Looking East essay: At the conceptual, geographical, and security

level, [the ENP] seemed to be an exercise in exclusion, a policy which

did indeed separate Europe from a fundamentally different and even
potentially threatening outside. Do you agree with this quote?

Elena SVISTUN
 The European Neighborhood Policy (ENP) was set up in 2003 as a new model of
political partnership and economic integration with the EU’s 16 immediate neighbors, to
the South: Algeria, Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Israel, Morocco, Palestine, Tunisia and Syria
and to the East: Moldova, Ukraine, Belarus, Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia.

The ENP is chiefly a bilateral policy between the EU and each partner country.
Nevertheless, it is complemented by regional and multilateral cooperation initiatives:

 Eastern Partnership - is the EU’s tool to provide prosperity, stability and

security in the Eastern European neighborhood. 1
 Union for the Mediterranean – promotes economic integration across 15
neighbors to the EU’s south in North Africa, the Middle East and the Balkans
region.

Its legal basis lies in Article 8 of the Treaty on European Union, and seeks “to develop
an area of prosperity and good neighborliness, founded on the values of the Union and
characterized by close and peaceful relations based on cooperation”.

For the purposes of paragraph 1, the Union may conclude specific agreements
with the countries concerned. These agreements may contain reciprocal rights and
obligations as well as the possibility of undertaking activities jointly. Their
implementation shall be the subject of periodic consultation 2.

This political initiative provides for the gradual transformation of traditional trade
and cooperation relations with a view to achieving a higher degree of integration between
the EU and neighboring countries. In economic terms, the ENP provides these countries
with preferential trade relations, a stronger EU linkage, a better link with the Union (eg
in the energy, transport and telecommunications sectors), the possibility of participating
in certain EU programs, and substantial financial and technical assistance.

In order to ensure the success of the ENP, the neighboring countries will have to
ensure that the commitments under this policy support national development strategies
and correspond to their institutional and technical capacity. At the same time, the EU will
have to guarantee the integrity and the concrete functioning of its internal market.

1
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1007/s12290-014-0299-1
2
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2008:115:0013:0045:en:PDF
 Through the European Neighborhood Policy (ENP), the EU offers its neighbors a
privileged relationship, building on a mutual commitment to common values (democracy
and human rights, the rule of law, good governance, market economy principles and
sustainable development.3

The main objective of the ENP is to share the benefits of EU enlargement in 2004
with its neighbors. Another objective is that set out in the European Security Strategy of
2003, namely increasing security in the neighborhood of the enlarged Union.

The ENP was reviewed in 2011, following the Arab uprisings. A major novelty
was the so-called 'more for more' principle, whereby additional reform efforts by partner
countries were to be rewarded with additional financial and other support. 4

The 2015 Review reinforced the principle of flexibility in order to accelerate

assistance and to ensure it is better adapted to rapidly evolving political circumstances
and priorities. The EU provides its support to partners in the Neighborhood region mainly
through the European Neighborhood Instrument (ENI), with over EUR 15 billion for
2014-2020. Apart from providing grants, the EU is also aiming to leverage substantial
additional funding through cooperation with International Financial Institutions by means
of investment subsidies from the Neighborhood Investment Facility.

Partner countries' action plans are at the heart of the Neighborhood Policy. These
are political documents setting out the strategic objectives of cooperation between
neighboring countries and the EU. The plans also contain a comprehensive list of
priorities for stakeholders. One of the major priorities is to stimulate economic growth by
improving the conditions that make sustainable investments possible and increase
productivity. Among the other objectives of the economic growth policy included in the
Action Plans are:

 Making and maintaining macroeconomic stability by applying prudent

monetary and fiscal policies
 developing the framework for financial services to improve access to
finance, insurance and other important financial services for businesses

3
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/factsheets/en/sheet/170/politica-europeana-de-vecinatate
4
https://eeas.europa.eu/diplomatic-network/european-neighbourhood-policy-enp/330/european-
neighbourhood-policy-enp_en
  eliminating administrative, legislative and regulatory obstacles that may
hinder the establishment and development of businesses
 safeguarding property ownership, contract enforcement and investment
protection
 Improving competition policy
 Continuing the liberalization of trade
 Institutional and judicial reforms, including capacity building
 supporting research and development and improving the quality of
education
 Combating corruption.

The essence of the ENP is that it “seeks to promote commitment to shared values”
and that “the level of the EU’s ambition in developing links with each partner through the
ENP will take into account the extent to which common values are effectively shared.”24
Through mechanisms of conditionality, the neighbors were supposed to be made to
implement not just European-style institutions of good governance and a liberal market
economy, not just to commit to sizable parts of the EU’s acquis communautaire, but to
internalize the very European values which serve as the symbolic heart of the EU and of
its understanding of what it means to be European. 5
In reality, however, this approach proved difficult to sustain. The notion of
partnership devoid of a membership perspective caused a number of tensions, which have
been widely analysed in scholarly literature.6

The European Neighborhood Policy does not offer prospects for EU membership
to the concerned countries (eastern Europe and the Middle East countries, and in June
2004 and the South Caucasus states) but allows a privileged relationship with its
neighbors and a better focus of efforts on areas of vital importance for the proximity of
the countries covered by European standards.

But that does not mean that states that are part of the Neighborhood Policy can
not join the European Union, because European integration is a political and economic

5
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0888325416673141
6
Whitman and Wolff (eds.), The European Neighbourhood Policy in Perspective; Michael Smith, Katja
Weber and Michael Baun (eds.), Governing Europe’s Neighbourhood: Partners or Periphery?
(Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2007);
process open to all European countries ready to adhere to the treaties and to fully take
over EU legislation. Under the Treaty of Lisbon (Article 49) 7, it may apply for EU
membership to any EU country that respects the principles of liberty, democracy, the rule
of law and respect for human rights and fundamental rights.

This policy has both positive and negative aspects, thus, to the question ‘’at the
conceptual, geographical, and security level, [the ENP] seemed to be an exercise in
exclusion, a policy which did indeed separate Europe from a fundamentally different
and even potentially threatening outside’’? I have two answers yes and no!

The positive aspects of the policy are the ones listed above, negative aspects, and
what makes me agree with this quote are:
 The non-homogeneity of partner states, both between the southern and
eastern components, and within each group of neighbors. Eastern countries
under the influence of the ENP have a recent assurance of independence
and constitution of the state, the institutional apparatus being far from
adequate for a modern economy and society, based on democratic
principles and respect for human rights and individual freedoms. At the
same time, the southern Mediterranean neighbors are considered to be
largely consolidated states with a market economy experience exposed to
international competition, many of which are, however, driven by
authoritarian regimes.
 There is a certain degree of limitation of conditionality (there is no clear-
cut comitia that partner countries are "forced" to adopt), a conceptual
partnership that is often undermined by the power of power between the
EU and its neighbors. Action plans outline priorities for reform, but
neglect the explicit component of reward for these reforms.
 The lack of a clearly defined policy goal, the ENP failing to resolve the
dilemma of the EU's enlargement limits. At the same time, the absence of
the optimal incentive that would have offered the partner countries the
prospect of EU membership, the degree of commitment of the partner
countries to reforms can be strongly influenced by shocks and conjectural
events. As there is the phenomenon of enlargement fatigue, which is likely

7
http://en.euabc.com/upload/books/lisbon-treaty-3edition.pdf
 to diminish the EU's interest and commitment to potential new candidates,
there might be a similar phenomenon of fatigue in neighborhood policies,
this time even from the partner countries.
 The non-involvement of the ENP partner states in the decision-making
process, and therefore their impossibility to influence European policies,
which they should subsequently adopt. Analysts call this kind of forever
norm takers. A policy shortcoming could be synthesized by the fact that
the ENP countries have a rich and diverse agenda of reforms in the context
of limited resources, a rather low implementation capacity and, in
particular, the lack of a participatory role in the decision-making process
EU.
 The budget allocated by the EU to its neighbors is a controversial subject
in bilateral debates. Compared to the real needs of partner countries, it is
considered that the allocated budget is quite limited. It has repeatedly
expressed the need for adequate funding for a whole range of
neighborhood-related projects, based on economic and financial benefits.
Here the national component plays an important role. It is sometimes
difficult to harmonize the EU's interests with those of each Member State.
It is obvious that each EU Member State has its own foreign policy agenda,
where it has to take into account specific realities, in its interests and
sometimes its dependence, often economic or security. Competition exists
not only at the level of the member states in expressing preferences and,
consequently, prioritizing (in terms of the allocated budget) the
neighboring favorite regions, but also between the partner states in order
to obtain optimal advantages, increased chances for eventual accession.
Analysts note that the ENP is more a policy for neighbors than a united
neighborhood policy. 8

At its core the ENP constructed a border, quite simply because it articulated a
differentiated mental geography, in that it separated the space of the EU’s Europe from
that of the neighbours. And no border can be legitimate or meaningful if it is not
accompanied by an articulation of the identities of the entities which it separates, and

8
Oana Mihaela Mocanu, Politica Europeană de Vecinătate-realizări și perspective- , Ed.
Nomina Lex, București 2010
thereby of the differences which seemingly justify the separation.2 Identity and bordering
are, as such, two sides of the same coin; one does not precede or ground the other, rather
both emerge simultaneously and are inextricably linked in the same discursive practice.
The construction of difference is integral to articulating identity, and the articulation of
new differences or borders does not simply draw on or follow from already existing
identities, but rearticulates, reiterates, and indeed reconstructs them. The drawing of a
border is a creative act, the very gesture of separation changing or altering that which is
thus differentiated.9

The notion of a neighbor of Europe makes the countries that are part of this
partnership outside the European circle, although they tend to join the European Union,
the reforms and objectives imposed by the EU seem impossible for most of the countries
because they have very limited resources in order to achieve the objectives that would
meet EU requirements.

As such, the ENP seemed to lock the neighbors into a process of perpetual
Europeanization which would never lead to Europe.

However, we cannot deny the benefits of a new neighborhood policy that will
mobilize efforts to support inclusive economic and social development, creating
employment opportunities for youth will be one of the main measures for economic
stabilization. New emphasis will be placed on stepping up cooperation with security
partner countries, particularly in the field of conflict prevention, terrorism and combating
radicalization. Other priorities will be legal and safe mobility, on the one hand, and
combating irregular migration, trafficking in human beings and illegal migrants, on the
other hand. As a last point, more attention will be paid to partnering with partners in terms
of energy security and combating climate change.

9
Cf. Iver B. Neumann, Uses of the Other—“The East” in European Identity Formation (Minneapolis:
University of Minnesota Press, 1999).
 NOTES

1. Cf. Iver B. Neumann, Uses of the Other—“The East” in European Identity

Formation (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1999).
2. Christoffer Kølvraa, Limits of Attraction: The EU’s Eastern Border and the
European Neighbourhood Policy Department of Culture and Society, Aarhus
University, Aarhus, Denmark
3. CONSOLIDATED VERSION OF THE TREATY ON EUROPEAN UNION
4. European External Action Service, THE EUROPEAN NEIGHBOURHOOD POLICY
21 December, 2016
5. Fact Sheets on the European Union – 2019, THE EUROPEAN NEIGHBOURHOOD
POLICY
6. Ingrid Habets, Alternative prospects for the Eastern Partnership countries
(Published online: 28 May 2014 Wilfried Martens Centre for European Studies
2014)
7. Oana Mihaela Mocanu, Politica Europeană de Vecinătate-realizări și
perspective- , Ed. Nomina Lex, București 2010
8. Whitman and Wolff (eds.), The European Neighbourhood Policy in Perspective;
Michael Smith, Katja Weber and Michael Baun (eds.), Governing Europe’s
Neighbourhood: Partners or Periphery? (Manchester: Manchester University
Press, 2007);