Five Georgians think tanks prepare proposal on future strategic direction of EaP
By Levan Abramishvili
Tuesday, December 17
The document covers a wide range of topics and answers to some of the important questions related to EaP and its future, such as: how to boost economic prosperity and human capital development in the EaP while promoting sustainability? How to strengthen good governance, the rule of law and the security dimension of the EaP? And more.
The report evaluates the state of play 10 years on in the EaP countries, with a focus on Georgia. The document finds countries confronted by irregular migration and brain drain, and communities questioning the validity of the EaP amid increasing populism and Euro-skepticism – fueled by reforms’ heavy price, but also by Russian interference.
This challenge, which includes new hybrid threats and clear challenges to pro-European actors and liberal values, renders the EaP more important than ever and requires a strong response from the EU, according to the document.
It calls for renewed and targeted EU investment for not only political projects but for the material betterment of the EaP citizens. The think tanks believe that it can be achieved through investments in human capital, increasing mobility by legal migration partnerships and infrastructure development.
The study identified numerous mutually beneficial points for the EU and EaP countries that could arise through deeper engagement.
“Security cooperation, in terms of the fight against radicalization and security sector reform, as well as more proactive EU engagement in transforming protracted conflicts in the region would meet EU’s strategic security needs. Support to regional connectivity across new sectors such as ICT and, where relevant, trade and energy policies could foster job creation and sustainable development as well as much needed intra-regional cooperation in a contested and fragmented region,” reads the study.
The experts argue that going into its second decade, EaP should differentiate between the six partners and tailor incentives to their needs, as well as the format and structures of the Partnership. They vouch for the expectations of partners to be managed.
“Our experts advocate that a multi-speed approach should be instituted to respond to the ambitions of those ‘’Associated States’’ having a deeper relationship with the EU, via Association Agreements (Ukraine, Georgia, and Moldova). Such an approach can afford the EU some flexibility in pursuing alternative models of deeper relations among and with EaP countries.”
Furthermore, the paper suggests that the EU needs to diversify its activities away from recent state-centered strategies to concentrate on encouraging civil society organizations and NGOs to engage in policy development and assessment and oversight of the implementation of EaP policies.
Answering the question on balancing development with promotion of sustainability, the document states that for the EaP countries to achieve sustainable economic growth, they will need to “create the conditions which enable people to have quality jobs that stimulate the economy while not harming the environment.”
Consequently, the experts say that the EaP countries should invest in human capital and foster knowledge and skills as a way of promoting economic engagement, social inclusion and sustainable growth. “To date, achieving sustainability in this regard remains an unaccomplished task for EaP countries,” the document says.
The document identifies some of the barriers impeding further integration of the EaP and particularly AA countries into the EU. Problems related to the rule of law, the lack of an independent judiciary, high-level corruption and social hardship, all are said to continue hindering further integration, “and in some cases, these problems have become even more acute.” To overcome these obstacles, in addition to bringing about legislative and institutional changes under AA commitments, efforts to fully implement the necessary reforms need to be expanded, according to the experts.
The document also touches upon territorial conflicts, saying that they further intensify the security challenges the countries are facing.
“The EU only marginally refers to conflict management issues in its EaP policy, despite the intensity of the security dilemma and the persistence of protracted conflicts in the region,” reads the document. The experts argue that the EU has always refrained from taking an active role in the resolution of territorial disputes in the post-Soviet space due to the lack of political will to actively oppose Russia, which utilizes these conflicts to prevent the expansion of Western influence in the common neighborhood.
Another important point raised by the experts is that the EU’s inaction in terms of Georgian conflicts can be explained with the fact that conflicts in Abkhazia and South Ossetia are ethnopolitical and require reconciliation of the sides. The EU will need to gain the trust of both sides to be involved in the process of peaceful resolution of these conflicts.
“However, because the EU officially supports the principle of Georgia’s territorial integrity, a special approach to the separatist sides of the conflict is necessary to play the sophisticated role of a neutral mediator. So far, the EU cannot cope with this dilemma,” conclude the experts.
The document was prepared by the Georgian Center for Security and Development (GCSD), Georgian Foundation for Strategic and International Studies (Rondeli Foundation), Georgian Institute of Politics (GIP), Georgia's Reforms Associates(GRASS), Levan Mikeladze Foundation with the support of Open Society Georgia Foundation.