Georgia and Europe. A short guide. CEPS Special Report September 2016

The new relationship between Georgia and the European Union is the focus of this accessible, non-technical short guide. This relationship is based on a complex treaty: an Association Agreement with extensive political, economic and legal content, signed in 2014 and entered fully into force on 1 July 2016. The Agreement includes a Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area (DCFTA). This booklet is a summary of a longer Handbook entitled Deepening EU-Georgian Relations: What, why and how?, which explains the contents of the treaty in much greater depth. The Handbook, like the present booklet, is also freely available at www.3dcftas.eu in both English and Georgian. Both publications follow the same chapter structure, which allows readers who wish to dig deeper into the subject to readily find their way in the longer Handbook

Deepening EU–Georgian Relations: What, why and how? CEPS Special Report, 23 August 2016

The signing of the Association Agreement and DCFTA between Georgia and the European Union in 2014 was a strategic political act to deepen the realisation of Georgia’s ‘European choice’. Of all the EU’s eastern neighbours, Georgia has distinguished itself by pushing ahead in the years since the Rose Revolution of 2003 with the most radical economic liberalisation and reform agenda. It has notably succeeded in reducing corruption and establishing a highly favourable business climate. The Association Agreement and DCFTA thus build on a most promising base. The purpose of this Handbook is to make the legal content of the Association Agreement clearly comprehensible. It covers all the significant political and economic chapters of the Agreement, and in each case explains the meaning of the commitments made by Georgia and the challenges posed by their implementation. A unique reference source for this historic act, this Handbook is intended for professional readers, namely officials, parliamentarians, diplomats, business leaders, lawyers, consultants, think tanks, civil society organisations, university teachers, trainers, students and journalists

Cyprus

Die Verfasserinnen fragen nach den Auswirkungen der Europäisierung auf den Zypernkonflikt. Seit 1974 hat die UNO immer ausgefeiltere Vorschläge für eine Föderation mit zwei Volksgruppen und zwei regionalen Einheiten vorgelegt. Die Verhandlungen zwischen den beiden Konfliktparteien zogen sich über Jahrzehnte hin und blieben schließlich ergebnislos, da jede Seite auf ihrer Position beharrte. Mit dem Antrag Zyperns auf EU-Mitgliedschaft wurde die EU in den 1990er Jahren zu einer Schlüsselgröße in der Entwicklung des Konflikts. Zyperns EU-Beitritt und entsprechende Aspirationen der Türkei führten dazu, dass beide Seiten Europäisierung und EU-isierung gleich setzen. Damit ergeben sich für Zypern zwei Dimensionen, die zum einen die Effekte, die die EU als politischer Rahmen der Bemühungen um eine Konfliktlösung ausübt, und zum anderen die Auswirkungen des EU-Beitritts auf die Konfliktparteien betreffen. Letztgenannter Aspekt der Europäisierung hat intendierte und nicht intendierte Folgen, die sich wahrscheinlich auf zukünftige Entwicklungen im östlichen Mittelmeerraum auswirken werden. (ICEÜbers)'This chapter reviews the impact of Europeanization on the Cyprus conflict. Since 1974, the UN has developed increasingly detailed proposals for a bizonal, bi-communal federation. But throughout the decades of failed negotiations the main parties have essentially stuck to their negotiating positions. In the 1990s, with Cyprus' application for EU membership, the EU became a key external determinant of the evolution of the conflict. Indeed, because of Cyprus' accession process and Turkey's own aspirations to join the Union, the parties to the conflict equate Europeanization with EU-ization. EU-ization in Cyprus has two dimensions: the impact of the EU as a framework on conflict resolution efforts, and the impact of the accession process on the parties in conflict. The latter dimension of Europeanization has had both intended and unintended effects, which in turn are likely to impinge on future developments in the eastern Mediterranean.' (author's abstract

Eastern Partnership policy beyond 2020: advances and omissions in a vast agenda. CEPS Commentary 14 April 2020

The Joint Communication on the Eastern Partnership (EaP)1 published in March offers a broad array of policy orientations but relatively little operational specificity. This drafting is presumably intended to be acceptable to all six EaP states. The lack of reference to the joint request of the three states with Association Agreements (AAs) – Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine – to open a ‘quadrilogue’ with the EU to treat matters of common concern to them, and which are not relevant or plausible in relation to the other EaP states, is a glaring omission that could still be corrected at the EaP summit on 18 June. This summit should also agree on EaP policy beyond 2020, with the partner states, and include the many transnational issues worthy of quadrilateral consultations, such as how revisions of major EU policies (for instance, on energy, climate and competition) may affect the associated states

Eastern Partnership policy beyond 2020: Advances and omissions in a vast agenda. CEPS Policy Contribution 14 Apr 2020.

With the bold title EasternPartnership policy beyond 2020: Reinforcing Resilience – an Eastern Partnershipthat delivers for all, the recent EU Joint Communication offers a broad array of policy orientations but little operational specificity, find the authors of this commentary. Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine – each with EU Association Agreements, requested a ‘quadrilogue’ with the EU to deal with matters of common concern to them but not the other EaP states. The fact that this request was not granted is a glaring omission from the Communication, but one that could still be corrected at the EaP summit on June 18th. The summit should also agree the policy direction of the EU and the Eastern partner states beyond 2020, and include the many transnational issues worthy of quadrilateral consultations. Among these issues is how the revision of major EU policies, such as those on energy, climate and competition, may affect the associated states

Balkan and Eastern European Comparisons: Building a New Momentum for the European integration of the Balkan and Eastern European associated states. CEPS Policy Contribution 25 Feb 2021.

The EU created the Eastern Partnership (EaP) over a decade ago, opening up new possibilities for growth and investment for the six partner countries: Georgia, Moldova, Ukraine, Belarus, Armenia and Azerbaijan. In 2014, Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine, known as the EU-associated Trio, signed association agreements (AAs), which since then have helped them to advance further with governance reforms. The AAs have provided for an ambitious and wide-ranging policy dialogue and cooperation with the EU, including deep and comprehensive free trade agreements that are the most advanced integration instruments of the EU to date. This courageous step by the EU has opened a new chapter in the relationship with our eastern neighbours, helping them to commit to comprehensive governance reforms as well as policy dialogue. The EU East Neighbourhood region has seen more than a decade of conflict – Russia at war with Georgia, then with Ukraine, its eastern territories occupied, and Crimea annexed. The EU and the wider global community responded by developing a comprehensive strategy to assist reforms in Ukraine but fell short of wider-reaching policy proposals for deeper integration with the EU. Nonetheless, the most advanced countries of the EaP have embarked on a path of difficult and painful policy reforms in such sensitive sectors as justice, budgets, land, pensions, state-owned enterprises, education and social policy. Despite both hidden and open wars with Russia and the continuous negative hybrid influences, illicit financial flows and corrupt practices inherited from Soviet times and coming from Putin’s regime, the EU-associated Trio has achieved a lot. The exemplary progress of these countries has brought more stability and prosperity to the region. Moreover, in the first five years of association, the Trio has been able to catch up with the countries of the Western Balkans, which already had an EU membership perspective as a result of the resolute EU policy launched in the region nearly ten years ago. Now, the EaP region is approaching a new wave of changes. Constant geopolitical shifts have culminated in the democratic changes we are observing in the eastern neighbourhood today. It is today that the EU must take the next brave geopolitical step. It is today, when the people in the EU’s eastern neighbourhood – in the middle of the European continent – are demanding change, democracy and respect for human rights, starting with events in Belarus and Russia. It is today that our policy has to grow in ambition if the EU wants to remain geopolitical for the next decade

Europeanization and secessionist conflicts: concepts and theories

Die Verfasser fragen nach dem Potenzial der EU zur Lösung der Konflikte in den geteilten Staaten an ihrer Peripherie. Eine dritte Governance-Ebene schafft neue institutionelle Optionen einer Konfliktlösung und schafft neue Anreize, die zu einer Redefinition der Interessen und Identitäten der an Sezessionskonflikten beteiligten Parteien führen können. Unter Europäisierung wird ein Prozess verstanden, der von europäischen Institutionen - vor allem der EU - eingeleitet und unterstützt wird, indem das Endergebnis eines Konflikts mit einer gewissen Integration der Konfliktparteien in europäische Strukturen verknüpft wird. Konditionalität und Sozialisation als Konfliktlösungsmechanismen der Europäisierung können nicht intendierte Folgen zeitigen, die das Ziel der Konfliktlösung unterminieren können. (ICEÜbers)'This chapter explores the potential of the EU to bring about conflict settlement and conflict resolution in the divided states on its periphery through its multi-level framework and capacity for foreign policy action. A third level of governance provides new institutional options for conflict settlement and creates new incentives that may lead to a redefinition of the interests and identities of the parties involved in a secessionist conflict. Europeanization is defined as a process which is activated and encouraged by European institutions, primarily the European Union, by linking the final outcome of the conflict to a certain degree of integration of the parties involved in it into European structures. The Europeanization mechanisms of conditionality and socialization aimed at conflict settlement may have unintended effects which can undermine the objective of conflict resolution.' (author's abstract

The Struggle for Good Governance in Eastern Europe. CEPS Paperback, 27 September 2018

This volume forms part of a wider project on the European Union’s Association Agreements (AAs) and Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Areas (DCFTAs) with Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine. These agreements serve as the cornerstone of the EU’s ambitious strategy to help anchor these three states into what they themselves call their “European choice”. They are comprehensive in scope and content, with an equal weight attached to both political and economic aspects. This broad landscape of issues has been analysed systematically in three Handbooks, now appearing in their second editions.1 The present volume picks up on the key political aspects in greater depth, and does so with a comparative approach taking all three cases together. The task has been to go through the critical determinants of, and obstacles hindering ‘good governance’, including constitutional aspects and hazards for the process such as the oligarchs, pervasive corruption and the unique geo-political situation in which the three states find themselves in between the EU and Russia. As with the three ‘Handbooks’, this present volume was produced by research teams from four independent think tanks, CEPS in Brussels, Reformatics in Tbilisi, Expert-Grup in Chisinau and the Institute for Economic Research and Policy Consulting in Kyiv. While much of the content of the Handbook is undoubtedly rather dry, we hope that the reader will appreciate the lighter touch in the artwork of Constantin Sunnerberg, which graces the introductory page of each chapter

Cyprus / Chapter 2 of Europeanization and Conflict Resolution: Case Studies from the European Periphery

This chapter reviews the impact of Europeanization on the Cyprus conflict. Since 1974, the UN has developed increasingly detailed proposals for a bi-zonal, bi-communal federation. But throughout the decades of failed negotiations the main parties have essentially stuck to their negotiating positions. In the 1990s, with Cyprus' application for EU membership, the EU became a key external determinant of the evolution of the conflict. Indeed, because of Cyprus' accession process and Turkey's own aspirations to join the Union, the parties to the conflict equate Europeanization with EU-ization. EU-ization in Cyprus has two dimensions: the impact of the EU as a framework on conflict resolution efforts, and the impact of the accession process on the parties in conflict. The latter dimension of Europeanization has had both intended and unintended effects, which in turn are likely to impinge on future developments in the eastern Mediterranean