IPN interview
The overcoming of the internal political crisis in the Republic of Moldova was followed very attentively both by Brussels and by other partners of the country because “we all care about Moldova”. The only and really sincere interest of the European Union was always Moldova’s development based on the European values. Moldova is now closer than ever to achieving the goal set for the Vilnius summit - to initial the Association Agreement, while Lithuania’s position of sincere and constant supporter of Moldova’s European agenda remains unchanged. These are some of the assessments made for IPN by Linas Linkevicius, the Foreign Minister of the Republic of Lithuania, which holds the presidency of the Council of the EU.
- Today, July 1, 2013, Lithuania takes over the presidency of the Council of the European Union. Towards the end of this period, your country’s capital city will host the Eastern Partnership Forum where very important documents for Moldova are to be initialed. What are Moldova’s chances at this stage of achieving this goal that is slightly diminished as the Moldovan Government, at the start of this year, projected to sign these documents?
- Several days ago, after the meeting of the EU – Moldova Cooperation Council, it was announced that the talks between the EU and Moldova on the Association Agreement, including the Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Agreement, were closed. That’s why I will dare to say that Moldova is closer than ever to achieving the goal set for the Vilnius summit - to initial the Association Agreement.
I would like to note that the closing of the negotiations on the agreement that is unprecedented owing to its new-generation ambitious character, not mentioning the fact that the talks on the Free Trade Area were completed in an impressively short period of 16 months, during which Moldova won the fame of leader of the pro-European reforms, represents an enormous success of your country.
- It’s known that the president-country has the right to adopt important decisions within the Council of the EU. How will your country use this right in the process of preparing and taking decisions concerning Moldova, including in the forum of November 2013?
- Many important decisions are taken within the Council of the EU by the principle of consensus. In other words, they are to be coordinated with all the EU member states, while the president-country has not the right to adopt important decisions, but rather the obligation - and this is often a serious challenge – to contribute to the formation of a common opinion, to become a mediator in a way. I would say that Lithuania, as one of the most open and consistent supporters of Moldova in its European aspirations, even before taking over the presidency, sincerely made effort to ensure the adoption of the most favorable decisions for Moldova concerning its European integration agenda. The status of president does not enable us to openly announce our position or to express our approving attitude towards the opinions of the EU member states. But I want to assure you that Lithuania’s position on Moldova remains unchanged.
- As regards the diminution of Moldova’s stake from the signing to the initialing of the Association Agreement and the Free Trade Agreement, credible diplomatic sources from the EU recently admitted that Brussels may bear a dose of responsibility, alongside many other internal and external factors, for the start of the profound and long political crisis in Moldova, which was close to changing the country’s European integration course. According to these judgments, the stake of signing the documents in Vilnius kept the Alliance for European Integration, which was shaken by serious internal contradictions, more united. The alliance would have been inevitably dissolved if there had been no such stakes. Does Vilnius recognize such an indirect responsibility borne by Brussels?
- In every country, the political decisions, including those concerning the strategic foreign policy goals, are taken by politicians and by the Government. The fact that when taking decisions one is put in the situation of assuming responsibility for implementing them should not be forgotten. Also, the expectations related to definite results must start from the responsible assessment of the situation. When you enjoy success, it is even more important not to yield to emotions and to keep the mind awake. I’m sure that the only and really sincere interest of Brussels was always the Republic of Moldova, which bases its development on the European values.
- It seems that the EU, or at least the European Commission, is gladder than the Moldovan political class in general that the political crisis was overcome the way it was overcome – by creating a new Government that maintains the country’s European course. This is the impression left by the format and results of the visit paid by the new Moldovan Prime Minister Iurie Leanca to Brussels at the middle of June. During a short period of time after the investiture of the new Government, there were held a number of important meetings with high-ranking European officials where important decisions were taken. It is evident that Brussels had a special interest and made great effort for this thing to happen during practically one day. By the way, how did it happen that you, being naturally based in Vilnius, found yourself in Brussels with a scheduled meeting with Premier Leanca?
- It seems normal to me for the Moldovan head of Government, whose top priorities include the continuation of the European agenda, to be received by the senior officials of the European Commission after the solving of the internal political crisis that was followed very attentively both by Brussels and by other partners of Moldova. We all care about Moldova.
Besides, when living at a very intense pace and being on trips a large part of the time, it is absolutely normal to benefit from possibilities of meeting with the representative of another state in the place where our roads intersect each other, including in Brussels.
- The great stakes, of signing the given documents, plus gaining a visa-free regime for the Moldovan travelers, were transferred for the end of 2014. What should Moldova do and what should the European Union do for this to happen? How many chances and how many dangers to these goals are anticipated today?
- Everything depends first of all on how Moldova meets all the conditions of the Visa Liberalization Action Plan. You are the only Eastern Partnership country that switched to the second plan implementation stage and that made considerable progress at the given stage. This makes us hope that everything will go well till the end. The decision on visa-free trips of the Moldovans in the EU will be taken by the Council of EU unanimously and, it’s not a secret, that a lot of work is to be done in the name of this positive unanimous solution. As regards the challenges, it is important to identify them as soon as possible and to neutralize them.
In general, the way from preparing the Visa Liberalization Action Plan to obtaining the visa-free regime includes a number of stages, assessments and intermediary solutions. It happens often that the given process is covered by the media in a very simplistic way and thus it seems that the achievement of the goal is very close.
- What are the priorities of Lithuania as the holder of the presidency of the EU Council and what specific signals will be given especially to the states with a status similar to Moldova’s?
- In this case, I would focus on the priorities of our presidency in the area of the EU’s foreign policy – the Eastern Partnership. In our eastern neighborhood, we want countries that would develop in conditions of security, would have a strong economy and would abide by the European values. When integrating into the EU, Lithuania had to cover a reform path similar to the one that is now covered by the EaP countries. That’s why the experience and support provided to the partner-countries can be very valuable to these countries in their aspirations to strengthen democracy and to come closer to the EU.
The Eastern Partnership does not represent an exclusive initiative of Latvia. This is an instrument of the policy that involves the EU and the partner countries. That’s why the objectives of the Third EaP Summit that will take place in Vilnius on November 28-29 are planned and set in concert with the EU and all the partner countries. As to the bilateral format, the goal is to sign the Association Agreement, including the Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Agreement, between the EU and Ukraine, to close the negotiations on the Association Agreements, including the Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area Agreements, with Moldova, Georgia, and Armenia, and to initial these agreements as well as to make progress in the talks with Azerbaijan. We also plan to advance in simplifying and liberalizing the visa regime. The given agreements will bring considerable practical and political changes and in the life of the eastern partners and in the relations with the EU.
- One of the priorities to which you referred is to reassert the EU as a model of openness and security. How can a goal consisting of two elements that seem to be excluding each other be achieved? For example, under the Soviet model adopted by the Moldovans and Lithuanians, security can be obtained exclusively by almost full isolation, by the Iron Curtain, etc. How can the EU overcome this contradiction?
- In reality, I do not see a contradiction between these two things – the security and opening. On the contrary, when you are open you enjoy greater security as you become less suspect and do not offer pretexts for different interpretations and speculations. The idea that self-isolation can somehow strengthen security is only a sick illusion that, as history shows, often has a fatidic ending.
If we speak about this goal of the Lithuanian presidency, when we say ‘security’ we refer to good relations with the neighbors and these neighbors do not generate dangers and are powerful from economic viewpoint. Namely for this reason we will tend to ensure as close relations of the EU as possible with the Eastern partners. During our presidency, we will also tend to more progressively control the external borders of the EU and towards better coordination of the external dimension of the EU’s energy policy, towards strengthening the general security and defense policy that will be ensured by closer cooperation with the partners and by appropriately responding to the new security challenges. ‘Opening’ means that Lithuania will continue the EU policy on enlargement and will contribute to free trade with such strategic partners as the U.S., Japan, Canada and other countries.
- The beginning of the presidency of Lithuania in the EU coincides with the visible worsening of the situation as regards the Transnistrian dispute. Should we expect position changes on the part of the EU, as observer? Would the EU want another status and another role in the negotiations in an area that is in its vicinity?
- I want to say that the EU is represented in the 5+2 format of the talks by the European External Action Service (EEAS), while the president-country plays a specific role in this matter. I can project only theoretically that this wish of the EU, as you said, can be examined only by the participants in the negotiating process. Better alternatives than the current format may not exist at the moment.
- Why Lithuania managed to become part of the EU, while Moldova did not even if they had practically the same starting point after the dismemberment of the Soviet Union and, if it succeeds, only with great difficulty?
- The identical ‘starting positions’ do not determine a similar evolution of the states as the development is always individual. As regards Lithuania, it was very important that the Euro-Atlantic integration became the strategic goal immediately after regaining our independence.
We submitted the application for accession in 1995, but the negotiations started in 2000. Our path to accession (starting with May 1, 2004) wasn’t at all simple and sometimes implied great efforts, but not enormous, close cooperation with the EU member states and the European institutions, mutual understanding between the people and politicians, etc. However, the main motive power, I would say was the fact that the people of Lithuania was convinced that our future is only in Europe. Another key moment is the fact that all the Lithuanian political parties signed agreements on common foreign policy goals such as the European integration for example. Thus, there are matters in the life of a state when the political forces must forget about the own interests and about what makes them different and join efforts so as to achieve the country’s strategic goals. In May 2003, when the referendum on Lithuania joining the EU was held, 91.07% of the 63.37% people who took part voted in favor.
It should be noted that since we joined the EU, the Lithuanians remain the greatest Euro-optimists (about 60% last December). If you set a goal in which you believe, many things become possible. By the way Moldova’s stable and consistent aspirations for European integration represent a steadfast reflection of the same thing. Thus, I would not describe the future in dull colors. The most important is to know what you want to achieve and this goal should consolidate the work of all the strata of society, while the different political forces should make the narrow party interests a second-level matter.
- What arguments would the ‘average Lithuanian’ have in a possible discussion with the ‘average Moldovan’ in favor of the European option after living in a European country for nine years? But the ‘average Moldovan’ can be if not Euro-skeptic than not obligatorily a Euro-optimist...
- The same poll of the Eurobarometer, according to which 60% of the Lithuanians are Euro-optimists, showed that the Lithuanians approve most of all in the EU of the possibility of working in all the EU countries and of traveling freely and studying in any country of the EU. Besides, the economic advantages are not less important, especially in agriculture, where the financial resources of the EU represent almost one quarter of all the revenues from agricultural activity. By the way, the structural support of the EU represents about one third of Lithuania’s budget. Over the last six years, Lithuania ‘obtained’ for every litas transferred to the EU budget more than five litai. I think the ‘average Moldovan’, even if Euroskeptic, can also approve of these priorities. It’s better to see once than to hear for about 100 times: it’s enough to visit Lithuania to see how many projects were already implemented and how many different projects are under implementation in the renovation, infrastructure and other spheres, which are aimed at improving the lives of the ordinary people. Most of these projects are partially financed with EU funds.
Valeriu Vasilică, IPN
