Complete Protocol

134th Bergedorf Round Table The Black Sea Between the EU and Russia: Security, Energy, Democracy June 23–25, 2006, Odessa CONTENTS Picture Documentation 1 Protocol Participants 20 Summary 21 Welcome 23 I. Where Does the Black Sea Region Belong ? 24 1. Is There a Black Sea Identity ? 24 2. Does the Black Sea Belong to Europe ? 30 II. Challenges in the Region 33 1. Energy 33 2. Frozen Conflicts 36 3. Kosovo as a Precedent ? 41 4. Organized Crime 46 III. Russia, the US and NATO 48 1. Russia 48 2. USA 55 3. NATO Enlargement 57 IV. Regional Cooperation 60 1. Is There a Need for More Regional Cooperation ? 60 2. Frameworks: BSEC, GUAM, CDC 61 V. What Role Should the EU Play ? 67 1. A Mare Nostrum of the EU ? 67 2. The EU’s Interests in the Region 68 3. Can the EU States Agree on a Common Policy ? 71 Annex VI. Activities and Options of the EU 74 1. The EU’s Activities: an Overview 74 Participants 106 2. Involvement in Conflict Resolution 76 Recommended Literature 112 3. Further EU Enlargement ? 79 Maps 114 4. Bilateral Cooperation 84 Glossary 116 5. Reinvigorating the ENP ? 86 Index 126 6. Should the EU Support Regional Cooperation ? 90 Previous Round Tables 131 7. Does the EU Need an Integrated Approach ? 91 The Körber Foundation 143 8. Cooperation with BSEC ? 96 Imprint 144 9. Sectoral Cooperation 101 Initiator Dr. Jörg Himmelreich, Senior Transatlantic Fellow, German Marshall Fund Dr. Kurt A. Körber of the United States, Berlin Dr. Ivan Krastev, Chairman, Centre for Liberal Strategies, Sofia CHair Victor Likachev, Senior Counsellor, Embassy of the Russian Federation, Volker Rühe, Kiev Minister of Defense (ret.) of the Federal Republic VLR I Dr. Hans-Dieter Lucas, of Germany, Hamburg Head, Central-, Southeastern- and Eastern Europe, Transcaucasus, Central Asia, Federal Chancellery, Berlin Speakers Hugues Mingarelli, Director for Eastern Europe, Caucasus and Central Asia, Gernot Erler, MdB, European Commission, Brussels Minister of State, Federal Foreign Office, Berlin Sofia Moreira de Sousa, Dr. Konstantin Gabashvili, MP, Political Advisor to the EUSR for South Caucasus, Chairman of the Committee of Foreign Relations, General Secretariat of the EU, Brussels Parliament of Georgia, Tbilisi Valeriu Ostalep, Dr. Charles King, Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs and European Chairman of the Faculty, Associate Professor and holder Integration, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Chisinau of Ion Ratiu Chair of Romanian Studies, School of For- Dr. Thomas Paulsen, eign Service, Georgetown University, Washington D. C. Managing Director, Bergedorf Round Table, Borys Tarasyuk, Körber Foundation Berlin Minister of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine, Kiev Ruprecht Polenz, MdB, Mihael-Răzvan Ungureanu, Chairman, Foreign Affairs Committee, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Romania, Bucharest German Bundestag, Berlin Yaşar Yakiş, Alexander Rahr, Chairman of the EU Commission, Turkish Parliament, Program Director, Körber Center Russia/CIS, German Ankara Council on Foreign Relation (DGAP), Berlin Ambassador Dietmar Stüdemann, Ambassador of the Federal Republic of Germany to participants Ukraine, Kiev Michael Thumann, Dr. Leila Alieva, Foreign Editor, DIE ZEIT, Hamburg Acting Chair, Center for National and International Dr. Dmitri Trenin, Studies, Baku Deputy Director for Foreign and Security Policy, Ambassador Dr. Norbert Baas, Carnegie Moscow Center, Moscow Special Envoy for Eastern Europe, Central Asia and Dr. Klaus Wehmeier, Caucasus, Federal Foreign Office, Berlin Deputy Chairman of the Executive Board, Rt. Hon. Stephen Byers, MP, Körber Foundation, Hamburg Member, United Kingdom Parliament, London Dr. Richard von Weizsäcker, Leonidas Chrysanthopoulos, Fmr. President of the Federal Republic of Germany, Secretary General, BSEC PERMIS, Istanbul Berlin Nicolaos Couniniotis, Christian Wriedt, Director General for Economic Affairs, Ministry of Chairman of the Executive Board, Körber Foundation, Foreign Affairs of the Hellenic Republic, Athens Hamburg Judy Dempsey, Dr. Gottfried Zeitz, Central and Eastern Europe Correspondent Europe, Office of President Richard von Weizsäcker, Berlin International Herald Tribune, Berlin 20 SUMMARY I. Is there a Black Sea Region and Where Does It Belong ? Does the Black Sea region have a specific identity or is there, unlike in the Baltic states, no estab- lished identity, do neighboring states know little about each other, and does each state pursue essentially its own interests (pp. 24–26)? Some participants main- tained that the “Black Sea region” is a politically-motivated construct (pp. 26–27). However, it was agreed that regional ties — interrupted during the Cold War — are again gaining in importance (pp. 27–29). Where does the region belong ? Historically, the region was sometimes com- pletely European and other times cut off from Europe. Georgians and Ukrainians called their countries profoundly European. Participants from Azerbaijan said the West had to support their country to exploit its European potential (pp. 30–32). Rus- sia, it was said, represents a competing pole of attraction to the EU (pp. 53–54). II. Challenges for the Region: Because of the Black Sea region’s importance as an energy corridor, stability in the region is a key interest of the EU. Regional representatives said that diversification of energy sources and transfer routes would benefit producers, transit states, and consumers equally (pp. 33–35). It was pointed out that the BTC Pipeline and its connection to the Central Asian pipeline network meant that Russia’s pipeline monopoly had been broken. Some called this con- frontation with Russia problematic (pp. 35–36). Also, it was said that, because the Caspian reserves were limited, the region could become sustainably important only if Iran supplies energy to the West (p. 34). The frozen conflicts, hotbeds of instability and organized crime, threaten Europe’s security (pp. 36–38). Their resolution, it was said, is possible only through comprehensive democratization — elections without democratic society and rule of law exacerbate separatist tendencies (pp. 38–39). While some emphasized that the key to resolving the conflicts lay in Moscow, others pointed out the respon- sibilites of other states and the necessity of integrating Russia into multilateral peacemaking approaches (pp. 39–40). The separatist, de facto regimes regard possible independence for Kosovo as a precedent, with Russia cautiously supporting this argument. Representatives of EU states warned against making that connection, but regional participants said that the de facto regimes would do just that regardless of whether the West likes it or not (pp. 41–44). The possibility also exists that Russia might use its veto in the UN Security Council on the Kosovo question to support independence e. g. for Abkhazia (p. 44). One participant said that functioning states had emerged in the 21 frozen conflict regions. If democratic standards were to be implemented there, negotiations about independence should be conducted (pp. 44–45). III. Russia, the United States, and NATO Enlargement: Regional representatives accused Russia of failing to recognize the independence of former Soviet repub- lics. Others appealed for understanding that Russia sees NATO enlargement as a threat. One must persuade Moscow that politics in the region could create win- win situations, some said (pp. 48–53, 57–58). Whether Turkish-Russian relations could pose a potential alternative for Turkey to EU membership was the object of discussion (pp. 54–55). The aggressive policies of the USA, said regional participants, threaten equilibrium. Others pointed out the esteem in which the US is held and its importance for conflict resolution in the region (pp. 55–56). IV. Regional Cooperation: Demands for more regional cooperation met with objections: regional cooperation was called a favorite EU myth (pp. 60–61, 90–91). Of all regional organizations, BSEC was commended for including all states bordering the Black Sea, including Russia. Some doubted, however, whether there was actually a common interest among BSEC states in regional cooperation. GUAM, it was said, represented a serious security interest among its member states. The SCO was also discussed. Does Russia consider GUAM and CDC overtly anti-Rus- sian alliances (pp. 61–66) ? V. What Role Should the EU Play ? Participants said it was unthinkable that the Black Sea could become an EU lake in the foreseeable future (pp. 67–68). However, in the interest of its own stability, security, and energy security, the EU should make a lasting commitment to the region (pp. 68–70). But can the EU agree on a common policy for the region (pp. 71–73) ? VI. Activities and Options of the EU: Besides discussing individual EU activities (pp. 74–79), the conference considered a possible enlargement prospect for the Black Sea region (pp. 79–84) and the question of whether a new conception of the ENP would be worthwhile or simply whitewash a refusal to commit substan- tial resources or make concessions (pp. 86–90). EU support for regional cooperation was a subject of dispute (pp. 90–91). Should the EU develop a comprehensive strategy for the region (pp. 91–96) ? And should BSEC become an institutional partner of the EU (pp. 96–101) ? 22 PROTOCOL Welcome Welcome to Odessa, a city full of historic sites and marvelous ar- von Weizsäcker chitecture. Being full of old culture but also of new problems, the city mirrors the Black Sea region with its history of ancient em- pires and its great potential, but also with its troubled past and equally disturbing present. Will the Black Sea become a zone of decline and conflicts or rather of prosperity and mutual understanding ? Will it be separat- ing people with different religious, ethnic or linguistic backgrounds, or will it be a zone of fruitful interaction for all littoral states ? This question is of utmost importance for the European Union, which will stretch to the littoral of the Black Sea after the accession of Bulgaria and Romania in 2007: only security, democracy, prosperity and a secured flow of energy in the Black Sea region can assure stability for the EU.

Load more