What is the European Union\u2019s impact on internal devel\u00adop\u00adments in Ukraine since the launch of the European Neigh\u00adbourhood Policy (ENP)? Has ENP made a difference in Ukraine or has it largely failed? On Monday 5 October 2009 several experts from Berlin-based think tanks, univer\u00adsities and political founda\u00adtions came together at the premises of the Institut f\u00fcr Europ\u00e4ische Politik (IEP) to discuss these questions and the corre\u00adspondent research project of Iryna Solonenko, Director of European Programme, Renais\u00adsance Foundation, Kyiv. The expert workshop was part of the Study Programme on European Security (SPES), which is conducted by IEP and supported by the Volkswagen Foundation, and was designed so as to contribute to Solonenko\u2019s research stay in Berlin.
\nAfter a short presen\u00adtation of the research project, Dr. Susan Stewart, researcher at the German Institute for Security and Inter\u00adna\u00adtional Affairs (SWP), Berlin and Prof. Dr. Alina Mungiu-Pippidi, Professor of Democracy Studies at the Hertie School of Gover\u00adnance, Berlin commented Solonenko\u2019s paper.
\nAs an intro\u00adduction, Dr. Susan Stewart stressed that Solonenko\u2019s paper is an important contri\u00adbution because it goes beyond current studies in that it analyses the EU\u2019s impact not only on the Ukrainian political elite but also on civil society and bureau\u00adcracy showing existing dynamics on each level. Taking a closer look at the EU support of civil society Stewart empha\u00adsised the tendency to focus on the promotion of NGOs and thus on the devel\u00adopment of a civil society elite. Solonenko confirmed this obser\u00advation for the case of Ukraine by identi\u00adfying a cleavage between the civil society at large and a very small and active group of Europeanized NGOs. Concerning Ukraine\u2019s impact on Russia, Stewart advocated a rather critical point of view and contested Solonenko\u2019s argument. In her eyes, the assumption that a democ\u00adra\u00adtizing Ukraine will cause a domino effect with conse\u00adquences for the Russian political system is disputable. Similarly, it is doubtful whether the EU would put pressure on Russia as this might jeopardize EU-Russia relations.<\/p>\n
Prof. Dr. Alina Mungiu-Pippidi approved Solonenko\u2019s empirical findings by stating that the ENP is a very helpful tool in promoting civil society. However, the EU is hardly having any impact on political parties and elites. Mungiu-Pippidi proceeded by comparing the reform process in Ukraine to the one in Central and Eastern Europe prior to EU accession. First of all, in contrast to the Central and Eastern European countries, there is no public consensus over the benefits of EU integration in Ukraine. Second, the greatest changes in Central and Eastern Europe took place before the countries had been invited to join the EU and thus at a similar stage at which Ukraine finds itself today. This obser\u00advation casts doubt on the efficiency of condi\u00adtion\u00adality, a mechanism used by the EU in its enlargement and neigh\u00adbourhood policies whose effects are contro\u00adver\u00adsially discussed in academic circles. According to Mungiu-Pippidi, the reform processes in Central and Eastern Europe were not under\u00adtaken due to EU incen\u00adtives but driven by a domestic will for transformation.
\nThe comments were followed by an intense discussion that touched upon several issues. One major aspect was the EU support to civil society in its Eastern neigh\u00adbourhood. The experts stated almost unani\u00admously that the major contri\u00adbution of the EU is not so much the use of instru\u00adments and specific programmes but simply being present in Ukraine at all and acting as an ally. What is considered as problematic, however, is how the Ukrainian population perceives the EU\u2019s attempts to promote a bottom-up approach to democ\u00adra\u00adti\u00adzation. As Solonenko put it, many civil society actors do not seize existing oppor\u00adtu\u00adnities as they are often not aware of them. Moreover, there is no sense of urgency to complement the cooper\u00adation on an official state level with civic partic\u00adi\u00adpation in EU projects.<\/p>\n
The experts also discussed Ukraine\u2019s allies within the EU. Poland, Lithuania, Estonia, and the Scandi\u00adnavian countries were identified as supporters, whereas the Nether\u00adlands, Spain, and Portugal were mentioned as opponents of Ukraine\u2019s accession to the EU. Inter\u00adest\u00adingly, while some EU member states are rather passive when it comes to promote Ukraine\u2019s membership perspective, the very same countries support Ukraine\u2019s Europeanization through concrete programmes. This behaviour might however be traced back to economic interests in the Ukrainian market rather than to altru\u00adistic motives.<\/p>\n
Subse\u00adquent to a very fruitful discussion Mariella Falkenhain, project coordi\u00adnator of the Study Programme on European Security, stressed that the format of expert workshops is going to be continued in the framework of the study programme since it opens up a space for an informal exchange of points of views and leads to highly inter\u00adesting insights for all participants.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
What is the European Union\u2019s impact on internal devel\u00adop\u00adments in Ukraine since the launch of the European Neigh\u00adbourhood Policy (ENP)? Has ENP made a difference in Ukraine or has it largely failed? On Monday 5 October 2009 several experts from \u2026<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":833,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"wp_typography_post_enhancements_disabled":false},"categories":[35],"tags":[],"yoast_head":"\n