New Eastern Europe Issue 1

46
Opinion and Analysis Katarzyna Pełczyńska-Nałęcz, The Glass Wall
which included a list of reforms necessary in order to waive visas. For the moment,
it is diffi cult to assess to what degree Ukraine or Moldova are able to
fulfi l their obligations. Some experts believe that this goal can be reached in
a few years. Quite discouraging for the Partnership countries is the fact that the
action plans are in no way binding for the EU, meaning there are no guarantees
that their fulfi lment will lead to visa waivers. In the end, it is the political will
of the member states that must be sustained. And yet, as one of the members
of the European Commission recently said: “Chances for such a decision are
decreasing with each election”. Inside the EU member states, elections are being
won more and more by parties unwilling to open European borders to citizens
from the Eastern states.
No team work
Until 2009, the EU policy towards Eastern Europe has been of a solely bilateral
nature. Th anks to the Eastern Partnership many multilateral institutions have
been created at diff erent levels. Th e partnership includes four thematic platforms,
which can summon expert panels, to address specifi c issues. Th e eff ects of these
platforms are summarised annually at a ministerial summit. Every two years there
are Eastern Partnership summits convening the head of states. Multilateral,
intergovernmental cooperation is to complement activity at various levels: the
business level, the local governmental level, the parliamentary level, and the non-
-governmental level.
Establishing institutions, within which regular meetings take place between
representatives of 27 EU countries and the Eastern European states, without Russia’s
participation, has a large symbolic meaning. In the same way, cooperation
has shown that diff erences in attitude towards the EU and the transformation
processes are so large among the Partnership countries that common actions of
these countries at the government or parliamentary level are very diffi cult. Th us
far, they have barely left the scope of a ritual-political debate.
Th e situation is diff erent at the non-governmental level. Organisations involved
in the Civil Society Forum of the Eastern Partnership have managed, in the last
two years, to defi ne common goals (fi ghting for human rights, democratisation,
the fi ght against corruption, visa waivers) and focus their activities around them.
One of the forum’s key problems is a relatively small interest in this initiative
shown by EU institutions and European non-governmental organisations. Here,
a new chance came with the Arab Spring which radically changed the belief in
the role of the civic society, especially in the Eastern Partnership. As one of the
European Commission’s staff said “a new, pro-social wind has started to blow”.