Former Foreign Minister Kristiina Ojuland on EU-Russia relations

It is very hard if not impossible for the European Union to talk with one voice, especially when the subject is EU-Russia relations. On one hand Germany and France are doing big business with Moscow; on the other hand many of the former communist EU member-states keep on fearing for an energy cut off by Russia.  Time to have an interview with an experienced insider!

Note: The interview took place in the European Parliament in Brussels before it was announced that US President Obama and his Russian counterpart Medvedev would sign the new Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) on April 8.

EBR: What is in your opinion the reason that it takes so long before the US and Russia are signing the new treaty on strategic arms reduction? The ‘old’ treaty expired already.

Ms Ojuland: That is right. The new treaty was due to be signed already last year. It is quite confusing it has not been done yet. A couple of weeks ago Russian President Medvedev raised some new obstacles. I hope the negotiations will be ready soon now, but I was much more optimistic about it last autumn then at the moment. This way of working is an example for the way the Russian foreign policy operates. When there is no political will in the Kremlin, nothing is going to happen!   
   
Does the not forthcoming of an agreement between the EU and Russia on the new cooperation treaty have the same background in your opinion?

Sure and the same for an Energy Charter between EU and Russia. It should have been concluded a long time ago. It is frustrating. We could be very good neighbours in principle, Russia is a big and important country. But it looks like they don’t have the political will.

But you don’t think the EU is also confusing for Russia. There is not such a thing as one European voice. EU Memberstates have quite often different opinions on many subjects, on Russia for instance.

I agree. I suppose Russia is looking now to us to see what the effect of the Lisbon Treaty on foreign policy will be. But I don’t expect Moscow is ready to change its foreign policy. They prefer to cooperate with EU countries in the old fashioned way, on bilateral level. Russia is clever, they know like we know, that the EU will not change overnight and speak with one common voice, if the EU will ever change, at least it will take a long long time. A recent example of a big bilateral deal is France selling Mistrals to Russia. There is only one winner in this case, that’s Russia. Other EU countries didn’t even know it was going to happen. Another example of bilateral big business is the new gas-pipeline in the Baltic Sea between Russia and Germany, avoiding the territory of Poland and the Baltic countries. 

You still believe in EU harmony and a good relation with Russia?

In the European Parliament there are many members very critical on these bilateral agreements with Russia. Let’s see what opportunities the Lisbon Treaty can offer to realise a more common approach.

The relation between the EU and Russia has to be build, step by step. We need mutual trust, on both sides. I believe in the role of time. Again, Russia is a big and important neighbour. But after twenty years there live still people in Russia, that are not happy that their former ‘satellites’ are full and respected members of the EU and NATO. That was not the original foreign Russian policy. This is all about sensitivity and emotions. It may sound strange, but believe me; emotions play always an important role in foreign policy thinking, shaping and implementing. By the way, that not only counts for Russia!

What are your expectations of Lady Ashton, the fresh High Representative for Foreign Affairs of the European Council and European Foreign Affairs Commissioner?

I am curious on her policy with Russia. When she came for the first time to the European Parliament, she told the Foreign Committee that she would try the way of silent diplomacy. I think we have to give her some time, we will wait and see. Let’s not speculate!

What could be concrete steps in the relation EU-Russia?

For instance, the Russian Federation has asked for visa freedom with the EU. That is in principle not a bad idea at all. It would offer ordinary Russian people the opportunity to visit our countries more easily. That would be good, especially for young Russians. At the moment there is a huge bureaucracy and it costs a lot of money to obtain a visa. But there are conditions of course; for instance the border control by Russia, in the south of the country, has to be improved. And I also doubt about the idea. I am not so sure the Russian leaders really like to make it easy for their people to travel to the EU. They prefer, I think, to keep them home and under control…

What role does NATO play in the relation with Russia?

Follow the Russian media, newspapers, radio, television, you discover that at least once a day NATO is presented as the enemy of Russia. Why do they need to do that? In the beginning of this century, a few years ago, the doors of NATO were wide open for Russia. A NATO-Russia Council was established, foreign ministers, parliamentarians, military people were welcome in conferences and meetings. It didn’t continue. But what happened: Russia proposed suddenly a new security structure ignoring the existence of NATO. I really don’t understand this. We and I mean with we NATO and Russia, have a very dangerous common enemy, global Islamic extremism! This makes a strong cooperation on our security absolutely necessary!