The European integration process until recently was regarded as more safe by the Republic of Moldova, alongside Ukraine and Georgia. This format of common hope was also found a special name – the Associated Trio. But the war changed significantly the situation, the rules of the game, the behavior and possibly the chances. The experts invited to IPN’s public debate “Associated Trio in new conditions: together and on their own” discussed the changes in the functioning mechanism of this format and if these changes can facilitate or hamper the accomplishment of the European integration objectives for these three countries together and separately.
Dionis Cenușa, a political scientist, researcher at the Institute of Political Science at Justus Liebig University in Giessen, said the Associated Trio is a platform that was launched last May, initiated by the foreign ministries of Ukraine, Moldova and Georgia to facilitate trilateral communication on the European integration and to coordinate the steps so as to obtain bigger progress on the path to the EU. “Then, they didn’t discuss the application to get the status of EU candidate country, but the goal of the format was clear – to closely discuss the steps and to obtain more results in the dialogue with the European institutions. Later, the Presidents stated their support for the format by signing the Batumi Statement in the summer of the same year, with President Maia Sandu signing alongside the Presidents of Ukraine and Georgia,” said the researcher.
He noted that even if there was big hope in 2021 that this format will institutionalize, will take shape and obtain more content, in 2022 attention was moved from trilateral communication and coordination with the EU onto unilateral survival in connection with the Russian military aggression against Ukraine and the pressure that in the case of Georgia has persisted since 2008, while in the case of the Republic of Moldova intensified after the snap elections of the summer of 2021. “We speak about a political context that changed the priorities in the region and of the countries that in the spring and summer of 2021 were less optimistic about the coordination of steps towards the integration into the EU. A number of unilateral decisions can be now seen,” stated Dionis Cenușa.
Political pundit Igor Boțan said the EU’s attitude to the Associated Trio changed cardinally because the circumstances in which the three states are changed cardinally. This is seen in the official documents that are launched on the platform of the Associated Trio, within the Eastern Partnership Summit of December 15 last year and in the March 12 Statement of the European Council, which lays emphases in a different way. These are the result of the radical modification of circumstances in the region. The EU, alongside the three countries, should look for new solutions for relations. After the launch of the neighborhood policy, the EU’s attitude evolved. “When the Eastern Partnership was announced, the main idea for the countries of the partnership was that the EU needed a belt of friends that would guarantee the EU’s security and the given friends would benefit from the EU’s support, including financial one, and these countries would be brought close step by step. The Eastern Partnership was launched in 2009 and emphases then were different and the EU had to respond to Russia’s dissatisfaction. The EU wanted this partnership to serve as a kind of joint commitment of the EU and Russia so that they together managed the situation in the states. Consequently, Russia reacted in an irritated way and announced that the former Soviet republics form part of the “exclusive interest zone of the Russian Federation”. The divergences between the EU and Russia were noticed then,” he stated.
Igor Boțan noted that ahead of the EU Vilnius Summit of 2014, events that continue to reverberate happened. “Russia imposed a ban against the Republic of Moldova, exerted pressure on Ukraine, discouraged Armenia and, recently, after the Batumi Summit, when the three EaP states decided to create a common platform, and at the EaP Summit of December 15, emphases were placed on the cooperation directions and combination of forces of the three states. After February 24, when the war broke out, at the Summit of the European Council Ukraine was empathized and the EU transmitted a powerful message of support. In the same document, the EU mentioned Moldova and Georgia, which also filed applications for EU membership. Now the European Commission has particular relations with the three countries that were issued with the Questionnaire, which is to show how close they are to the Copenhagen criteria. The situation changed radically and, despite the new difficult circumstances, new opportunities for the countries of the Associated Trio can appear.
Mihai Mogîldea, team leader of the Europeanization program of the Institute for European Policies and Reforms (IPRE), said that in the last messages transmitted from Brussels, including after the informal meeting of the European Council of March, in the Council’s Declaration they tried to offer an integration perspective to Ukraine, saying that Ukraine is part of the European family and its place is in the European family. “But a clear and distinct discourse hasn’t existed, especially in the case of Georgia and Moldova. But in the case of Ukraine, we also cannot say that the message was consensual and well-articulated at the EU level and that this offered a clear integration perspective. The goal of the Associated Trio, when this was formed, was to help achieve a common goal of the three states – the European integration by combination of forces, by areas where the combination of forces would bring joint benefits to all the states. One of these efforts refers to the persuading of the EU member states of the fact that the three countries should be offered a clear perspective of integration into the EU and political support, which is not at all easy,” stated the expert.
He noted that the initial goal of the Associated Trio and its objectives now entered a freezing period as the war in Ukraine changed the situation, including the cooperation between the three states. “Ukraine, for example, had particular expectations of Georgia – that Georgia would subscribe to the sanctions against Russia, would be more firm in its message of condemnation and would end particular commercial ties with Russia. This didn’t happen. That’s why the relations between the two states are rather tense at particular levels. As regards the relations between Ukraine and Moldova, the messages that come from Kyiv are mixt, of recognition and welcoming of the humanitarian support provided by the Republic of Moldova. But there were also statements that were rather critical of the Moldovan authorities,” said Mihai Mogîldea. He believes that Ukraine at the moment looks at the opportunity of the Trio in a fully different context than last year and this is important as Ukraine launched particular processes, asked for political support from the EU member states for the perspective of joining the EU and probably wanted the Trio to contribute to this, but the Trio was now moved to the second place. “They follow the path of bilateral relations between the states and the EU, but I hope that the dialogue format will be restored when the war in Ukraine is over.”
The public debate entitled “Associated Trio in new conditions: together and on their own” was the 240th installment of IPN’s project “Developing Political Culture through Public Debates” that is supported by the Hanns Seidel Foundation.
