Transcript Slide 1
International Relations in the Baltic Sea Region Leonid Karabeshkin, PhD Spring Semester 2011/2012 US Policy in the BSR The “Romantic period” -1991-1994: support of democratic reforms in Russia, no enlargements, but support to Baltic statehood, encouraging withdrawing troops 1994 – 2000 – worsening US-Russia relations, the Lake Doctrine (widening democracy) – consolidation of new democracies and market economy through NATO enlargement, initiation of the North-European Initiative of the US (assistance to integration of the Baltic States to Euro-Atlantic structures and widening US economic presence in the region. US Policy in the BSR: 1994 – 2000 Worsening US-Russia relations; The Lake Doctrine (widening democracy) – consolidation of new democracies and market economy; NATO enlargement; “Low profile” policy failure – the attempts to charge Nordic Countries (Sweden first) to supervise Baltic security and Euro-Atlantic integration of the Baltic States. North-European Initiative - assistance to integration of the Baltic States to Euro-Atlantic structures and widening US economic presence in the region Strengthening economic presence in the Region: MN, Estonian Raiways, Eesti Energia – beyond the Baltic States active investment in the Leningrad Oblast; Political elites – new “American” presidents in Latvia and Lithuania, further in Estonia (2006). US Policy in the BSR: 2000-2004 Peripheryzation of the Baltic issue on US Policy agenda: 9/11, Iraq, Afghanistan; stability in the Baltic Sea Region; improving relations with Russia under the “first” Putin; Accession of the Baltic States to NATO and EU – the policy of engagement to Russia from the Baltic States and establishing Russia-NATO Council; Weakening policy of defending investments – withdrawing from MN, Eesti Raudtee, etc. Weakening interest to domestic policy – Rolandas Paksas in Lithuania, Arnold Rüütel in Estonia bacame presidents. US Policy in the BSR: 2004-2008 Relative growth of US interest to the Baltic States, and Eurasia in general; E-PINE initiative aimed at widening multilateral cooperation in fighting terrorism, active involvement into coalitions of the willing, “democracy export” to the postSoviet space (incl. Russia). Tensions in relations with Russia: colour revolutions, YUKOS, Iraq, Beslan etc. Strengthening voice in European affairs through new NATO and EU members which pursue pro-American stance; limiting potential Russian-European rapprochement. Worsening Russian-Baltic relations Impeachment to Paksas in Lithuania, election of Ilves in Estonia. Trenin on US policy in the BSR: “restricted peripheral confrontation”. US Policy in the BSR: 2008-2012 “Reload” in Russian-American relations; Decreasing US Activism in the BSR Decreasing US activism on the post-Soviet space, disappointment of the Baltic States with the results of their policies in Georgia, Ukraine and other states of the former USSR; Energy recourses diversification policy – support of the Baltic States policies in energy security, against of Nord Stream; NATO presence in the region, defence action plan for the Baltic States; EU Approaches to Baltic Policy 1996 – “Baltic Sea Region Initiative” “To strengthen political stability and economic development in the Baltic Sea region” “The CBSS has a unique role in the region as a vehicle for political dialogue and coordination of measures favouring democracy and stability. “The recommendations of the initiative are closely linked to the preparation by the Swedish Presidency of the CBSS of the "Visby Charter" with a view to promoting action programmes for contacts, economi cooperation and environmental cooperation.” Enhancing Democracy and Stability Commission will further support: • direct contacts between public and private institutions, including public administration reform, for instance through secondment of staff, and local initiatives at municipal and subregional levels; • projects in the area of civil society and human rights under the PHARE and TACIS Democracy programme; • better coordination of regional networking of non-governmental organizations within the framework of the CBSS; • more comprehensive activities for the rights of national minorities through improved legislation and administrative procedures as well as facilitation of their economic and social integration by means of language training and other supporting measures; • activities of the CBSS Commissioner on Democratic Institutions and Human Rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities; • measures under the Stability Pact to strengthen democracy and human rights. Promoting economic development • to support the establishment, in accordance with WTO rules, of the Baltic Free Trade Area between Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, including a customs union by 1998, and free trade between these countries and Poland in the framework of CEFTA (Central European Free Trade Agreement), which will further complement the Europe Agreements; • to assist in speeding up the approximation of regulatory frameworks; • to consider cofinancing integrated trade networks, combining infrastructure projects with advice on trade facilitation; • cofinance the Via Baltica (Helsinki-Tallinn-Riga-KaunasWarsaw) • promote the Via Hanseatica (Riga-SovietskKaliningrad-Gdansk-Szczecin-Bremen) • finance technical assistance on the HelsinkiSt.Petersburg-Moscow corridor, • cofinance the development of ports, Energy Energy efficiency and the interconnection of electricity and gas networks will improve security of energysupplies, contribute to economic development and protect the environment. The Russia-BelarusPoland-Germany gas pipeline is a EU-priority project. The crude-oil pipeline from Russia to Finland, together with the linking of electricity and gas supply networks in the Union with those of partner countries, e.g. the Baltic Electricity Ring, should be developed; contribute further to the improvement of the safety of nuclear reactors in the region (Ignalina, St.Petersburg, Kola) and to enable the total dismantling of the nuclear reactor in Paldiski, Estonia; Northern Dimension The initiative was announced by Finish Prime-Minister Paavo Lipponen Was aimed at overcoming geographical and politically peripheral status of Finland in the EU (accessed in 1996); Had to attract attention of the EU to the Baltic Sea region and relations with Russia where Finland possessed the only immediate border-line between the EU and Russia; Was critically met by Sweden, Baltic States and Poland, as well as by Russia; Was cautiously met by the EU, which claimed that Northern Dimension is not a new regional initiative but just a “concept which can provide for an added value”. The initiative did not receive separate budget line, but served as a coordination mechanism of existing programmes. Northern Dimension EU Commission Communication “Northern Dimension for the Policies of the Union” – 1998. 6 priority areas were enumerated: energy, environmental and nuclear safety, cross-border cooperation, trade, transport, telecommunications and health care. Northern Dimension became a policy of the EU Avoiding EU foreign policy implementation by one country only (Finland) Coordination of different financial aid instruments for Finland and Sweden (Structural funds), Baltic states and Poland (PHARE), as well as Russia (TACIS). Relatively low priority status of the initiative, dependent on the position of the EU Presidency – Finland and Sweden as the main lobbyists. Northern Dimension Preparation of the 1st Action plan (2000-2003) – decision made under Finnish presidency in the EU (1999). Included the list of challenges and operational actions in the following areas: - Infrastructure (Energy – “Access to the west European market for gas from the region is important for European security of supply”; Transport – Trans-European networks and border bottlenecks; Telecommunication and Information Society) . - Environment and Natural Resources (the main priority – used water treatment improvement); - Nuclear Safety – NPP and Russian submarines (“EU policy aims at the earliest practicable closure of all nuclear reactors at the nuclear power plants in the region, namely Ignalina, Leningrad and Kola (1-2) that cannot be upgraded to internationally accepted levels of safety at a reasonable cost”). - Public Health; Trade and Business; Cross-border Cooperation (incl. Kaliningrad) Approved on the EU Summit in 2000 (Feira, Portugal) – the list of top priorities narrowed to: environment, nuclear safety, trans-border crime and Kaliningrad. Northern Dimension: problems Narrowing agenda was caused by a number of reasons: - Limited recourses – both financial and institutional; - Russia did not welcome the energy cooperation in EU interpretation, perceiving it as unattractive; energy dialogue was viewed as a separate part of Russia-EU relations, beyond the Baltic agenda; - Russia was concerned about widening external relations of its regions – Putin started centralizing state governance, including foreign affairs; - EU had ambiguous goals: on the one hand, enlargement and eliminating internal barriers; on the other hand, development of cross-border cooperation with Russia. The priority was granted to the first area, which stipulated fastening external border perimeter; - Economic disparity of the regions across borders; differences in organizing regional and municipal governance – Russian regions and especially municipalities could serve only as recipients of foreign aid; Northern Dimension 2nd Action Plan 2004-2006 Priorities – more or less repeated from the 1st Action Plan: economy, business and infrastructure; human resources, education, culture, scientific research and health; the environment, nuclear safety and natural resources; cross-border cooperation and regional development; justice and home affairs. Kaliningrad Arctic Area nd 2 ND Action Plans: Comparison In comparison with its predecessor it is less political and strategic, representing rather a list of the projects to be implemented. The list of environmental projects here is longer than in any other field of activities Establishment of Partnerships – Social and Environmental 2004 – Baltic States and Poland became EU members. “Externalization” of ND – growing role of Russia ND and EUSBSR 2007 – ND was transformed into quadrilateral program of Russia, Norway, Iceland and the European Union Widening number of Partnerships: - Transport and Logistics - Culture Initiation of the EU Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region as a projection of the EU regional policy. Partnerships: Transporn and Logistics “The NDPTL's goal is to improve, in compliance with the ecological needs of the region, the major transport connections and logistics in the Northern Dimension region to stimulate sustainable economic growth at the local, regional and global levels by focusing on a limited number of priorities that reflect both regional and national priorities in a balanced way.” (NDPTL Director Interview) NDPTL Priority: The Barents Link The Barents Link: Way to Asia 800 km decrease in distance Northern Dimension Environmental Partnership: Projects 2011 NDEP: financing EU Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region 2009 What for? “The Baltic Sea Region is a highly heterogeneous area in economic, environmental and cultural terms, yet the countries concerned share many common resources and demonstrate considerable interdependence. This means that actions in one area can very quickly have consequences for other parts, or the whole, of the region. In these circumstances, the area could be a model of regional co-operation where new ideas and approaches can be tested and developed over time as best practice examples” (European Commission Communication, 2009). EU Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region 2009 European Parliament published a report in late 2006 calling for a strategy for the Baltic Sea Region. On 14 December 2007, the European Council in its Presidency Conclusions invited the Commission to present a European Union strategy for the Baltic Sea region no later than June 2009. EU Commission Communication 10 June 2009 EUSBSR Challenges To enable a sustainable environment To enhance the region’s prosperity To increase accessibility and attractiveness To ensure safety and security in the region. EUSBSR: Priority Areas 1. Nutrient inputs to the sea 2.Natural zones and biodiversity 3. Hazardous substances 4. Model region for clean shipping 5. Climate change 6.Internal market and cooperation in the customs and tax areas 7. Research and innovation 8. Entrepreneurship, SMEs and human resources 9. Agriculture, forestry and fisheries 10. Energy markets 11. Transport links 12. Education and youth, tourism, culture and health 13. Maritime safety and security 14. Maritime accident response capacity 15. Cross border crime ENVIRONMENTALLY DOMINATED AGENDA Baltic Dimension of EU Policies: Environmental Axis Externally: - fighting climate change - ensuring environmental leadership and projecting environmental regimes worldwide - exporting “environmentalism” / related technologies Internally: - prioritizing environment as an element of sustainable development - integrating environmental goals into implementation of other EU policies Lisbon Treaty Environment – shared competence with member states Conservation of biological marine resources (a special part of fishery policy) – exclusive competence of the EU Integration (harmonisation) – priority on internal market/energy “The polluter should pay” (Article 191 EUFT) EU 2020 Strategy Climate change / energy greenhouse gas emissions reduction 20% (or even 30%, if the conditions are right) lower than 1990 20% of energy to be received from renewable sources 20% increase in energy efficiency EU 2020 Strategy: Sustainable Growth more competitive low-carbon economy protecting the environment, reducing emissions and preventing biodiversity loss capitalizing on Europe's leadership in developing new green technologies and production methods Outcomes: energy security, climate change, preserving natural resources as well as social and economic benefits (boosting GDP growth, new jobs, global competitiveness) EU 2020 strategy: Estonian national targets Renewable energy – 25% CO2 Emission +11% (in relation to 1990) Energy consumption – 0.71 Mtoe (0.3% of EU) Environmental targets integration: transport policy EU TRANSPORT: 60% of oil consumption, target of decreasing GHG emission 60% by 2050. White (strategy) Paper on Transport (2011): fuels, intermodality, operational measures • • • • • -50% “conventional” fuel in urban transport by 2030 (full elimination by 2050); 40-50% decrease of emissions in aviation and maritime transport 30% of long-distance road traffic to be switched to maritime and railways by 2030 Medium-distance passenger traffic to rail by 2050 Air, maritime and road management systems Environmental targets integration: maritime policy Integrated Maritime Policy (2007) “to face challenges of globalization and competitiveness, climate change, degradation of the marine environment, maritime safety and security, energy security and sustainability” Maritime Transport Strategy (2009) Target: zero-waste, zero-emission maritime transport Support of IMO MARPOL sulphur limitations for ship fuel: 4,5 4 3,5 3 2,5 2 1,5 2000 2010 2015 1 0,5 0 ECA Globally The EU’s Baltic Sea Strategy (2009): a macroregional dimension of EU Policies 4 priorities: environmental sustainability, prosperity (economy), accessibility and attractiveness (energy and transport), safety and security. Challenges and proposed responses - eutrophication – reducing nutrient inflows (priority – removing phosphates from detergents); - biodiversity – reducing negative effects of fishing - hazardous substances – reduction of use - pollution from ships – reducing water discharge, air pollution, noise is getting a problem - climate change – regional adaptation (vs. global fighting) EU Baltic Sea Strategy: transport and environment Support of railways: Nordic Triangle, Rail Baltica (TEN-T Priority Projects) EU Baltic Sea Strategy: transport and environment Motorways of the Sea: providing transport intermodality - strengthening north-south ferry links: Karlskrona to Klaipeda and Gdynia, Trelleborg to Sassnitz. Gdyna - Karlskrona MoS Klaipeda-Karlshamn: to increase share from 18% to 71 % by 2025 Green Transport Corridors “To facilitate more traffic on existing corridors between major hubs, while encouraging environmental sustainability and energy efficiency” Low impact for natural environment Energy Efficiency Complementarity of modes Infrastructure and facilities (ports, terminals) Supply points (bio-fuels and hydrogen) Innovative management technologies Harmonized rules and equal access Green corridors: basic concepts Co-modality Support of environmentally friendly modes (sea and rail) Intellectual Transport Systems Spatial development Internalisation of external costs Concentration of cargo on long-distance legs Eco-labelling Incorporating Russia, Belarus and Ukraine EU: Energy and Environment Emission Trade System since 2005. Covering energy-intensive enterprises Multiannual national plans (2008-2012) The main limitations are imposed on energy installations (in Estonia – 42 of total 50, 64 % of total energy-related 86% of GHG emissions) Kyoto Commitment – 8% reduction by 2020 National Program Commitment – 21% by 2010 to 1999 Challenges Auctioning emission allowances since 2013 Decreasing emission allowances 1.74 % annually in 2013-2020 Accession treaty obligation on Narva Electric Power Plants Russia is not participating in ETS yet Transport issue – aviation covered since 2013 Emissions trading effectiveness in Estonia: Conclusions of State Audit Office EU Emissions Trading has not brought about reduction in GHG emissions due to the following: –The MoE drafted the two national allocation plans based on economic interests of companies and failed to take into account the need to reduce GHG emissions; –The money obtained from the sales of allowances was not used for investments into environmental technologies: - During the 2005-2007 trading period the state energy monopoly sold allowances for approximately128 mln euros. The government decided to use these revenues for general state budget purposes. NB: In April 2011Commission rejected Estonia's revised National Allocation Plan, NAP for 2008-2012 concerning carbon dioxide (CO2) emission allowances. The plan was rejected on several grounds but in particular because the average total quantity of allowances Estonia proposed to allocate to its installations over the period was too high. HELCOM (Baltic Marine Environment Protection Commission) Priorities: - Environmental monitoring and assessment - Combating eutrophication caused by excessive nutrient loads from municipal wastewater and agriculture - Preventing pollution by hazardous substances - Improving navigational safety and accident response capacity - Protecting and conserving marine and coastal biodiversity Members: 9 Baltic States + European Union HELCOM: Legal Base Convention 1974 (fully ratified by 1984) - political role in relations between USSR and the West; - research and technical support; - national concerns vs. regional approach as a driver of environmental cooperation Convention 1992 - changed political realities: the end of the Cold War and active environmental movements; - accumulated scientific knowledge; - inland water included (sovereignty issue); - more active collaboration with various stakeholders (vs. previous approach of attracting professional environmentalists from narrow group of international organizations); - precautionary principle - use of best environmental practices and best environmenetal technologies - “polluter should pay” principle HELCOM: Baltic Sea Action Plan Priority 1. Fighting Eutrophication Goals: Good environmental status - decrease of inputs of phosphorus to 21,000 (from 36,000) tonnes and nitrogens 600,000 (from 737,000) tonnes; - improve the treatment of wastewater, including increasing phosphorous removal from 80% to 90%; - substituting phosphorous in detergents. Country Phosphorus (tonnes) Nitrogen (tonnes) Denmark 16 17,210 Estonia 220 900 Finland 150 1,200 Germany 240 5,620 Latvia 300 2,560 Lithuania 880 11,750 Poland 8,760 62,400 Russia 2,500 6,970 Sweden 290 20,780 1,660 3,780 Transboundary Russian Baltic Policy: foreign policy tools disposed - Coercion - Engagement and Reassurance - Differentiation - Marginalization - Pragmatization/economization - Peripherization/negligence The main problems Withdrawing Russian troops (1993-1994); NATO and EU enlargement Border agreements Status of Russian-speaking minorities (Latvia and Estonia) Kaliningrad (Lithuania) Investment into strategic areas: energy and transit Energy security The most problematic relations Latvia – before 2007 Estonia – 2007-2011 Lithuania – 2011… Evolution and stages Tactical alliance – 1990-1991. - Common efforts in fighting Soviet Center - Democratic movement in Russia and its support of Baltic autonomies - Personal links of Baltic leaders with Yeltsin, his meeting with 3 Presidents - Mutual recognition – the Treaties on Establishing Interstate Relations (1991) - Undermining Soviet economic blockade Evolution and stages Accepting independence (1992-1996) - Withdrawing Russian troops; - Elements of differentiation (Lithuania received advanced withdrawing); - Importance of transit – Russia lost its transit facilities; - Attempts of coercion to get concessions (winter 1992-1993, energy sanctions); - Dissatisfaction with minority policies; - Rejection of territorial claims (Kaliningrad, Petseri, Abrene). Evolution and stages Differentiation 1996-1998 - “Long-term Russia’s Foreign Policy Line towards the Baltic States”, 1996 - conditioned development of economic cooperation and border settlement from resolution of political problems, first of all, status of Russian-speaking minority rights in Latvia and Estonia and respect of Russian interests by Governments of the Balts (NATO membership); - 1997 - elements of engagement and reassurance in security – Russia’s proposals on multilateral security guarantees - 1997 – Russian-Lithuanian Border Agreement signed LITHUANIA as an example of good relations with Russia Evolution and stages Peripherization 1998-2000 - Economic crisis in Russia (Default August 1998) - Political instability – 5 governments in Russia changed - Inability to coordinate foreign policy with the interests of large companies - 1999 - passive reaction to deal on “Mazeikiu nafta” refinery in Lithuania - 2000 – the Law on Compensation of Soviet Damage (Lithuania) Evolution and stages Economization and “pragmatization” 2000-2004 - Putin-I attempts of improving relations with the West - Moderate political forces in power in the Baltic States - Controversial consequences of NATO/EU enlargement: rhetoric “red lines” and de facto recognition - Purchase of “Mazeiku nafta” by YUKOS - Kaliningrad Transit and ratification of Border Treaty with Lithuania - Russia actively develops its oil transit facilities - 2002-2003 Closed oil pipeline to Ventspils Evolution and stages Marginalization 2005-2007 Worsening relations of Russia and the West EU and NATO enlargement: the Baltic States serve a role of permanent critics of Russia, as well as try to “export democracy” to the Post-Soviet Space Sell of Mazaiku nafta to Polish PKN Orlen and closing “Druzhba” pipeline 2005 – Only Latvian President visited 50th Anniversary of Great Victory Ceremony in Moscow The Attempts of Estonian and Latvian Parliaments to stop border treaty ratification Growing importance of historical debate (different interpretations and “historical policy” in bilateral relations Bronze Soldier (April 2007) Evolution and stages Selective engagement – 2007…. - Decreasing interdependence in transit – Russia received transit facilities for oil, developing Ust-Luga and other ports; - The issue of Russian-speaking population was separated from the general agenda of bilateral relations; - Border agreement with Latvia signed (2007), visit of Latvian PM A.Kalvitis to Moscow and launch of normalization in bilateral relations; - Continuing deterioration in relations with Estonia; - Stagnation in relations with Lithuania, failed efforts of the New Lithuanian President Dalia Grybauskaite to improve them; - Energy security in bilateral agenda – 3rd EU Gas Package, Integration of electricity markets; - Hard security issues – growing accusations in authoritarianism and unpredictability towards Russia. At the same time, Latvia and Lithuania abrogated compulsory military service – orientation on NATO collective defence and overseas operations.