Letter from Germany: EU's good neighbors are Russia's bad dream

[Aptrgangr]

Letter from Germany: EU's good neighbors are Russia's bad dream

Judy Dempsey

BERLIN: Over the last few weeks, leaders from Ukraine, Moldova, Azerbaijan, Armenia and Georgia have been making the rounds in Berlin, visiting the Chancellery and the Foreign Ministry. Nothing unusual about that. With Germany at the helm of the European Union until June 30, Berlin has become the first stop for many government leaders.

These particular visits from Ukraine and the southern Caucasus, however, have a much wider significance. They are part of the EU's new European Neighborhood Policy. With the bloc's borders stretching east, Brussels wants to reach out to its new neighbors. The problem is that Russia believes this region belongs in its sphere of influence and not Europe's.

"There is a kind of competition taking place between the EU and Russia in this region," said Arcadie Barbarosie, executive director of the independent Institute for Public Policy in Chisinau, Moldova.

"The EU wants to establish a ring of stable democracies which is important for our country and our eventual membership in the EU. Russia has other ideas."

At the same time that these pro- Western leaders were visiting Berlin, Moscow acted as host to a special gathering of its proxy supporters from the same region. The leaders of the internationally unrecognized breakaway regions of Abkhazia and South Ossetia in Georgia, Transnistria in Moldova and Nagorno-Karabakh in Azerbaijan met in Russia.

At the end of their stay, they issued a joint communiqué calling Russia "our common strategic partner and guarantor of the rights of the Abkhaz, Transnistria and Ossetian peoples."

The Russian Foreign Ministry pointedly referred to these leaders as "presidents" — titles that provoked a strong reaction from Georgia. Its foreign minister, Gela Bezhuashvili, said Russia was "encouraging separatists."

Ivan Krastev, director of the Center for Liberal Strategies in Sofia, said Russia was using these breakaway regions to divide and rule in its neighborhood.

"Russia wants its friends in place at a time when Europe's borders are changing," Krastev said.

What bothers Russia is how the EU's expanding borders touch more and more of Russia's western and southern regions.

"As it enlarges, the EU comes with a values-based policy based on human rights, the rule of law and a market economy," Krastev said. No wonder the EU is seen as a competitor if not a threat to Russia's interests in the region.

The EU jolted Russia for the first time in December 2004 when Javier Solana, the EU's foreign policy chief — joined by the Polish and Lithuanian presidents — mediated in Ukraine's pro-democratic Orange Revolution. "That was a turning point," said Sabine Fischer, Russian analyst at the EU's Institute for Security Studies in Paris. "Russia saw how the EU was entering into its sphere of influence."

Ever since, Russia has changed tactics. Instead of trying to integrate some of its neighbors politically and economically, the Kremlin has used energy as a political instrument. It is no coincidence that Gazprom, Russia's state-owned energy giant, introduced world market prices for precisely the same countries that are included in the EU's Neighborhood Policy. Gazprom also has been busy buying the energy distribution networks in Armenia and Moldova so that it can maintain influence.

Russia's efforts certainly have hurt the region. Although countries in the longer term can cope with higher energy prices, the threat of destabilization through the use of breakaway movements remains. That Russia adopts such means is certainly questionable from an ethical point of view.

It is also puzzling in practical terms. At a closer look, the EU's strategy toward the fragile democracies in its neighborhood is far less coherent and effective than Russia might fear.

This was already clear with Ukraine. Despite the popular enthusiasm among Ukrainians for closer integration with the EU, Brussels fumbled after the Orange Revolution by failing to develop a strategy that would encourage reforms. This led to frustration among the pro-Western, albeit chaotic, elites in Kiev.

Analysts complain that Brussels is not providing sufficient incentives to these countries to introduce bold reforms. After all, it was the perspective of EU membership that during the 1990s propelled the East European countries toward reform.

"The EU does not provide sufficient attraction to the Neighborhood Policy countries," Fischer said. "The strategy is not clear. It tries to become engaged in resolving the territorial conflicts such as Transnistria but it cannot offer any security guarantees."

The European Commission, the EU's executive, which is steering the Neighborhood Policy, admitted as much in an assessment paper published in December. It stated that "the European Neighborhood Policy has achieved little in supporting the resolution of frozen or open conflicts in the region."

The commission also admitted that it was in no position to offer economic and trade concessions or easier visa arrangements even if these countries do introduce reforms and harmonize their legislation with EU rules, as they are being asked to do.

"In terms of market access and integration and other economic benefits, they will only bear fruit later. This creates a real difficulty for partner countries in building the necessary domestic support for reform," the report added.

Gernot Erler, state secretary at the German Foreign Ministry and an expert on the region, agreed that the weakness of the EU's strategy toward Ukraine and the Caucasus was its failure to offer a clear perspective of EU membership. "It creates a certain frustration among the elites," he said. "The Neighborhood Policy is a substitute for EU membership."

The EU has shied away from adopting a more coherent policy toward the region because "it is scared," according to Krastev. He said the EU was stung by the 2004 enlargement that admitted eight East European countries because the effect in transforming their institutions was short term. They are still very weak.

There is also enlargement fatigue among some member states. The French and Dutch rejection of an EU constitution showed how the Union has little idea which direction it is heading.

Still, the potential is there to strengthen democracy and the rule of law in the region. "If these countries use the Neighborhood strategy properly, it could be a vehicle for change," Erler said. That is what worries Russia, despite EU assurances that the policy is not directed against it — fear of contagion of democratic values.

Source

[Crvena zvezda]

"There is a kind of competition taking place between the EU and Russia in this region," said Arcadie Barbarosie, executive director of the independent Institute for Public Policy in Chisinau, Moldova.

"The EU wants to establish a ring of stable democracies which is important for our country and our eventual membership in the EU. Russia has other ideas."

No the EU is trying to weaken Russia because Putin is not a puppet like Yeltsin was. This man is an idiot, Moldova can already join the EU all it needs to do is re-unify with Romania and give independence to Transdniestr.

[Crvena zvezda]

These particular visits from Ukraine and the southern Caucasus, however, have a much wider significance. They are part of the EU's new European Neighborhood Policy. With the bloc's borders stretching east, Brussels wants to reach out to its new neighbors. The problem is that Russia believes this region belongs in its sphere of influence and not Europe's.

Again only Ukraine and Moldova can be considered neighbours. The Caucausus is not a neighbour of the EU and it can be argued that it is not a part of Europe hence there is no need to have a European neighbourhood policy with them. The EU should not let these countries leach off of them.

"There is a kind of competition taking place between the EU and Russia in this region," said Arcadie Barbarosie, executive director of the independent Institute for Public Policy in Chisinau, Moldova.

There is no competition, it is simply the EU following America's line and try to keep a fellow European country (Russia) weak. By helping make Russia weak Europe is following America's imperialism and it showing that it is nothing more then a manifestation of Anglo-American imperialism.

"The EU wants to establish a ring of stable democracies which is important for our country and our eventual membership in the EU. Russia has other ideas."

This is meant to weaken Russia and the democratic nature of some of these countries is dubious and they're usually carbon copies of their predecessors in many ways. The west lies of their democratic credentials. The leaders of these countries would lose power if they were to actually try and join the EU, they're using the spectre of EU membership as a way to keep their population from rising up by promising memmbershipo in the rich-man's club. Do you seriously believe any of these countries would undergo reforms to join the EU when membership is at least 10 or even 20 years away.

At the same time that these pro- Western leaders were visiting Berlin, Moscow acted as host to a special gathering of its proxy supporters from the same region. The leaders of the internationally unrecognized breakaway regions of Abkhazia and South Ossetia in Georgia, Transnistria in Moldova and Nagorno-Karabakh in Azerbaijan met in Russia.

Considering that at this same time the west is trying to get Kosovo independence and Russia has made it clear that it wants a precedent for these reasons, it is rather obvious that Russia is trying to re-affirm this committment to them. As far as I see Russia is the doing the same thing the west is to pro-Russian forces.

At the end of their stay, they issued a joint communiqué calling Russia "our common strategic partner and guarantor of the rights of the Abkhaz, Transnistria and Ossetian peoples."

The Russian Foreign Ministry pointedly referred to these leaders as "presidents" — titles that provoked a strong reaction from Georgia. Its foreign minister, Gela Bezhuashvili, said Russia was "encouraging separatists."

If Georgia doesn;t want such a reaction from Russia then they should not give refuge to chechen terrorists on their soil and stop provoiking incidents with Russia. Does Georgia really think the west would come to the assistance of them if Russia were to actually invade?

Ivan Krastev, director of the Center for Liberal Strategies in Sofia, said Russia was using these breakaway regions to divide and rule in its neighborhood.

No, Russia is trying to counter the blatant Russophobia of the leaders. If these leaders were to stop being so anti-Russian I doubt the breakaway regions would even have existed for so long. What do you expect, that Russia wants to be on good terms with the most Russophobic leaders on the planet.

"Russia wants its friends in place at a time when Europe's borders are changing," Krastev said.

Anmy country want's this, idiot.

What bothers Russia is how the EU's expanding borders touch more and more of Russia's western and southern regions.

No what bothers Russia is the fact that the EU is supporting anti-Russian regimes and that it has adopted some anti-Russian attitudes since it expanded.

"As it enlarges, the EU comes with a values-based policy based on human rights, the rule of law and a market economy," Krastev said. No wonder the EU is seen as a competitor if not a threat to Russia's interests in the region.

The EU does not care for human rights, the rule of law and a market economy. The Ukraine has not adopted a more free market system since it's "revolution" and neither have any of the other countries of the region. The rule of law hasn't improved in any of the countries, and in Georgia many observers say it's gotten worse. Same goes for human rights, they've slightly improved in may be Ukraine and Moldova but in the other regions that is a lie. The EU has three objectives in keeping Russia weak in this region.
- 1. Keep Russia weak.
- 2. Created a region stretching from the Ukraine to the Caucausus also incorporating "The Balkans" and Turkey where the people will work for china level wages.
- 3. Secure Energy from Central Asia, all Turkic muslim states that are dictatorships and under EU-law the EU should not be doing any business with them because of their disresepct for human rights, the rule of law and the free market. Basically because Russia is adopting a policy of free market and punishing those who still it's energy supplies the EU want's to find a new source of gas (kind of a contradiction if you support the free market), Despite the fact that new pipelines that avoid Ukraine, Belarus, the Baltics and Poland will secure European energy supplies.

Ever since, Russia has changed tactics. Instead of trying to integrate some of its neighbors politically and economically, the Kremlin has used energy as a political instrument. It is no coincidence that Gazprom, Russia's state-owned energy giant, introduced world market prices for precisely the same countries that are included in the EU's Neighborhood Policy. Gazprom also has been busy buying the energy distribution networks in Armenia and Moldova so that it can maintain influence.

Wrong. Russia has been trying to integrate some of its neighbors politically and economically but they wanted to leach off of Russia's generosity just like how tehy want to leach off of the EU. These efforts include the CIS, GUAM and other efforts. Russia refused to give them money since this is no longer the USSR and it's shown that nothing would get better, fuirthermore most of these countries terrible economy policies caused them to not try to enter the Russian market.

Again, Russia introduced world market prices on all it's neighbours including Belarus. That's actually a lie since all those countries still pay below market prices. Theirs a reason why Russia did that it's called capitalism, Russia was gaining a loss from giving these countries gas and oil at less then a quarter of the market price and in many cases they were getting it for free. Not only that but countries who violate conditions of trade are punished and the countries that had their gas turned off are known to have been stealing gas and oil not meant for them (Ukraine stole billions meant to go to Europe, and Georgia stole hundereds of million meant to go to Turkey).

Russia's efforts certainly have hurt the region. Although countries in the longer term can cope with higher energy prices, the threat of destabilization through the use of breakaway movements remains. That Russia adopts such means is certainly questionable from an ethical point of view.

B.S. Europe has hurt the ex-Yugoslavia by supporting breakaway movements. Second, if I'm not mistaken their is evidence to suggest that NATO has armed and trained chechen terrorists in the 1990s. So if anything Russia is doing the same thing as the EU has. If anything this means that the EU seem's to have no consistency and is experiencing a constant lapse of reason.

It is also puzzling in practical terms. At a closer look, the EU's strategy toward the fragile democracies in its neighborhood is far less coherent and effective than Russia might fear.

No, it's not. If you see a flaw in what your opponent is doing you exploit it. Russia sees a flaw in the EU's anti-Russian strategy so it exploits it.

This was already clear with Ukraine. Despite the popular enthusiasm among Ukrainians for closer integration with the EU, Brussels fumbled after the Orange Revolution by failing to develop a strategy that would encourage reforms. This led to frustration among the pro-Western, albeit chaotic, elites in Kiev.

No. The government never intended reforms. The new regime is a carbon copy of the old one. The EU failed to have a policy because there was really nothing it could do to entice the elites to under go reforms that would heart their interests.

Analysts complain that Brussels is not providing sufficient incentives to these countries to introduce bold reforms. After all, it was the perspective of EU membership that during the 1990s propelled the East European countries toward reform.

The EU can't give this perspective since under the EU's own laws it can not have more then 27 member states until it adopts it's constitution. This will gladly not happen soon. Not only that, even if this number is raised it will go up by may be 6, and even then this will only be enough to get the "Western Balkans" to join, which they will considering how successful pro-EU propaganda has been here. Such an increase would mean none of the states mentioned in this article can join until later. Further more, Moldova could just reunify with Romania and give Transistria independence to join the EU (but again EU membership is just a lie).

"The EU does not provide sufficient attraction to the Neighborhood Policy countries," Fischer said. "The strategy is not clear. It tries to become engaged in resolving the territorial conflicts such as Transnistria but it cannot offer any security guarantees."

Of course it can't. There's no support for the EU to become involved in imperialists wars in the Caucausus or Moldova. There is no point.

The commission also admitted that it was in no position to offer economic and trade concessions or easier visa arrangements even if these countries do introduce reforms and harmonize their legislation with EU rules, as they are being asked to do.

Again. All these are dependant on the actions of governments in the region. Clearly the necessary reforms are against their interest. This is a lie since concessions have already been given. Considering that their is no chance of EU membership for some time their really is no need for anything mentioned in this section.

[Junkers from Galicia]

Originally Posted by Crvena zvezda

f Georgia doesn;t want such a reaction from Russia then they should not give refuge to chechen terrorists on their soil and stop provoiking incidents with Russia. Does Georgia really think the west would come to the assistance of them if Russia were to actually invade?

Well, actually Chechenians are Caucasians like Georgians are. Georgians like all their brothers, that`s why they help Chechenians.
Actually Chechens aren`t terrorist, they fight for Independent. Serbian, have you forgotten the Turkish rule?
Now about Georgians - what do you call "provoiking incidents"? Embargho on Georgian wines? Embargho on Georgian mineral waters? Sending thousands Georgians back to Georgia?
Last one - do you really think that Russia would come to assistance of Serbia? Remember 1999, where were they? Why "mother russia" didn`t help you?

[Crvena zvezda]

Originally Posted by Junkers from Galicia

Well, actually Chechenians are Caucasians like Georgians are. Georgians like all their brothers, that`s why they help Chechenians.
Actually Chechens aren`t terrorist, they fight for Independent. Serbian, have you forgotten the Turkish rule?
Now about Georgians - what do you call "provoiking incidents"? Embargho on Georgian wines? Embargho on Georgian mineral waters? Sending thousands Georgians back to Georgia?
Last one - do you really think that Russia would come to assistance of Serbia? Remember 1999, where were they? Why "mother russia" didn`t help you?

They are. No Chechens are not fighting for independence but the creation of an islamic caliphate in the Caucasus. Second, Chechnya is not a defined territory and all chechen independence advocates have called for it to expand or the creation of a state like Iran.

Those are all responses to Georgian provocations.

I know Russia didn't help us and I know Russia only cares about its interest. Unless the west gives some really good offer to the Russians, it is in their interest to help us this time. I find it stupid to be an anti-Russian state when you border them and depend on them in many states.

[Junkers from Galicia]

Originally Posted by Crvena zvezda

They are. No Chechens are not fighting for independence but the creation of an islamic caliphate in the Caucasus. Second, Chechnya is not a defined territory and all chechen independence advocates have called for it to expand or the creation of a state like Iran.

Those are all responses to Georgian provocations.

I know Russia didn't help us and I know Russia only cares about its interest. Unless the west gives some really good offer to the Russians, it is in their interest to help us this time. I find it stupid to be an anti-Russian state when you border them and depend on them in many states.

Chechenians are. They were fighting even in 19 ct, remember imam Shamil. Russia just doesnt want to lose any non-russian land, because:
1 - all another will separate.
2 - Chechnya has oil, which is first thing for russian blackmail.
Thats why Russia created all this propaganda about bloody muslim khalifs.

its not stupid to know who was, is and will be your enemy. More stupid is to be far away from a state and to hope for its mythical help.

[Crvena zvezda]

Originally Posted by Junkers from Galicia

Chechenians are. They were fighting even in 19 ct, remember imam Shamil. Russia just doesnt want to lose any non-russian land, because:
1 - all another will separate.
2 - Chechnya has oil, which is first thing for russian blackmail.
Thats why Russia created all this propaganda about bloody muslim khalifs.

its not stupid to know who was, is and will be your enemy. More stupid is to be far away from a state and to hope for its mythical help.

As I said. They will help us only if it's in their interst, currently I beleive it is. However, as I stated if the west gives them certain deals they will not help us. Serbia can count more consistent support from China then from Russia.

Second, Russia is not are enemy. Our enemies is Turks, Albanians & Muslims. All other people are not.

No. The caliphate is an actual threat, and it doesn't matter what Chechens claim. It is just like how Muslims say they aren't looking for world domination when they clearly are.

Second. More Georgians are entering Russia then are being deported, so even if they are being deported that means there will still be a net ncrease.

[Lucas Corso]

I agree with Crvena Zvezda, however don't forget Poland and the other states of the "New Europe" they're just a puppet state of the U$A-UK
Guess where is the church below...

[svin]

Chechenians are. They were fighting even in 19 ct, remember imam Shamil. Russia just doesnt want to lose any non-russian land, because:

Ok, if they are, then tell me why are they spreading like plague, invading ethnic Russian cities and villages? Ever heard of events in Karelian (!) city Kondopoga?

Actually, I'm for the independence of Chechnia, but only if all Chechens that live in Russia move there. I'll be glad.

[Junkers from Galicia]

Originally Posted by Crvena zvezda

Second, Russia is not are enemy. Our enemies is Turks, Albanians & Muslims. All other people are not.

No. The caliphate is an actual threat, and it doesn't matter what Chechens claim. It is just like how Muslims say they aren't looking for world domination when they clearly are.

I wasn`t about your enemies, I meant our. You just have to be happy, that you dont have border with Russia.
I have never heard, that Bosniaks are looking for world domination

[Junkers from Galicia]

Originally Posted by svin

Ok, if they are, then tell me why are they spreading like plague, invading ethnic Russian cities and villages? Ever heard of events in Karelian (!) city Kondopoga?

Actually, I'm for the independence of Chechnia, but only if all Chechens that live in Russia move there. I'll be glad.

Isn`t it a problem of all ex-metropolies - too much immigrants from conquered regions? Look on London, Amsterdam, Paris... Why in Lviv before WW2 there lived 12 Russians, and in 195x years Russians were 60% of inhabinats? And what is Karelian town doing in Russia? Whats worse for real Kondopogians - Russians or Chechens?
for second part +1

[Crvena zvezda]

Originally Posted by Junkers from Galicia

I wasn`t about your enemies, I meant our. You just have to be happy, that you dont have border with Russia.
I have never heard, that Bosniaks are looking for world domination

Muslims as a whole are. The Bosniaks, turks and the muslims in the Balkan Green Transversal (except for may be the Gorani) are a trojan horse for a muslim invasion of Europe. By the end of this century if Europeans don't start procreating this continent will become Eurabia.

[svin]

Isn`t it a problem of all ex-metropolies - too much immigrants from conquered regions? Look on London, Amsterdam, Paris... Why in Lviv before WW2 there lived 12 Russians, and in 195x years Russians were 60% of inhabinats? And what is Karelian town doing in Russia? Whats worse for real Kondopogians - Russians or Chechens?
for second part +1

Real Kondopogians are Russians & Karelians who coexisted peacefully for centuries without any problems from any side (the soviet era was both harmful to Karelians and Russians) and who are united through religion and many cultural aspects (btw, I'm all in favour of Karelian cultural authonomy). I can act the same whay. What is Rusyn town Uzhgorod doing in Ukraine?

I'm not saying that this problem is somehow unique. But if Chechens are so independantist and so on, why are they invading OUR cities? It's impossible to walk outdoors and not to meet one on the street. I haven't met Karelian yet. They are all in Karelia and in Tver.