In December, 2008, the European Commission unveiled its new Eastern Partnership initiative package. The intention of the initiative is to cement closer cooperation between the European Union and six post-Soviet nations – Armenia, Georgia, Azerbaijan, Ukraine, Moldova and, with certain reservations, Belarus. The authors of the Eastern Partnership are Sweden and Poland. The program was proposed much earlier and it probably would have still been in the initial discussion phase had it not been for the developments of last August.

As is stated in the official website of the European Commission in Armenia, “The EU has a growing responsibility to the partners to help them address the political and economic challenges they face and support their aspirations for closer ties, not least in the light of the conflict in Georgia last summer. Following the conflict in the Caucasus the European Council of the 1st September requested the Commission to present its proposal earlier than previously foreseen.”

The haste for implementing the initiative was also based on the desire on the part of the European Commission to play a more active role in the regions directly neighboring it. Even though the European Union is proposing a series of economic incentives to its eastern neighbors with the new program, nevertheless it wasn’t unequivocally accepted in all the “target nations”.

The reason perhaps was the failure of the prior European Neighborhood Policy and all those contradictions and uncertainties that came to the fore with the new program.

Europe’s “European neighbors”

The European Neighborhood Policy (ENP) has been operating since 2004 and aims to strengthen cooperation between the European Union and the nations participating in the program. However, in contrast to the Eastern Partnership program the ENP includes a greater number of participants – Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Ukraine, Belarus as well as a number of countries in northern Africa and the Middle East – Algeria, Morocco, Libya, Tunis, Israel, Palestine, Syria, Jordan, Lebanon and Egypt.

In July of last year French President Nikolai Sarkozy came out with an initiative for a Euro-Mediterranean Union that would aim to create a union of the 27 member states of the European Union and countries bordering the Mediterranean Sea.

Many viewed this initiative as an alternative for Turkey, which was allocated a pivotal role in the new union, in substitution for direct membership in the EU.

In the view of the experts, “Eastern cooperation” came about to supplement the Euro-Mediterranean Union. In this manner, there was a clear delineation of EU eastern and southern policies.

As noted by Polish Foreign Affairs Minister Ratoslaw Sikorski, “Whereas the EU's partner countries in the south are "neighbors of Europe”, the Eastern countries are "European neighbors" with a "natural membership perspective".

In terms of “long-term membership prospects” the two programs do indeed differ given that the Euro-Mediterranean Union (EMU) assumes the creation of joint institutes but the Eastern Partnership does not.

This is yet another factor to confirm that the EMU is understood to be an alternative to EU membership. The two new programs, which include the states participating in the European Neighborhood Policy (ENP), thus cast doubt on the future viability of the ENP itself.

Despite the fact that EU officials claim that the new program doesn’t impede the continued existence of the ENP, the issue remains a murky one in Brussels nevertheless. Most likely the issue will be cleared up in the spring of 2009, after the “Eastern Partnership” summit.

Economic Prosperity for the “European Neighbors”

OK, so what is the European Union proposing for its eastern neighbors? It is proposing a series of economic privileges that can be generally summed up as follows. Free trade with the EU, the free movement of people (the easing of entry regulations as well as the lifting of such requirements in the future), greater financial assistance for administrative and socio-economic reforms, gradual integration into the EU’s economic sector, and insuring efficient energy security for the EU and Partnership nations.

The program also aims to encourage the partners to develop a free trade network amongst them, which as a long-term objective can lead to membership in the European economic community. In this manner, the program is putting into practice an important European playing card – proposing economic prosperity to its European neighbors. Also discussed in a cursory manner in the program are the themes of democracy and successful governance and stability.

However, it is clear that in the framework of the Partnership, Brussels will not be engaged in problems of democracy in the participating nations as well as issues these states might have with their neighbors.

Work in this direction will be left to other institutions, most notably the European Commission and the OSCE. Furthermore, it would seem that similar problems will not affect cooperation with the European Union that these nations have with the framework of the “Eastern Partnership”.

This was indirectly touched upon by the Commissioner for External Relations and European Neighbourhood Policy Benita Ferrero-Waldner while in Yerevan during her recent trip to the region.

She hinted that it was up to Armenia to resolve her domestic democracy issues, as well as the Nagorno-Karabakh issue, by way of “mutual cooperation” and “mutual compromise” and that these problems wouldn’t be able to impede the realization of the Partnership program Perhaps the question remains unclear that, at least in the long-term, what are the prospects of the Partnership program.

It is clear that the European Union is attempting to tackle the quandary it faces. On the one hand, Brussels understands that in the recent past the post-Soviet region was more the zone of influence of Washington and Moscow and that Brussels was kept out of local developments and that the time has come to have a more active role in the life of these states.

On the other hand, Europe is suffering from what is labeled “expansionist exhaustion”. In the short-term at least, Europe doesn’t wish to incorporate new members into its union. Taking these two factors into account, Brussels has decided on an interim option – closer cooperation without mentioning membership prospects.

It can’t be ruled out that in the long-term the six nations of Eastern Europe will be offered entry into the European economic community, but not into the European Union.

One of the outstanding questions is that the six states have differing economic policies and that they are moving in the direction of European integration at different speeds.

In the words of Arman Kirakosyan, Armenia’s Deputy Foreign Minister, the EU is resolving this issue, “By proposing equal possibilities to all parties in the cooperative pact while the parties themselves will decide the scope and scale of their participation.”

Perhaps, and with some justification, the “Eastern Partnership” initiative was received with the least amount of enthusiasm in the Ukraine.

The matter is that most of the Partnership’s proposals had already been implemented, or were in the process of being so, in EU relations with the Ukraine. Whilst welcoming the initiative, Ukraine stressed the necessity to differentiate itself based on individual desires, objectives and possibilities.

Ukraine declared that it is ready to support and utilize the opportunities presented by the “Eastern Partnership”, “only if the new policy of the EU isn’t interpreted as an alternative to potential EU membership, but rather if it brings Ukraine closer to this objective.”

It is noteworthy that the eastern members of the EU, that are more interested in seeing Brussels expand eastwards, are inclined towards the establishment of greater privileged relations between the EU and Ukraine, Moldova and even Belarus.

Combined with the prospect of full membership. The Polish foreign minister specifically advised these three nations to follow the example of the Visegrad Group, an alliance  formed by Poland,  the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Hungary for the purposes of regional cooperation and furthering their European integration prior to these nations becoming members of the EU.

The prospect for such cooperation in the southern Caucasus as yet remains a dream. Therefore, the “Eastern Partnership” opens new possibilities for Armenia, Georgia and Azerbaijan.