Political and Legal Perspectives of the EU Eastern Partnership Policy PDF
Preview Political and Legal Perspectives of the EU Eastern Partnership Policy
Tanel Kerikmäe · Archil Chochia Editors Political and Legal Perspectives of the EU Eastern Partnership Policy Political and Legal Perspectives of the EU Eastern Partnership Policy ThiSisaFMBlankPage Tanel Kerikma¨e (cid:129) Archil Chochia Editors Political and Legal Perspectives of the EU Eastern Partnership Policy Editors TanelKerikma¨e ArchilChochia TallinnLawSchool TallinnLawSchool TallinnUniversityofTechnology TallinnUniversityofTechnology Tallinn,Estonia Tallinn,Estonia ISBN978-3-319-27381-5 ISBN978-3-319-27383-9 (eBook) DOI10.1007/978-3-319-27383-9 LibraryofCongressControlNumber:2016930826 SpringerChamHeidelbergNewYorkDordrechtLondon ©SpringerInternationalPublishingSwitzerland2016 Thisworkissubjecttocopyright.AllrightsarereservedbythePublisher,whetherthewholeorpartof the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilarmethodologynowknownorhereafterdeveloped. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publicationdoesnotimply,evenintheabsenceofaspecificstatement,thatsuchnamesareexempt fromtherelevantprotectivelawsandregulationsandthereforefreeforgeneraluse. Thepublisher,theauthorsandtheeditorsaresafetoassumethattheadviceandinformationinthis book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained hereinorforanyerrorsoromissionsthatmayhavebeenmade. Printedonacid-freepaper Springer International Publishing AG Switzerland is part of Springer Science+Business Media (www.springer.com) Preface Year 2015,sixyearsafterlaunchingtheEU’sEasternPartnership(EaP) policyin 2009,canbecharacterisedasyetanothercrucialyearintheimplementationofthat policy. InMay2015,theRigaEasternPartnershipSummit—EaPSurvivalSummit,asit was also sometimes called—took place, which was to take stock of the EaP initiative in the context of tremendously changed post-2013 security political environment. Also, a broader European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) review was launchedinMarch2015.AstheHighRepresentativeoftheEuropeanUnionforthe ForeignAffairsandSecurityPolicyFedericaMogheriniunderlinedwhileintroduc- ingtheENPreview:TheEUhasavitalinterestinbuildingstrongpartnershipswith itsneighbours.Recentdevelopmentsintheregionhaveincreasedthechallengeswe allface:fromeconomicpressurestoirregularmigrationandsecuritythreats.We needastrongpolicytobeabletotackletheseissues.Wealsoneedtounderstand betterthedifferentaspirations,valuesandinterestsofourpartners.Thisiswhatthe review is about if we are to have a robust political relationship between our neighboursandus. Reaching these objectives is without any doubt a very difficult task. And there aremanyreasonstobelievethattheoutcomeofthereviewwillbe,toalargeextent, influencedbythecrisisinUkraineanddeterioratingsituationintheSouth.Before 2013, the entire ENP policy was very much based on the philosophy of enlarge- ment, which used the assumption of EU’s irresistibility and attractiveness. Along withchangedenvironment,thelatterhasbeenpushedbackbythenewconcernsfor securityandstabilityintheneighbourhood.Basedonthoseconsiderations,funda- mental questions have been asked in the ENP review document about the further levelandinstrumentsofcooperation. The main question deriving for the EaP within the context of ENP review ishowtomakethepolicytrulyefficientinthecontextofincreasingdifferentiation between the Eastern Partners. Here also the questions about keeping the balance between values and interests become relevant: how to avoid the lowering of the level of ambitions of the policy, how to live up to the principle of conditionality v vi Preface (socalledmore-for-moreprinciple)underthecircumstanceswherethe28Member States are unlikely to find compromise on the membership perspective and how, without giving up on EU interests, to develop meaningful relationships with those that do not want to have a closer integration with the EU. After all, EaP is first and foremost a framework for developing bilateral relations with six respective countries—Ukraine, Georgia, Moldova, Armenia, Azerbaijan and Belarus. And accordingly, the EU’s EaP initiative should also be looked at rather as a tool, not as an ultimate goal. The main aim is the well-being, stability anddemocratisationofEaPcountriesandtherebymakingtheneighbouringregion moreprosperousandstable. There is a growing differentiation between EaP countries regarding their ambitions for their relations with the EU. There are the three countries that have stated their wish to become members of the EU and the other three, which formanyreasons have chosenverydifferentpaths.Thelitmus testintheforesee- able future for those countries that have concluded the association agreements will be the actual and efficient implementation of those agreements, i.e. the actual achievements by the EaP countries themselves in reforming their societies and economies. Even though the main burden here lies with the partner countries themselves, this will also be the yardstick by which the EaP policy and EU’s commitmentwillbemeasured. Let us hope that the ENP review will provide us with some additional, more flexible tools that would help reach those aims. The ongoing review process and different discussion platforms tackling the challenges related to the reshaping of the policy are of utmost importance. The current publication, launched by Estonian scholars, which is a compilation of articles by well-known international authors who examine the political and legal perspectives of the EU EaP policy, isavaluablecontributiontothisend. Tallinn,Estonia MargeMardisalu-Kahar Contents DimensionsandImplicationsofEasternPartnershipPolicy: Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 TanelKerikma¨e TheEasternPartnershipProgramme:IsPragmaticRegional FunctionalismWorkingforaContemporaryPoliticalEmpire?. . . . . . . 7 VladVernygora,DavidRamiroTroiti~no,andSigridVa¨stra TowardsaNewEuropeanNeighbourhoodPolicy(ENP): WhatBenefitsoftheDeepandComprehensiveFreeTrade Agreements(DCFTAs)forSharedProsperityandSecurity?. . . . . . . . . 23 TatjanaMuravskaandAlexandreBerlin InformationSocietyGoesEast:ICTPolicyintheEU’sEastern PartnershipCooperationFramework. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 OlgaBaturaandTatjanaEvas DemocratisatingtheEasternPartnershipintheDigitalAge: ChallengesandOpportunitiesofPoliticalAssociationBeyond theLanguageofOfficialTexts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 YuriMisnikov ExportingGoodGovernanceViae-Governance:Estonian e-GovernanceSupporttoEasternPartnershipCountries. . . . . . . . . . . 81 KatrinNyman-MetcalfandTarasRepytskyi EasternPartnershipandFamilyLaw. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101 KristiJoamets MappingtheMigrationIssues:EaPPolicyasaToolforRegulation. . . 119 LehteRoots vii viii Contents TheEuropeanUnionandProtectionofEnvironmentinEastern PartnershipCountries. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137 HamedAlavi ImplementationofAssociationAgreementsBetweenthe EUandUkraine,MoldovaandGeorgia:Legaland ConstitutionalChallenges. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . 153 RomanPetrov TheUkrainianCrisisasaChallengefortheEasternPartnership. . . . . 167 EvhenTsybulenkoandSergeyPakhomenko EuropeanisationofPrivateLawinUkraine:Comparisons intheFieldofLawofObligations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181 ThomasHoffmann ChangeofPowerandItsInfluenceonCountry’sEuropeanization Process.CaseStudy:Georgia. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197 ArchilChochiaandJohannaPopjanevski Georgia’sRightto‘EuropeanDream’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211 DaliGabelaia EuropeanSelf-RegulationsMechanism:TheCaseStudyforGeorgia. . . 227 MamukaAndguladze EuropeonRomanian-SpeakingTVintheRepublicofMoldova. . . . . . 247 OnoriuCola˘cel Baltic–RussianInnovationCooperationintheContextofEUEastern Partnership. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 257 EuniceOmololaOlaniyiandGunnarKlausPrause Dimensions and Implications of Eastern Partnership Policy: Introduction TanelKerikma¨e An official definition for the core theme of the given book has been given by the EuropeanUnionExternalAction: The Eastern Partnership (EaP) is a joint initiative of the EU and its Eastern European partners:Armenia,Azerbaijan,Belarus,Georgia,theRepublicofMoldovaandUkraine. Launchedin2009attheEUPragueSummit,itbringsourEasternEuropeanpartnerscloser totheEU.TheEasternPartnershipsupportsandencouragesreformsintheEaPcountries forthebenefitoftheircitizens.1 We have to admit that the posed objectives and aims of the EaP are not in compliance with the actuality. The success stories are clouded by frustration, mismanagement,failures,unexpectedobstacles,blameputoneachother.Although the whole European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) is currently in repairs, the achievement of intentions requires lots of resources and political will from both sides.Thisvolumeisbasedoncurrentlessonslearnedand,thereforenotdedicated tocountry-specificstudiesofBelarus,AzerbaijanorArmenia,as,inthecontextof theEaP,thereisnotmuchtocelebrate.Thisfactispresentedbyseveral scholars, e.g. by Pawel Dariusz Wis´newski from Carnegie Centre.2 Critical view is also presentedbyAdamHugfromtheUK-basedForeignPolicyCentre,whoclaimsthat “the EaP was transformed by events from a broadly technocratic exercise into a geopoliticalfaultlinebetweenEurope(andthewiderWest)andRussia”.3Surely, the “Russian factor” cannot be ignored when delving into the analysis of EaP strategies. Fierce critical comments by Moscow are further supported by inter- national independent and “independent” experts. For example, Dr Heinrich 1http://eeas.europa.eu/eastern/index_en.htm. 2Wis´newski(2013). 3Hug(2015). T.Kerikma¨e(*) TallinnUniversityofTechnology,TallinnLawSchool,Tallinn,Estonia e-mail:[email protected] ©SpringerInternationalPublishingSwitzerland2016 1 T.Kerikma¨e,A.Chochia(eds.),PoliticalandLegalPerspectivesoftheEUEastern PartnershipPolicy,DOI10.1007/978-3-319-27383-9_1
The list of books you might like
