ON THE INTERACTION OF EURO PARTIES WITH PARTIES FROM THE EASTERN PARTNERSHIP COUNTRIES. PART 1

The article analyzes the results of cooperation between two leading pan-European political organizations – the European People’s Party (EPP) and the Party of European Socialists (PES) with their counterparts in the countries participating in the Eastern Partnership program (Armenia, Belarus, Georgia, the Republic of Moldova and Ukraine), except Azerbaijan. It is considered with which political forces and why the EPP and the PES have established interaction and even accepted them into their membership. The profiles of these political organizations were studied, including the results of their participation in the national parliamentary and presidential elections and interaction with other political forces of their countries on the formation of ruling coalitions. Information is provided on when these parties joined, respectively, the EPP and the PES, and what status they have today in these European structures. The main provisions of the resolutions of the governing bodies of the EPN and the PES concerning the situation in the countries participating in the Eastern Partnership program and the support of their partner parties in these countries are presented. It shows how the foreign policy course of the Eastern Partnership member countries changed after political organizations that closely cooperate with their European counterparts came to power. It is noted that in almost all of these countries there has recently been a steady desire to strengthen political and economic partnership with the European Union and Western countries in general. And only one country. Georgia is still trying to maintain a balance in relations with Western countries and Russia. Key words: European parties, party system, Eastern Partnership program, elections.

EU’s Resilience in the Eastern Partnership Region vs Russia’s Hybrid Aggression

The article examines the issues of counteracting the hybrid aggression of the Russian Federation in the countries of the Eastern Partnership. It is stated that European Union has been implementing the Eastern Partnership policy for more than ten years. This implementation has been a resounding success for all, without exception, the six target states. Ukraine, the Republic of Moldova and Georgia have advanced much more in their European aspirations. However, this does not stop the Russian Federation from further positioning all the states that were once part of the USSR as a sphere of its ultimate influence. Russia is also producing rivalry with the EU for influencing all, without exception, the Eastern Partnership states and even the EU. An overview of academic research analyzing the resilience of the EU in the face of Russia in the context of its impact on the Eastern Partnership countries is set out in this article. Some approaches have been used to define the EU as a “normative power” and Russia’s controversial policy towards neighbouring countries. The examination of the works described in the article concludes that the Russian Federation continues to regard neighbouring states as its sphere of influence, particularly Ukraine, Moldova, and Georgia. Moscow considers any attempt by a third party to interfere as an intrusion on its unique field of power. As can be observed from the investigated sources, Russia’s activities are scarcely diplomatic or focused on global democratic norms. In its Eastern Partnership strategy, the EU, on the other hand, utilizes values as a guideline. Simultaneously, Ukraine, the Republic of Moldova, and Georgia must demand immediate modifications to the Eastern Partnership policy. The potential of EU membership, in particular, must be appropriately explained by Brussels.

The Eastern Partnership as a Contested Neighbourhood: The Role of External Actors – The EU and Russia

Contestation remains a signifi cant factor in the EU neighbourhood. The aim of this article is to elaborate on the role of external actors – namely the European Union and the Russian Federation – in managing local and regional contestation. The latter is defined as incompatibilities between two or more competing views about how political, economic, social, and territorial order should be established and/or sustained. Competing interests between the EU and Russia concern many issues; the model of political system in the neighbourhood (democracy vs. authoritarianism), the model and direction of the economic integration of these countries (European or Eurasia integration), and the infrastructure and availability of gas and oil (energy disputes). The common neighbourhood, which concerns EU Eastern Partnership (EaP) countries (Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Moldova, and Ukraine), has become an area of rivalry rather than cooperation between the EU and Russia. The first seeks to stabilise the post-Soviet area, while Russia exploits local destabilisations and conflicts to maintain its influence there.

The Challenges of Ukraine’s European Choice in the Context of the Kremlin’s Neo-Imperialist Policies During Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s Presidency

This article attempts to analyse the situation in Ukraine in the face of ongoing Russian aggression and increasing pressure from the Kremlin towards Eastern European states. The armed confl ict taking place in Ukraine means that the geostrategic situation of Eastern Europe has changed. In this context, the Eastern Partnership, which was meant to be one of the key instruments shaping international relations with the states neighbouring the EU in the East, is quite often seen as an ineffective or even obsolete tool. There can be no doubt that the greatest problem for the Eastern Partnership is that the project is seen in geopolitical categories – thinking of the countries of the Eastern Partnership in the context of the necessity for them to choose between the European Union and Russia (listening to statements by the EU’s political decision-makers, it can often seem that those states have no other option). The key research question is whether we will be dealing with an assertive EU policy in tandem with current US policy, or whether there will be another reset in relations between the West and the Russian Federation.

Democracy, Governance and Economy: How EaP States Have Evolved in the Last Decade?

In the last decade, several transformations have occurred at the level of governance systems within the six states included in the Eastern Partnership (Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Moldova, Ukraine), in order to respond to multiple challenges, either endogenous, or exogenous. Against this background, the question that arises is whether this reconfiguration of the systems meant positive effects or, on the contrary, on certain directions, an involution can be highlighted. Thus, our methodological approach takes into account a multidimensional perspective related to democracy, governance and socio-economic aspects, which emphasize whether progress has been made in 2020, compared to 2010, in terms of the mentioned components. The research results underline if the measures implemented by these countries were in accordance with the pro-market and pro-democracy principles, based on good governance. In addition, the identification of some vulnerabilities might allow the outlining of policy recommendations, for an increased adaptability of these economies to future crises.

Geographical Indications: Eastern Partnership Countries case

In the Eastern Partnership (EaP) countries, the subject of geographical indications is particularly important. Although the approach to the subject of GIs in the EaP countries is uneven and differs from country to country, the attention that each of these states pays at the national level to the field of geographical indications cannot be neglect. In countries such as Georgia and Moldova, the development of the GI system is one of the national strategic objectives. This interest is largely due to those economic benefits offered by the implementation of the geographical indications system, especially in countries where the share of the agri-food sector in GDP is significant. Despite the fact that challenges regarding the implementation of the association agreement in the part concerning geographical indications in the EaP countries are quite similar, there are no complex studies regarding the implementation of the geographical indications systems in the Eastern Partnership Countries. The main purpose of this paper is to fulfill the existing gap and to analyze the current situation in the field of GI highlighting best practices but also the vulnerabilities of the GI system in the EaP countries.

Regional diversification of the use of agricultural production potential in the EU candidate and the Eastern partnership countries

Diversification of the agricultural production potential often implies the differentiation of the achieved farming productivity due to its effect on the agricultural resources and structural processes. The article aims to examine the diversity of the production potential in the agricultural sectors of the EU candidate countries (CC) and the Eastern Partnership countries (EPC) and its impact on the variety of the achieved productivity, as well as to present changes in the analyzed indicators in the years 2006–2017. A synthetic measure of agricultural development and a linear regression analysis were applied in the article. The research revealed that Belarus may be distinguished with regard to its production potential, as well as the achieved productivity. In most countries (with the exception of Montenegro and Macedonia), an increase in the value of the synthetic measure of the possessed potential has been recorded in the studied period. However, the synthetic measure of the agricultural productivity level displayed an insignificant raise only in half of the countries surveyed.