Europe must take a wider view of the future
George Soros
The Wider Europe Initiative, launched recently by the European
Commission to manage relations with its neighbours, looks great on paper. But the plan
will be doomed to obscurity if it is allowed to moulder in the European bureaucracy.
It is up to European Union members to rally behind this promising idea.
If realised, the initiative - now also called the New Neighbourhood policy - would help
shape countries on the expanded EU's eastern and southern frontiers into well-governed
states in step with EU values.
In this respect, the EU's most powerful tool of influence is the
prospect of membership. So far it has worked wonders. But the current problems with EU
enlargement make it unrealistic to hold out this prospect except to those already under
consideration: Bulgaria, Romania, Turkey and possibly a few states from the former
Yugoslavia.
No country on Europe's eastern and southern borders - from Morocco in
the south to Ukraine and Belarus in the east - is ready to join the EU. But the Wider
Europe Initiative could prepare them for closer association and, in some cases, eventual
membership.
The Wider Europe proposal, which recognises that the EU's relations
with its neighbours are inherently asymmetric, must avoid the pitfalls of the stability
pact. Even before the plan's general framework is defined, the Commission should think
about adding more substance to the action plans currently being worked on for countries
deemed top priority. Joint working groups should be set up to monitor the action plans.
The EU should use incentives to promote the democratic development of
bordering countries without seeking reciprocal concessions, incentives that could be
withdrawn if expectations are not met.
In the east, Wider Europe is Russia's backyard. The EU cannot entice
those countries with membership any time soon, whereas Russia is only too happy to lure
them into a reconstituted empire. To counteract Russia's pull, the EU must offer greater
access to Europe's common market, more favourable visa regimes, job and immigration
opportunities, and access to capital, cultural contacts and technical assistance.
Admittedly, the EU has not budgeted for spending on the Wider Europe initiative before
2007; but it can find the money if desired. Giving real life to the initiative would help
build cohesion in Europe and would offer an attractive alternative to the current US
policy of spreading democracy by military means.
I have established a network of foundations dedicated to building open
societies in countries of the former Soviet Union. They are doing on a small scale what
the Wider Europe Initiative should do on a large one. They help promote democratic
development by supporting civil society and working with governments when possible. The
less receptive the government, the more important the support of civil society becomes.
The same principle must guide the EU; non-partisan players - representatives of civil
society - should be part of every action plan.
With this in mind, the EU needs to intensify engagement in the Ukraine,
Moldova and Georgia. Elections are pending in Ukraine and Moldova, and abuses that often
accompany elections are increasing. The prospect of substantial rewards might persuade the
authorities to curb such abuses. Georgia has just undergone a peaceful revolution and
should be brought into the initiative.
While the Georgian experience is unique, it has made neighbouring
regimes nervous. They see no advantage in strengthening the rule of law and democratic
institutions. Carrots and sticks might help to convince them.
Belarus may seem beyond hope. But the outrageous behaviour of President
Alexander Lukashenko could provoke the unexpected - a change of regime. EU members
protested when Mr Lukashenko tried to sack the rector of the European Humanities
University and this, among other developments, has weakened the president's position.
Russia, meanwhile, will not foster positive change in the region. After
a chaotic period, the restored Russian state is shedding the few attributes of an open
society it had acquired. Having failed to provide effective assistance, the west can exert
little influence. The only way is to strengthen economic ties while ceasing to treat
Russia as a nascent democracy. Russia's latest incarnation underlines how the EU should be
more active in neighbouring countries where political orientation remains in the balance.
The writer is chairman of the Open Society Institute
“Financial Times”, Mar 30, 2004
http://search.ft.com/ |