BRUSSELS – On matters of foreign policy the European Union tends to move slowly and cautiously.
For instance, a month before Russia attacked and captured three Ukrainian navy vessels on Nov. 25 after they tried and failed to gain entry to the Azov Sea via the Kerch Strait, the European Parliament on Oct. 25 adopted a resolution calling on the EU to appoint a special envoy for Crimea and Donbas.
The responsibilities of the envoy would also cover the Azov Sea region, which, after months of brewing tensions, has emerged as the key flashpoint for further Russian aggression against Ukraine.
But parliament’s resolution only contained a recommendation: The EU was not obliged to follow it, and so far nothing has come of it.
As a result, there was no special EU envoy to Ukraine in place to react to Russia’s brazen attack – the first open assault by Russian forces on Ukrainian forces. Moreover, the EU’s official statement in response, which came a whole three days later, expressed only “dismay” and “concern” at Russia’s actions – and no mention of further sanctions.
Meanwhile, the EU is still hesitating over the appointment of a special envoy to Ukraine, according to Michael Gahler, a member of the European Parliament from the group of the European People’s Party, who was one of the initiators of the recommendation. And he is not that hopeful that progress will be made soon.
Gahler told the Kyiv Post in an interview on Nov. 29, that appointing a special envoy at this stage was “not a bad idea” in principle.
“The United States has one, but if one were appointed now, and we were to get stuck after six months in a situation without any progress; it would give the impression that we’ve not been successful. Therefore, I’m currently a bit hesitant.”
At the same time, Gahler said pressure on Russian must be increased: “I’m very much in favor of identifying further individuals who should be put on the blacklist. There are so many people who are profiting from the ongoing situation on the Russian side, be they in the occupied zone or in the Russian Federation itself. These people should be identified and blocked in their ability to travel, and to use their bank accounts in our countries. I think that would be far more painful and convincing than any other means.”
However, EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Federica Mogherini takes a dovish approach to the Kremlin, and while she is in her job strong measures against Russia from the EU look unlikely, some in Brussels say.
Roland Freudenstein, policy director of the Wilfried Martens Centre for European Studies, the official think tank of the European People’s Party, told the Kyiv Post that while the idea about a special envoy is a good one, “as long as Mogherini is high representative, however, the appeasement of Russian aggression won’t change.”
“That can be seen, for example, from the (EU’s) refusal to name Russia as the aggressor in the Donbas,” he said.
Past success
The EU already has eight specials envoys or, as they are officially called, EU Special Representatives. They have been appointed to Bosnia and Herzegovina, Central Asia, the Horn of Africa, on Human Rights, Kosovo, on the Middle East Peace Process, the Sahel, and the South Caucasus, which includes Georgia – another victim of Kremlin aggression.
The institution is designed specifically so that the EU can play the role of facilitator or mediator to consolidate peace or resolve conflicts in troubled regions. It can be a powerful instrument when used well – and the EU has sent one to Ukraine before.
In 2004, Javier Solana, who was at that time effectively acting as the EU’s foreign minister, mediated between the Ukrainian presidential candidates Viktor Yushchenko and Viktor Yanukovych during the Orange Revolution. Tensions were high after Yanukovych, who was prime minister at the time, rigged the vote in his favor, and Yushchenko was allegedly poisoned with dioxin. Solana made frequent visits to Ukraine, and helped de-escalate the situation and prevent bloodshed.
But Roman Shpek, the chairman of the Independent Association of Ukrainian Banks as well as senior advisor to Russian-owned bank Alfa Bank, who was Ukraine’s ambassador to the EU at the time of the Orange Revolution, warns not to expect such success from a future EU special envoy to Ukraine.
“This is the right tool to improve the dialogue between the conflicting parties,” Shpek told the Kyiv Post.
“(But) we should not have excessive expectations that a representative of the EU can resolve the issue. He can improve communication, dialogue, but he cannot resolve that which only Moscow and Kyiv can resolve,” he said.
Moreover, EU unity on the Ukraine issue will be vital if a future EU special envoy to Ukraine’s mission is to succeed. But according to Shpek, cracks are already appearing in the EU’s position, and the union still has to take a firm, collective decision to oppose Russian aggression against Ukraine.
“I think members of the European Parliament, when they are back at home, have to speak about this with their own governments and ask them to put this on the agenda of the European Council (the EU’s “cabinet,” made up of the heads of government of the member states)… The time has come to do so, but maybe it’s even a little bit too late,” Shpek said.
Backing Kyiv
The head of Ukraine’s Mission to the EU, Mykola Tochytsky, agrees that the appointment of a special envoy to Ukraine would keep the EU focused, united and strong on the Azov Sea issue – and firmly behind Kyiv.
“This person … will be able to keep the member states constantly informed and focused in terms of maintaining, strengthening and extending sanctions,” Tochytsky said. “It took us two months to persuade the EU to pay attention to the issue of the Azov Sea, what was happening there. If there’d been a special representative, it would have been much easier. It’s one thing when something is claimed by the victim, and another when claims are made by (a special envoy),” he said.
Tochytsky gave an example of how a special envoy could improve the flow of information to Brussels about the threats facing Ukraine from Russia.
“During the council meeting at which the Azov Sea was the topic for discussion, only very few ambassadors were aware of the fact that (Russia had arrested) ships under the European flag in the Azov Sea. Despite the effort we made to inform them, the information we provided did not reach (EU capitals).”
Policy problem
But Freudenstein of the Wilfried Martens Centre for European Studies, thinks the root of the problem is not the lack of a special EU envoy to Ukraine, or poor communications from Kyiv, but the weak EU foreign policy overseen by Mogherini.
“After the European elections in May 2019, there are strong chances that someone more solid will take over the European External Action Service,” Freudenstein said.
“There will always be member states that will hesitate to show some backbone vis-a-vis Russia, but there is no reason for High Representative Mogherini to hide behind them. So let’s hope for both a new high representative, and a special envoy.”
“That would be like a birthday and Christmas together.”
