EU'S EASTERN PARTNERSHIP HOPES TO RECOGNIZE

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 03 BRUSSELS 001808

SIPDIS

NSC FOR KVIEN

E.O. 12958: DECL: 11/27/2018
TAGS: EU PREL
SUBJECT: EU'S EASTERN PARTNERSHIP HOPES TO RECOGNIZE
"EUROPEAN ASPIRATIONS" WITHOUT PROMISING MEMBERSHIP

REF: SECSTATE 124616

BRUSSELS 00001808 001.2 OF 003


Classified By: Chris R. Davis, Political M-C, for reasons 1.5 (B) and (
d)


1. (SBU) Summary: According to EU officials and the Czech
Permanent Representation, the European Commission will
release the first week in December a report containing
proposals for the Eastern Partnership program first proposed
by Poland and Sweden in May 2008. The report will recommend
signing Association Agreements with five and possibly six
post-Soviet Eastern neighbors (Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia,
Moldova, Ukraine, and eventually Belarus, still under EU
restrictive measures) in order to provide them with a
European perspective, without, however, holding out an
automatic prospect of membership. There is considerable
debate over elements of the program within the EU and
political concerns in some of the potential partnership
states. Nonetheless, the launching of the ambitious program
would signify an important eastward outreach by the EU. End
Summary


2. (SBU) Mission has gained several insights into the report
expected to be issued by the Commission December 3 on the
Eastern Partnership initiative first proposed in May by
Poland and Sweden. A press report (which Commission
officials have confirmed to us as accurate) states that the
EC proposes signing Association Agreements with each of the
six former Soviet countries included in the program. The
draft report (according to the press) proposes recognizing
the "European aspirations" of the six countries and drawing
them closer to the EU, without explicitly offering them
membership as part of the program. The initiative has a
three part emphasis: 1) trade, investment and capacity
building, including in the energy sector; 2) visa
facilitation with a view toward visa free status; and 3) a
people-to-people, civil society, rule of law, and social
development component. Reports on the amount of funding
proposed vary, with one official telling us the Commission
proposal is for a 600 million Euro top up, coming from new
money as well as existing funds.

--------------
Czech Briefing on
EP program and time-line
--------------


3. (SBU) The Czech Permanent Representation's experts on
Eastern Europe and Central Asia briefed third-country mission
representatives November 25 on the Eastern Partnership. The
Czech representatives explained that the Commission's
proposal contained two tracks: one with bilateral initiatives
for each of the six partners, and one with multilateral
initiatives bringing the six closer together. On the
bilateral track, the Partnership would aim to conclude
association agreements with all six countries. These would
be a "new generation of agreements" to replace the
Partnership and Cooperation Agreements they currently have.
The new agreements would deepen trade and economic
relationships and promote the free movement of people. On
the latter point, Czech contacts conceded that due to member
states' sensitivities, this would have to happen in stages,
starting with visa liberalization. The purpose of the
multilateral track would be to promote cooperation among the
six eventual partner countries themselves, in areas such as
economy, energy, and culture. Czech officials said that the
EU would "leave the door open" to EU membership for the six
countries, but not more, stressing that membership
perspective is a particularly sensitive issue for the EU.


4. (SBU) Czech Perm Rep officials also described the timeline
for EU political discussions on the Partnership. The
Commission will present its report on the Partnership
December 3, leaving little time for discussion by member
states during the remainder of the French EU presidency.
Discussions will begin in January in EU working level groups
chaired by the Czech presidency, with the aim of approving
the Partnership at the European Council in March 2009. The
official "launch" would then take place at a Czech
presidency-hosted summit, which would include the 27 EU
member states and the six partner countries, sometime between
March and June 2009. The Czechs expect internal EU
discussions on the Eastern Partnership to be tricky, due to
differences of opinion among member states. Contacts
emphasized that these differences would need to be settled in
order for the Partnership's level of ambition to remain high.



5. (SBU) The Czech presidency will also begin a discussion

BRUSSELS 00001808 002.2 OF 003


on the financing of the Partnership, although the review of
the EU's current financial perspective would not be discussed
until after the Czech presidency ends. Czech officials would
not provide an estimate for total funding and stressed that
financing was a potential problem, with the EU budget already
stretched. They said that other funds, such as the European
Neighborhood and Partnership Instrument, could be used for
some projects and that member states could contribute under
the Neighborhood Investment Facility. The Partnership could
also allow for private investment and the involvement of the
European Bank for Reconstruction and Development. Czech
contacts said they did not foresee a big new structure
(secretariat, etc.) for the Eastern Partnership, but that
these matters also remained to be decided. They added that
some member states might want to name a Coordinator for the
Eastern Partnership, likely through the Commission. Summing
up the role of the Czech presidency in the Eastern
Partnership, officials stressed that facilitating internal EU
discussions on the partnership would not be an easy task. If
all went smoothly, the main events during their presidency
would be the approval of the Partnership in March and a
summit to officially launch it.

--------------
Both EU Members and
Prospective Partners
Express Concerns
--------------


6. (C) Both EU members and prospective eastern partners have
raised some concerns about the project as currently
described. Ukrainian diplomats here have complained to us
that the offer of Association Agreements in the absence of
membership perspective (and access to structural funds that
membership brings with it) falls short of what Ukraine and
the region require. They say they are disappointed that the
initiative as it currently stands does not equal what the EU
did for the Balkans, where it provided a high profile and
long-term political commitment as well as resources to match.
A Nordic diplomat working for the EU conceded privately that
an Association Agreement without accession as the end goal
would be a dubious incentive for the Eastern neighboring
countries to undertake the tough reforms required and make
the effort to absorb the "acquis." Moreover, some of the
"partner" countries may not want to be seen as trying too
hard to integrate with the EU. The Eastern Partnership is
already a domestic political football for Moldova, whose
president (keen to cut a deal in the future with Moscow on
Transnistria) is wary of embracing the Eastern Partnership,
even while the Prime Minister has assured the EU that he
supports the plan.


7. (C) EU member state concerns include both the substance
and the timing of the project. We have been told that the
Germans (supported by the Dutch, Luxembourgeois, British,
French, Swedes and others) are rather unhappy about the idea
of easing up on visas, meaning there may be no quick result
on that front. On timing, the EU and the three Caucasus
countries are scheduled to meet at the ministerial level on
the margins of the December 9 GAERC. The Germans have
reportedly balked at a too forward-leaning approach on the
Eastern Partnership (or the issues related to it) in the
draft joint statement for the Caucasus meeting out of concern
that this could pre-judge EU debate and decisions later that
week at the European Council. Czech Perm Rep contacts
confirmed that at the EU-Caucasus ministerial, partners will
be briefed on the main points of the Commission's proposal,
but with an emphasis on the fact that it is only still a
Commission proposal, without the approval of member states.

--------------
Relex DG Sees Draft as
"Ambitious"
--------------


8. (C) When the Ambassador asked RELEX DG Eneko Landaburu
during a November 19 meeting about the Eastern Partnership
initiative, he was chary with details. He said the draft
proposal, which he characterized as &ambitious,8 was the
subject of internal discussion. (Comment: Czech PermRep
contacts, days before, lamented not yet seeing the draft.)
Speaking in terms of two pillars, Landaburu said the
initiative would 1) emphasize economic integration among the
six countries and 2) their integration with Europe. The
latter would explicitly address matters such as energy
security, better governance, and institution building.
Landaburu said the initiative was not intended to counter
Russia, &nor are we addressing security issues,8 he added.


BRUSSELS 00001808 003.2 OF 003



9. (C) Landaburu told the Ambassador he was getting some
push-back &within the house8 on his request for an
additional 600 million euros for the initiative, saying
Commission commitments to Pakistan, Afghanistan and Georgia
were competing for funds. This money, if granted, he said
would be used for energy security and communication
infrastructure.
--------------
Comment
--------------

10. (C) While the Eastern Partnership faces a number of
hurdles before it becomes reality, and while it may fall
short in some regards, it would be a significant step forward
for the EU's outreach to a key region, and is a step we
should welcome publicly and enthusiastically as a positive
contribution to broader European stability.
.