s discussions with Russia are not between Europe and the Kremlin but between the European Union and Gazprom. But Gazprom is not Russia. It is a company that is pursuing its own interests. We must not mix up Gazprom’s interests with the relations we want to establish with Russia. Sometimes confusion arises in our relations with Russia. It’s difficult to understand who is speaking for the country — the head of Gazprom or the head of the state. This must be clarified.
