Caucaz.com, Georgia
Sept 30 2005
The South Caucasus seen from Brussels: betwixt pressure and good
marks
Article published in 30/09/2005 Issue
By Anne-Marie MOURADIAN in Brussels
Translated by Michèle-Ann OKOLOTOWICZ
The European Union is getting ready to negotiate action plans with
each of the South Caucasus republics, which will allow it to
implement its new neighbourhood policy in the region. These plans are
custom-tailored to reflect the specificities of each country and to
serve as an incitement for democratic and economic reform.
The idea of the future action plans can be summarised in a nutshell:
treat each country on its own merits, by `rewarding’ those that
progress the most rapidly. But on the front of economic, legal or
social reforms, each of the three Caucasian republics differs widely.
`If in five years’ time we observe that the partner country has
progressed well, we can move on to a form of closer partnership’,
Brussels explains. No further details are supplied.
For its part, Georgia has already officially declared that its
ultimate aim is to become a fully-fledged member of the EU. Armenia,
which has always felt a European calling, has expressed the same
desire. But for the EU, the subject is not on the agenda. Its
objective for the time being is limited to stabilising a circle of
friendly countries on its boundaries.
Tbilisi’s efforts at reform are encouraged, in spite of everything
Today, Georgia is at the top of the charts of the South Caucasus
republics. The EU’s presence there is also the most visible. The
delegation of the European Commission in Tbilisi, numbering some 40
individuals, covers its smaller Yerevan sister, which is run by a
chargé d’affaires and the delegation in Baku, which will open
`shortly’. Moreover, Georgia is the only country to have benefited
from an international donors’ conference, held in Brussels.
In June 2004, during the international donors’ conference it was
co-chairing with the World Bank, in the wake of the `Revolution of
the roses’, Europe doubled its aid to Georgia, in support of the new
government.
Since then, Brussels has observed a positive evolution and a manifest
desire among its leaders to fight corruption, clean up the State
apparatus and public accounts, and to enact the rule of law.
Although the institutional structure is still slightly unstable,
improvements are visible on the political level. `This encourages us
to have an ambitious action plan for Georgia’, explains Hugues
Mingarelli, director at the European Commission for Central Asia and
the South Caucasus.
Measures implemented by the government have translated into changes
in everyday life, such as the great sweep in the police force, which
had grown accustomed since the Shevardnadze era to extorting money
from the population.
Sylvie Pantz, the French judge who from July 2004 to July 2005 headed
the European `Rule of law’ mission, is also in agreement. Titled
`Eujust Themis’, the mission, carried out at the Georgian
government’s request, constitutes a first within the framework of the
European security and defence policy.
Around ten European experts, judges and advocates-general have helped
the Georgian authorities reform the judicial system where it was the
most urgently needed, in penal and criminal law, at penitentiary
level.
`On site we found serious corruption problems with very vulnerable
judges, who are not mature, don’t stick together, are not protected,
and have no sense of professional pride. I have had to swallow a lot
of guff’, explains Sylvie Pantz. `But we brought in ideas on how to
create a new kind of judge. The mission was a great success. The
Georgians were very interested in our advice and expertise. They have
achieved a great deal within a very short timeframe. All they need
now is assistance to implement the new strategy.’
The economic outlook is not so optimistic. The country lacks natural
resources and public coffers are close to empty. The fallout from
activity from the Tbilisi-Baku-Çeyhan pipeline could translate into a
significant rise in GDP, but economic difficulties are aggravated by
the instability linked to the question of the two secessionist
republics of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. Brussels notes that as long
as these two problems are not resolved, it will be difficult to
concentrate on the economy.
European experts, under the authority of Heili Talvitie, EU Special
Representative for the Southern Caucasus, are examining ways to help
the Georgians manage their border with Russia and to train border
guards.
In order not to upset Russian sensitivities, the Europeans are based
not on the border but at the more discrete location of Tbilisi, from
where they carry out return trips.
Armenia has been congratulated… but there are misgivings
>From the political reform standpoint, the situation in Armenia is far
from ideal and Brussels emphasises that Armenian leaders have a long
way to go to come close to European standards, and it hopes that the
forthcoming elections will be more democratic than the previous ones.
However, the Europeans have complimented the country for its very
good economic performance. `Armenia’s leaders have undertaken
structural reforms in many sectors and have been able to stabilise
the country’s financial situation’, notes Hugues Mingarelli.
In spite of its land-locked position and the blockade imposed by
Turkey, the Armenian economy has seen its GDP progress spectacularly,
rising from 3.3% in 1999, to 12.9% in 2002, and to 13.9% in 2003. But
the economy still remains in the hands of `clans’ and a significant
proportion of the population does not have access to the growing
riches.
Brussels also hopes that the Armenian authorities will be `flexible’
in negotiations on Nagorno-Karabakh, reminding Armenia in the
meantime that the Turkish blockade is a heavy price to pay.
The EU is not planning to increase pressure on Turkey to open its
borders. Likewise, the denial of the Armenian genocide by the Turkish
state is not considered to be a human rights issue. Brussels
restricts itself to calling on Ankara to seek reconciliation with
Armenia. And to Armenians who invoke the duty of remembrance,
European officials generally point out `the difference between
`little’ Armenia and the geostrategic weight of its Turkish
neighbour’.
Another subject under discussion is the nuclear power station of
Medzamor, which supplies 40% of the country’s electricity but whose
venerable age makes it dangerous. Europe has said it is ready to
organize a donors’ conference and to put 100 million dollars on the
table if Yerevan commits itself to a date for the definitive closure
of the station. `But the Armenians do not want to replace cheaper
nuclear power with thermal or hydroelectric energy which would be
more costly for their economy. They have asked us to pay for the
difference but we cannot on the one hand help them to develop
alternative energy sources and on the other pay their surplus costs.
They are asking for too much’, Brussels says.
On 23 September however, Yerevan let it be known that it intends to
close down Medzamor and to build a new plant with the help of the
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).
Moreover, the construction of the gas pipeline between Iran and
Armenia should cover, upon its completion in 2007, a third of
Armenia’s gas requirements. The EU has not been involved in financing
the pipeline, explaining that `the Armenians did not ask for any help
and we do not want to do anything which might upset the Americans too
much’. However, the Europeans are backing Yerevan’s denunciation of
the project by Turkey, Georgia and Azerbaidjan to build a new
Kars-Tbilisi-Baku railway designed to circumvent Armenia. Brussels
believes the new railway would be surplus to requirement since a rail
link already exists between Kars and Gumri (Armenia), which is
currently closed due to the Turkish blockade.
Baku is feeling the heat, but is less dependent on European financing
Regarding political and economic reform, Azerbaijan has a long way to
go to catch up. The November general elections will constitute a
decisive test. The EU is attempting to exert pressure on the
authorities for them to guarantee democratic elections, to take steps
allowing opposition and media to no longer feel threatened and
equally ensure press independence.
The European Commission sees President Ilham Aliyev as `reasonable’.
`He wants to play the democratic card and is moving in the right
direction. He’s trying to improve the electoral law somewhat and has
an action plan for human rights. However, Ilham Aliyev is not alone
and must take into account his entourage’.
The EU is insisting that the government steps up its fight against
its still endemic corruption and wants it to use its oil revenue to
fight poverty and strengthen social cohesion. It has invited the
authorities to diversify the economy by developing sectors other than
oil and gas. A Special Fund has been created to that effect but
progress is still slow in coming.
`Within the framework of its action plan, Baku has to expect strong
pressure from us’, Brussels says, recognising that thanks to its
energy resources Azerbaijan has greater room for manoeuvre than the
other two South Caucasian republics. Neither does it share their
financial constraints. `Azeris are far more relaxed’, notes Hugues
Mingarelli. `They are less dependent on European largesse than
Georgia and Armenia’.
http://www.caucaz.com/home_eng/breve_contenu.php?id=190