Posted on 05/21/2006 12:54:17 PM PDT by Tailgunner Joe
Russia has accused new European Union members from eastern Europe of bringing their “phantom pains of the past” into the 25-member club and putting strains on relations with Moscow.
Vladimir Chizhov, Russian ambassador to the EU, said their attitude had made it harder for Russia and Europe to forge a long-term “strategic partnership” – one of the key objectives of a summit this week between the two sides.
Speaking to the FT, Mr Chizhov said he expected the summit at the Black Sea resort of Sochi to be “businesslike” and to tackle the contentious issue of energy relations between Russia and Europe.
But he said the EU’s 2004 enlargement, which brought eight former communist countries into the union, had made relations more difficult. “With enlargement, the EU has not become an easier partner for us,” he told the FT. “Some, not all, of the new members have brought into the the EU their own phantom pains – people who concentrate on the sores of the past.”
But Mr Chizhov said relations between the two sides were not “in crisis”, adding that strident US attacks on Moscow could have the effect of bringing them closer together.
Referring to US vice-president Dick Cheney’s claim this month that Moscow was using its oil and gas reserves as weapons of “intimidation and blackmail”, Mr Chizhov said: “Speeches like that have an opposite effect on the European way of thinking.”
Energy will dominate Thursday’s summit; tensions have been high since March when José Manuel Barroso, European Commission president, went to Moscow to ask Mr Putin to open Russia’s pipelines to third-party operators, in exchange for Gazprom having access to the EU’s retail market.
Gazprom responded by talking about shifting its focus to China and the US, and Europe remains cautious after Gazprom turned off gas supplies to Ukraine in the New Year.
Mr Chizhov said Russia and Europe needed each other, and Moscow was the EU’s “most stable and reliable” supplier, but admitted: “There is perhaps a problem with the public relations aspects of our relationship, which should receive more attention on both sides.”
He said Russia was discussing with the European Commission how Moscow might ratify the energy charter treaty – an international framework for energy supplies – but he thought a result was unlikely before the G8 summit in St Petersburg in July.
Mr Chizhov said the charter needed improvement first, including to its transit protocol covering access to pipelines and a disputes procedure, which he said failed to work in January’s stand-off with Ukraine.
This week’s summit will ease visa restrictions between Russia and the EU for some types of travel, but Mr Chizhov hopes it will pave the way for an eventual visa-free travel regime between the two sides.
It will also discuss a new “strategic partnership” between Russia and the EU, covering a wide range of bilateral issues, to replace the existing 10-year arrangement which expires in 2007.
Yeah, Putin said.
There was a saying in Poland during communism time - if the party says, that they are going to take something away from you - they will. If they say, that they are going to give you something - they say.
Hmm. So you use it as a justification? I do not think that the above fact is something Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney are proud of or like to be reminded about.
No, it's irrelevant. What matters is that they're right, not whether or not they fought in a war.
Btw, why would you be upset that New Europe might stand in the way of closer ties between Russia and the EU? Do you want Russia to be integrated closer with the EU? One of the reasons I supported Yuschchenko in Ukraine was because I knew it would drive a wedge between Russia and Europe. It looks like I was right.
George W. Bush is not a Jr.
"I wouldn't share a beer with a traitor like you."
Funny - you answered EXACTLY as we bet you would. Soooo predictable. But come on over TGJ - come into the VFW. I'll sign you in and then you can tell all of my fellow VFW brothers about how you, someone who REFUSED to serve his country, think that I am a traitor.
This is for the Russians to decide if they want have European or Asian orientation. I am not sure what is better for them, seeing how EU evolves, the cordon sanitaire (quarantine belt) between Russia and EU might be a blessing in disguise and protect Russia :). Who knows?
It will also divide the EU and prevent a common EU foreign policy.
The Old Europe is more pragmatic and business minded - they want access to the huge Russian natural resources. "New" Europe is more idealistic and less successful in economy.
Hey Tailgunner. I have a question for you. One what basis do you trust the formerly Communist countries of Eastern Europe more than you trust Russia? This is not a hostile question. Just curious.
First of all, they sided with us in Iraq against the Axis of Weasels: Russia, Germany, France, etc. The Weasels now want to punish US allies for costing them so much in dirty UN Oil-for-Food money from Saddam.
But couldn't that be used as a tactic to gain entry into NATO and/or the EU?
We want them in NATO because otherwise they will become part of a unified European military force, which we don't want.
"But couldn't that be used as a tactic to gain entry into NATO and/or the EU?"
Poland and Lithuania are in NATO and EU
But aren't all the wrong people for enlarging NATO?
WASHINGTON -- Opening the administration drive to win
Senate approval of NATO expansion, Secretary of State
Madeleine Albright said Tuesday that excluding Europe's new
democracies from the western alliance would cause confidence to "crumble" in the region and lead to costly arms buildups and instability there.
http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/earlvote.htm
Wasn't this the equivalent of Putin giving a green light to NATO enlargement?
Russia's reaction to the new momentum behind NATO enlargement has not been as hostile as many expected. Indeed, just 24 hours after the Bush speech, Russian President Vladimir Putin warmly embraced the American president at a summit in Bled, Slovenia, strongly implying that he did not intend to let enlargement undermine the potential for U.S.-Russia cooperation. Later in the summer, Putin took a further step toward acknowledging the inevitability of enlargement by expressing the view that Russia might itself want to join NATO, as an alternative to his preferred option of seeing NATO disappear. Putin went even further in October 2001, as Russian-American cooperation on terrorism was moving forward, saying that if NATO were to continue "becoming more political than military" Russia might reconsider its opposition to enlargement. This was hardly an expression of Russian support for enlargement, but it was the strongest signal yet that Moscow wants to find a way to accommodate a development that it does not like but knows it cannot stop. At their November 2001 summit in Crawford, Texas, Putin did not press Bush on the issue.
http://www.brookings.edu/comm/policybriefs/pb90.htm
But then came the German "counterattack" in the form of a speech by Schroeder calling NATO outdated and proposing a trans-Atlantic panel of experts to reform it. NATO, Schroeder said, was "no longer the primary venue where trans-Atlantic partners consult on and coordinate strategic ideas." Schroeder's point was that many of the divisive, post-Cold War issues -- for example, the Iraq war, the Kyoto protocol, weapons sales to China -- were outside the scope of the U.S.-controlled alliance and there was currently no other appropriate forum in which to discuss them.
Three points were worth noting about the Schroeder speech. First, the chancellor had used what had originally been an annual, informal gathering of NATO allies to discuss Cold War security issues but which had recently changed its character (the Russians now attend) in order to make his point that NATO was out of date. Second, judging from Rumsfeld's reaction, the Germans had probably given the defense secretary no advance word on what Schroeder was going to say. In fact, Rumsfeld was non-committal, "I don't know," he said. "We're reviewing NATO structures already. I have the impression that important issues are discussed at NATO." Third, Schroeder was sending a message that, while somewhat vague, could be seen as a rejection of the notion that the world revolved around American solutions. - LINK
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.