|
RUSSIA-EU RELATIONS
KONSTANTIN KOSACHEV,
Chairman of the State Duma's International Committee
RUSSIA MADE NO CONCESSIONS TO EU ON ANY PRINCIPAL ISSUES
The relationships between Europe and Russia are of current interest for evident reasons. For Russia May can be called a month of Europe. It is due to the 60-year anniversary of victory in the World War II, the Russia-European Union Summit that took place in Moscow on May 10, and the Council of Europe Summit that will take place on May 16-17, in which Russia is going to participate.
The decision to celebrate Victory Day in such way as an international event was successful. Those who did not come to this celebration are very few. It is evident that their absence told on this celebration atmosphere by no means.
Even those European leaders who traditionally take other views about the World War II history but who visited Moscow were self-composed and they refrained from categorical judgments. I think that it testifies to the fact that such European judgments are very marginal and they are not supported by serious political circles.
As for the fifteenth Russia-EU Summit, the expectations that were in the press concerning possible breakthroughs in Moscow were too high. Breakthroughs were not prepared initially. They could not occur and did not occur. The Summit proved to be effective since the decisions to be made in the Summit were made in exact accordance with the existing plans. I mean the approval of four Road Maps.
It is necessary to say that in the run-up to the Russia-EU Summit, during bringing the Road Maps to the final condition I came to realize that hard time frame as well as the plans of the parties to make decisions only in one package could result in the fact that Russia would lose ground on principal questions. Summing the Summit results up I can satisfyingly note that no concessions were made on any principle questions on that the European Union tried the concessions from Russia.
As an example I mention two negotiation positions. The first one concerns the EU intention to more closely get into the format of settlement of some conflicts within the CIS and this way to replace the existing formats. I remind you that with Transdniestr, Nagorno Karabakh and South Ossetia it is OSCE and with Abkhazia it is UN.
For the time being the EU does not take part in any of those conflict settlement processes immediately. Evidently our partners aimed at breaking that situation. The Russia’s approach was our readiness to assist to settle the conflicts in any ways. But we will be ready to do it only when we see the principal novelty of joining EU or other participants to the corresponding processes.
Until that and when we just hear about substitution of one body for another and that the process is possible only in this way the corresponding decisions will not be made and those were not made at the Summit.
The second decision rejected at the Summit is EU efforts to lift payment for the use of Russian air space, the so-called trans-Siberian flights. Neither in Road Maps nor in other agreement accepted at the Summit meeting I did not see any specific decisions that would promote this matter more rapidly. The time frame is determined by the year of 2013. I believe that this position is invariable.
Of course, all of us were interested whether the bilateral documents, in particular the boundary treaties with Latvia and Estonia would be signed by Russia and the countries-members of the EU in the context of the Russia-EU Summit. I am convinced that Russia’s decision not to sign such treaty with Latvia is the only possible reaction to Latvia’s actions that are absolutely unacceptable for Russia meanwhile Latvia tried to accompany that signing with the unilateral declaration on the preservation of territorial claims to Russia.
It is necessary to say that at all previous stages of preparation for the treaty signing, indeed at all levels, the executive and legislative branches, we did not receive the information about the fact that such declaration is being prepared. Its addition was an eye-opener to Latvian leadership.
Anyway, now the situation is not advantageous for Russia. We showed full readiness to sign this document without any exemptions or reservations. I am sure that Latvia’s territorial claims to Russia are unacceptable both for EU and Russia. At a minimum we expect the corresponding assessment and as a maximum clear comprehensive actions from Brussels to make Riga lift the proposal on acceptance of such unilateral declaration.
As for Estonia, we also have no information about the fact that similar actions can be taken. Now we are ready to sign the corresponding document on May 18 in Moscow. If at the last moment something is added Russia’s reaction will be similar to the reaction to Latvia’s actions.
The forthcoming Council of Europe Summit is the third one in the Organization history. President of Russia Boris Yeltsin took part in the first and the second Summits in 1993 and 1997. At first he represented Russia as the country-candidate then as the Council-Europe member.
The present Summit could do a real breakthrough in this Organization destiny. But it does not appear that it will do so. The Council of Europe problem is the fact that recently this Organization stopped being engaged in any matters but human rights, democracy and law supremacy altogether.
Those subjects are of importance for any state-member of the Council of Europe including Russia. But we believe that the Council should play much wider part in common European processes. It comprises humanitarian cooperation, cooperation in education, culture. It is necessary to develop ways to counteract new challenges and threats.
As a spokesman of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe I took active part in developing proposals for the third Summit. Some of them were supported by the Council executive bodies. In particular, three new conventions initiated by some countries including Russia will be opened for signing.
This convention is about laundering, uncovering and exempting incomes received illegally and allocated to finance terrorism. The second one is about terrorism prevention and the third one is about human traffic prevention. All of the three conventions concern the counteraction to new challenges and threats.
We see a response from the Council of Europe in regard to Russia’s disquietudes. But, unfortunately, that response is limited. We think that the political declaration, the plan of actions to be accepted by the Council of Europe have no principal ideas about a new part of the Council in the changed world and Europe.
Russia is interested in the Council of Europe as in a powerful, independent and dynamically developing Organization that would not be influenced or, more than that, controlled by any other European organization. Now the European Union comprises the majority (25 of 46) members of the Council of Europe. It tells on the Organization activity where sometimes it is difficult for us to change the decisions that have been made in another place.
The text is based on the address of Konstantin Kosachev in the press conference “Results of the Russia-EU Summit and the forthcoming Summit of the Council of Europe” on May 12, 2005.
|
