Natalie Sabanadze
Okay, hello, everyone. It’s a great pleasure to welcome you all for this very timely discussion. As you know, we are meeting ten days before the European Council gathers on 15th of December, and we’re all awaiting whether the Council will actually endorse the Commission recommendation and start accession negotiations with Ukraine and Moldova, and grant candidate status to Georgia. We have online audience, you are here, in person. This is great, this is not under the House Rules, it’s on the record, so feel free to tweet whatever you find interesting.
We have lots of interesting questions. Of course, we expect that the Council will endorse the recommendation and turn it into a decision, but will it go as expected, or will there be one member state, or perhaps more, who will decide to block this decision? Will the unanimity be maintained, or we will see more challenges on Ukraine’s road to EU? How important this decision is for Ukraine, I think, is most clearly demonstrated by the timing when Ukraine applied for the EU membership. Ukraine did this within, basically, few days of the Russian invasion, and the President Zelenskyy said that Europe was their home. And, rather unexpectedly, we can say that Europe reciprocated very quickly. The President of the European Council said, “Welcome home, welcome to the EU.”
So, is the EU actually ready to integrate one of the largest, by European standards, war-torn countries with no clear security guarantees? This is another big question that we are facing. Of course, the logic of Ukraine was clear, this is a rescue operation for Ukraine, and I think the logic is very much in line with the very project of the European Union. If we paraphrase British Historian, Alan Milward, he said that European integration as a rescue for European nation states, who understood that they needed to unite, came out of the wars, hot and cold, and understood that they needed to be united in order for Europe to be free and at peace.
But this project, this process, cannot really be complete without Ukraine. However, we have to see how difficult it will be. What are the internal challenges that Ukraine is facing, and what are external changes? And what the European Union – and whether it will be able to reform at the same time as embark in this very complicated and arguably, the most consequential of rounds of enlargements.
So, to talk about this, and to take your questions, and questions from the audience, we have a wonderful panel, and I will introduce each speaker as they start. And I would like to start with our dear guest, Viola von Cramon, who is a Member of European Parliament from the German Green Party. She is an MEP since 2019. Before, she was a Member of German Bundestag, and she is a very big friend of Ukraine, has been engaged with Ukraine since the 90s, as I discovered. She just comes from Ukraine, she’s been there last week, so she’ll have lots to tell us.
Viola von Cramon-Taubadel
Yeah, thank you so much, thank you, Natalie, thanks to all of you attending this great discussion panel here this afternoon, in London. To be honest, I was, for a long time, I was very optimistic, because it’s so clear crystal clear, as you said, for Ukraine, it’s a little bit like a lifeline, it is very clear Ukrainians, with their bravery, they’re fighting for European values. They have achieved and they have implemented most of the reforms which were on the agenda of the European Commission.
We, from the European Parliament are in very close exchange with our colleagues in the Verkhovna Rada, we have seen how difficult it was during wartime, to really work through the legislative agenda, but they have done so. They gave all the European demands the priority which was needed, and so on and so forth. That’s why the European Commission, two/three weeks ago, gave a very positive progress report for Ukraine, but also for Moldova, for example, and that is absolutely deserved.
So far, we had the impression that it could be doable to find a compromise with the spoiler in the whole game, which is Hungary. Hungary has its own agenda. Hungary works as Putin’s man, obviously, in the European Union, tries to destroy the Union from inside, and it’s becoming more and more obvious. First, he mentioned there’s the Hungarian minority in the Zakarpattia region, then there was something else, so he uses one or the other argument for his own national interest.
But now, it’s not only that. Now, it’s becoming even more difficult, why we have seen that another group of member states, such as Austria, but also Slovak Republic, coming up with the idea, “Well, it can’t just be Ukraine getting this favour of beginning the accession talks, but there must be also something for the Western Balkans.” And this layer, I think, complicated things. While some of us here in the room work also on the Western Balkan, we have seen that it is a merit-based process, and there is not too much merit seen in the last month and weeks in most of the Western Balkan states. But, of course, we need to make sure that the process, accession process, on Ukraine, is not blocked, while, actually, I would say still Austria and Slovak, and I don’t know the third country, besides Hungary, blocking this, can be convinced, and can be making – hopefully, taking on board.
So, we have on one hand, the European Commission putting up a huge financial package of €50 billion, for four years, making sure we are not dealing year-by-year on a annual basis, on a half-annual basis, to give this budget support for Ukraine during wartime, and, also, having a leverage on Ukraine’s political agenda. We, in the European Parliament, I think, have even improved this facility. Waiting now for the Council to give green light on that. And now, in the process where everyone was pretty much optimistic that the Council decision could be taken, we have to acknowledge that, as I said, it’s not just Hungary. There are so many actors which are unpredictable that I have to admit I am becoming more and more pessimistic.
I might stop here, and we will come back, but I could go on, and I don’t want to dominate this too much, so maybe we ask others.
Natalie Sabanadze
Thank you, Viola. We’ll go now to Ukraine, and I would like to ask Orysia Lutsevych, who is Head of the Ukraine Forum here, and Deputy Director of Eurasia-Russia Programme. She knows a lot about social change, transformation, the role of civil society and, also, how to build democratic resilience for external interference. And I hope you can talk to us a little bit from the perspective of Ukraine, how it all looks like, what are the domestic challenges, and what is at stake?
Orysia Lutsevych
Thank you, Natalie. I also want to introduce you, because I think it’s the first time we are sitting on the stage together. Natalie just joined us, she is the Senior Research Fellow at Russia and…
Natalie Sabanadze
Thank you.
Orysia Lutsevych
… Eurasia Programme. Also, very experienced Diplomat, from Georgia, she served as the Ambassador to the European Union, so she knows what she’s talking about for this panel, right? A very good moderator, thank you…
Natalie Sabanadze
Thank you.
Orysia Lutsevych
…for having us in this conversation. I mean, I came from Ukraine in the beginning of November, we were with my colleague, Anna Morgan, there discussing about the reconstruction and meeting with the Ukrainian civil society. But I had my little side-jump to a Ukrainian Catholic University, where there was a discussion between the older generation of dissidents, and the younger activists in civil society. And the topic was justice, what is just peace and what is justice for these Ukrainians? And they come – they were coming from all avenues of life, from culture, from rule of law, from helping with the military, you know, technology now for the frontline.
And I was struck, when they were talking about justice, I thought they would talk about, kind of, retribution for Russian aggression, that it is so important that, you know, there is justice as an international law. But they talked about how to build a just society, and how it is important that children rise being honest and have integrity, how it is important that Politicians are actually held accountable. And this would have been a conversation at any European university, you know, from Rome to here, at Canterbury.
So, I think we have to really understand that Ukraine is part of the European cultural space, that space of culture, where, of course, you know, throughout the centuries, the approximation and fusion between Ukraine and the European civilisation was arrested by Ukrainians’ history, by the fact that the country was torn between three imperial projects, Russia, Ottoman Empire and Polish expansion. And this is what Ukraine is now fighting, is to put an end to that pathway of arrested European development.
And you could see clearly spiking numbers for the support in European Union membership, even before the aggression. If you compare, like, full-scale aggression, in 2012, only 36% supported, for example, membership in EU, in 2021, 58 already. That was, you know, after the annexation of Crimea. But now, today, the most recent number is 78% support membership in the European Union, and 77% in NATO. So, you have this tectonic shift, where Ukraine has taking a political decision, and it is clear.
And what is very important is that for Ukrainians now, after almost more than 600 days of war, Europe became the home front. So many Ukrainians do find safety, children, women, 90% of Ukrainian refugees, ah, this is where the future of Ukrainian nation is being saved and preserved. The children are being educated, they are going also to Ukrainian Sunday schools to learn their traditional language, and it’s priceless. And I – and in this way, I think Ukraine is already in a big way integrated into the European Union. And then, of course, all of this comes to practical ways, can we, and what should happen?
And I would like to just maybe say a few words on what Viola mentioned, how even during the war, Ukraine has shown that it can reform. And some of these seven conditions that the Commission put, they are quite serious.
Natalie Sabanadze
Hmmm hmm.
Orysia Lutsevych
They were looking at the core issue of judiciary reform, for example, the selection of Judges to Constitutional Court. Or for example, Ukraine had to finish integrity checks for the candidates for High Council of Judges and High Qualification Commission of Judges. It has to comply to FATF for money laundering regulation, to devise a strategy on reform for law enforcement sector. These are the key pillars of independence judiciary.
What is remaining, and it hasn’t complete all the 100%, there are still remaining issues of reappointing the Head of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau, providing more powers to the Anti-Corruption Bureau to insti – investigate and verify assets of high-level government officials. Ukraine has to look at its lobbying regulation, for example, how oligarchs of vested interest could influence, or not, the political system. And yes, what Hungary keeps pushing, it’s the educational law on ethnic minorities.
But, you know, the – Ukraine’s pathway to Europe comes to three key things. One, its prosperity and economy, another one is independence of institutions and political modernisation, and the third one, it’s actually market regulation that will make Ukraine part of the European market. This is what European integration is, and, of course, like Natalie said, it’s the largest country, geographically, in Europe. It has 42 million hectares of agricultural land, which is twice more than France. So, that is difficult for absorption capacity, which will require reform of the EU.
But there also is an immense opportunity. Ukraine has an enormous resources of critical minerals, of very talented labour, digital governments, that we can learn a lot. But, of course, you know, I personally believe Ukraine can achieve a lot of these transformations that I mentioned. We can talk more in Q&A, and what gives me hope is when I go to Ukraine and when I meet with business leaders, Members of Parliament, they know what is Ukraine’s stumbling block to growth, and that is modernisation of institutions. It’s always the most difficult thing, but Ukrainians are on it. They know what is on their agenda, and they are not fooling themselves that they can somehow fudge it through this time, and become a member of European Union. They will work hard for it.
And I think I’ll stop here and then, we can discuss obstacles, enablers, politics of EU, or politics of Ukraine. Thank you, Natalia.
Natalie Sabanadze
Thank you, Orysia, and it’s very important how you highlighted how this whole accession process is actually contributing to transformation and motivates the change in the countries. I mean – and it’s – you know, the accession – the enlargement, has been considered one of the most successful EU policies, and paradoxically, it has gotten a pretty bad name lately, particularly over the last decade. Which led to the, sort of, non-enlargement policy for a while, and it took Russian invasion for this to come back on the table.
So, I would like to bring you, Sebastien. Our last speaker is Sebastien Maillard, who’s new, recently joined Chatham House as an Associate Fellow. He directed Jacques Delors Institute before, in Paris. He had a career in journalism and was the Rome and Brussels Correspondent for La Croix, and he also taught, and maybe you still do, in Sciences Po and Boston College. So, we’d like to hear from you how EU is going to deal with this return of enlargement on its agenda, and how is it going to combine and balance this geopolitical urgency, which actually brought it back to the agenda, with the need to respect for criteria, which is, in many ways, parts of its political identity?
Sebastien Maillard
Well, thank you, Natalie, for organising this very timely meeting ahead of the – next week’s European’s Council. You are right to mention that it is the return of enlargement and the fact that we all remember in 2014, when we had previous European elections, and Jean-Claude Juncker had his mandate saying, proudly saying, “There will be no enlargement during my mandate,” and – which was perhaps the best way to demotivate a new candidate country.
But we were, at the time, not at all in the mood for any enlargement, because it was not only about enlargement fatigue, as we call it, but I mean, Europe, or the EU, was in an existential crisis. They had – we had had the Euro debt crisis, migration crisis already, and the Brexit challenge, and many issues. So, it’s true that I think when Ukraine, Georgia and Moldavia, right after the Russian invasion, applied for EU membership, I must say it was almost a shock also in the EU to say, you know, they really trust us. You know, they – it was almost, I think, a big surprise for member states to be taken so seriously by those countries, you know, that, “We really want to come in now.”
And I think, yes, it has, at least I witnessed this in France, that it has changed the mindset on enlargement. France has probably been the most reluctant country on any kind of enlargement, except Greece, perhaps, but otherwise, we have had a long track record of vetoes and – on – and when it comes to enlargement. But I’ve really witnessed this at the Ministry of – French Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Élysées Matignon, all the – where the – but on – not only in France, but the fact that enlargement, which was before seen as a burden, something you know, “Yeah, well, we have to take those countries in.” And now it seems it’s really regarded as a geopolitical imperative, as a – the fact that Putin, for – and for security reasons, we know that there must be no more grey zones on our continent, and we cannot afford, even for our own security, to let the EU as it is. And so, in that way there is – we could have witnessed a French veto before and now, on the contrary, I think France is one of countries advocating for enlargement.
I – and I share the pessimism, or at least the – I don’t exactly know how the – next week’s European Council is going to end up. A month ago, I would have been perhaps more optimistic on the fact that, you know, the Commission had done this report on the 8th of November. It said that Ukraine had met four out of the seven steps to be completed before getting accession, and then they would – it would report back in March next year on how it has assessed this, but we could open the neg – accession talks. Because I think when it comes to enlargement, the difficulty today that there is a, sort of, a gap between the political signal given and the legal procedure as it moves.
What I mean by that, that if you can – let’s say, if we are optimistic, can say that the EU Council, European Council decides to open negotiation tal – accession talks with Ukraine, and then approve a negotiations framework takes a bit longer, and then you have several steps before it actually really happens. And then we know that, you know, before Ukraine enters, you know, there are 35 chapters in new Treaty of Accession, and it’s a veto – the veto round the corner all the way, because it takes a unanimity of 27 members states to open and to close each single 35 – of the 35 chapters, you know this very well. And so, if it’s not Orbán today, it can be someone else with…
Natalie Sabanadze
Wield their strength on the…
Sebastien Maillard
…and I am not – I would be a bit – because when there are the veto – when the country vetoes, there are always other countries hiding behind that veto.
Natalie Sabanadze
Hmmm.
Sebastien Maillard
Orbán likes to play the bad cop, but yes, we – when it comes to Ukraine, you have countries, member states, that are passionate about Ukraine, and of course, the Baltic States are perhaps the most pushy on it. Poland, to a certain extent, but I’m sure there’s a – the – hopefully, new Prime Minister of Donald Tusk, it will be very supportive of Ukraine accession. A country like the Netherlands have always been like France, very cautious on any enlargement. And we remember that in 2016 they had a referendum where the Dutch had to say no to the ratification of the Ukraich – Ukrainian Deep Comprehensive Association Agreement. So…
Natalie Sabanadze
Hmmm hmm.
Sebastien Maillard
…we don’t know yet when there will be a new Dutch Government, but then we –it’s not – we cannot be quite reassured on the way it goes. So, even if accession talks, at the end of the day, start, yes, it will be a long way ago – to go. And I’ll end on the idea that may I think move on in the coming month, the idea of a staged accession.
Natalie Sabanadze
Hmmm hmm.
Sebastien Maillard
And I think it’s something we can perhaps also discuss, the idea that, even if we enlarge – I mean, if the EU will enlarge, but perhaps it will not enlarge in the same procedure as done for…
Natalie Sabanadze
Before.
Sebastien Maillard
…the previous enlargement, because for a country as big as Ukraine, I mean, it’s a tall order.
Natalie Sabanadze
Hmmm.
Sebastien Maillard
And if you don’t want to wait ten years before Ukrainians enjoy the – some of the benefits of an EU membership, and instead of going from zero to one, you can perhaps do it step-by-step. We can perhaps discuss more the idea, but I think this – it’s a way, also, to compromise between some countries who want to – Ukraine to enter as quickly as possible, others who are very reluctant. And it’s a way, also, to get out of any debate on fixing the date, or an entry date. So, a – I think a staged accession can have a future in the way we enlarge the EU.
Natalie Sabanadze
Thanks a lot, Sebastien. Yeah, EU officials are very reluctant to mention dates, but it was an exception that Charles Michel actually spoke about 2030, which is very soon, right? Because we know that it takes, on average, from seven to nine years to accede. The exception was Sweden and Finland, they did it in three years, but they were coming from European economic…
Sebastien Maillard
Exactly.
Natalie Sabanadze
…area. However, Ukraine, Moldova, Georgia, would have had association agreement with the DCFTA since 2014, and that covers about 70% of AKIS. So, it’s interesting to see how ready will they be, and how fast this can go. The staged accession is an interesting one. I would like Viola to, first, disagree with any of your colleagues, because I saw you disagreeing. That would be more fun, if you disagreed. But Sebastien spoke about the change of attitude in France, and perhaps you could tell us a little bit how it’s going on in Germany, because we hear a lot about it.
And perhaps you can also mention, and there was question here that I will, kind of, rephrase, about the reform of the EU, should it go in parallel? Should it happen before? Before there is a lot of discussion that first, EU should reform, and there was this proposal, Franco-German proposal, on how to deal with this. So, would like your reactions.
Viola von Cramon-Taubadel
Yeah, thank you very much. First of all, I think we should not forget, I said it’s a merit-based process, but it is a geopolitical decision, and Putin is watching what we are doing, whether we succeed or whether we fail. As long as we cannot make up our mind, as we do not find a mechanism how to compromise with Orbán, he will succeed. And if you see what he does on the military side, he’s upscaling the military industrial sector 24/7, which we cannot match, which we don’t match, which we obviously do not want to match. I think we need at least to come up with a political proposal for Ukraine for Euro-integration. At least this is what we owe to the people and to the citizens of Ukraine.
My biggest concern is that, at this current state, where Ukraine is not successful on the military side, where we see that the counter offensive is not as, yeah, as successful as expected, in Washington there might be a change in the White House, that Putin has just the time, and he will put more people after the s0-called election on the 17 of March. There will be a third wave of mobilisation. Hungary will have, in the second half of next year, the EU Presidency and there will be nothing in terms of a military, yeah, a military further step forward of liberated territory, neither a political solution. And that might have consequences which are, hopefully, not come into force, but which might be predictable. And I don’t think these consequences are being discussed in, let’s say, in real term in all the capitals. Maybe in Paris, I don’t know, but definitely not in Berlin, with the necessary consequences.
So, I’m not in favour of the state accession, especially while some of the leaders in the Western Balkan would be terrible happy if they do not have to comply with the political reform. They just get these economical benefits, they just would go for the domestic market, for the internal market, and no political reforms. And the problem will be that those partners we have in these countries, the young generation, the more progressive people, they actually stay as long as they have the perspective that there is this transitional momentum, which some people doubt already that this might be possible.
So, I think without a full-fledged membership for all the candidate countries, be it Georgia or Albania or Bosnia, I guess, this is not – it will look like a waiting room for most of the countries we are talking about. So, I would be very much in favour to make sure we have an agenda, there are the political reforms and yes, of course, you can give them a little bit more of economical, I don’t know, freedom, or with the association agreement. As Natalie has mentioned, they have already 70% of the AKIS and the intensification of trade, and so on.
But nevertheless, I think the ultimate goal should be as soon as possible to bring them into the European Union. Yes, and we need to make sure, and that is my biggest concern, or my second biggest concern, that these reforms will not be taken as serious as they need to be taken to speed up and to have the pace, we need to integrate Ukraine. Orysia was speaking about the Common Agricultural Politics, the CAP. You should not forget that more than 20 or 30% of the agriculture soil, under [inaudible – 32:13], is now mined.
Orysia Lutsevych
Now it is, yes.
Viola von Cramon-Taubadel
So, it is the country – yeah, and it will take decades. So, Bosnia is still not demined after how many years? So, it still takes I think ten/20/15 years, for Bosnia, which is much smaller. So, in Ukraine we speak about, at minimum, 70-80 years. In that respect, I would say we need to reform our Common Agricultural Policy anyway, and this is then a good reason maybe to speed up with this. And we had other bigger agriculture players, like Romania or Bulgaria, where we also mention to integrate them. I would not be too afraid of that, because our Farmers now come up already with petitions and resolution…
Orysia Lutsevych
Hmmm hmm.
Viola von Cramon-Taubadel
…against…
Orysia Lutsevych
Exactly.
Viola von Cramon-Taubadel
…Ukraine’s accession as such, because it’s such a danger, it’s such a – for their existence. Which I think is – it’s not – it’s doable. So, I would say let’s focus on what is priority and this is military. We need to make sure we match the capacities which Russia puts forward, we don’t. Then the political agenda, I think we have to really talk tougher with Orbán. We don’t do this, so far. We always hope we can come up with a – I don’t know, financial compromise. I don’t think this is enough. We need harder political instruments. There is no political initiative in the Council, so far.
And then you ask how much Germany is committed to enlargement. Well, it’s hard to say. I think they are the ones hiding behind others. They don’t say this…
Sebastien Maillard
True.
Viola von Cramon-Taubadel
…in public, no, they don’t say this in public, but I – maybe it’s fair to say, some partners are more in favour of enlargement, and some partners are closer to Ukraine’s membership than others. But definitely when it comes to financial commitments and pledges, we have a great reluctance in – amongst those coalition partners in the current government. And that’s – that does not make things easier, and so I might leave it at this.
Natalie Sabanadze
Thanks a lot, Viola. We have about half an hour, so I will open now the floor to questions. Please introduce yourself and make your questions short and sharp. Please.
Terri Paddock
Hi, my name is Terri Paddock, I’m a Chatham House member. At an event at Chatham House last week – sorry, referencing several of the panellists talking about Orbán and other bad actors within the EU currently. At one of the events last week, one of the panellists was even more pessimistic, and predicted that after next year’s elections, the EU may actually be subject to a far-right takeover. So, the question is two-part, do you think that is likely? And if so, if that did happen, would Ukraine still want to be a member?
Natalie Sabanadze
One more question perhaps, and then we will ask the panellists. Please.
David
Hi, thank you, thank you to the panellists. My name’s David, I’m a Foreign Policy Adviser for the MoD, here in the UK. Orysia mentioned towards the start of this that modernisation of Ukraine institutions is key, and I just wanted to know from all of you, and perhaps Natalie, as well, what should the top two or three priorities for Zelenskyy be on that institution modernisation programme? Thank you.
Natalie Sabanadze
Hmmm hmm, thank you. You can start, Viola, and then…
Sebastien Maillard
Okay.
Natalie Sabanadze
…all three of you.
Viola von Cramon-Taubadel
Oh, maybe I start with your question. What we see in the last weeks and month, and that is a little bit contradicting what we said before, but it’s, in the same way, also, worrying that Zelenskyy tries to consolidate his power at the moment. That he used the martial law to – well, to be, how to say? To make sure that political opponents don’t have a chance, neither in the media sector, nor in the Verkhovna Rada. So, that is something, it needs to stop, and if your Minister of Defence can have a honest talk with some of the leaders in Ukraine, this would be super helpful. Because if we support Ukraine, we do this because we expect to uphold democratic standards, also, in the political arena, and that is necessary. We need to see that the opposition rights are not cut off, that our colleagues are allowed to travel, and things like that, and there is a very worrying development, I have to admit and this needs to be taken on board.
On the other hand, Ukraine is always portrayed as a corrupt country. I would say there were, before the war, really functioning anti-corruption institution – anti-corruption bodies in – I mean, installed and they worked. They are partially also abolished or put on hold, and also, here we would like to see a little bit more of an engagement, and less involvement of the Pre – of the Office of the President. But rather the independence of these integrity bodies and a merit-based process by appointing people who run this institution. I think this is important, and we need to stress that.
And, yes, then, when it comes to decentralisation, the European Union had invested more than 90 million in decentralised structure. That is why Ukraine was so resilient, and, also, here we see a consolidation of power. Kicking Mayors out of office and things like that, this is not acceptable, and this would be great if you could raise this on the top level.
Regarding the likelihood of a takeover, I wouldn’t say so, but I would say there is a shrinking centre after the election. And if you see the predictions, if you see the polls, of course, many things can happen for the next six month to come, but we are all getting ready, in case we are re-elected, that we need to compromise, but we have to be ready to work cross-party. We do this anyway, but probably we have to stretch even more. We have to be ready to work with more Conservative or Socialist or Liberals to have this broad majority in the centre, to have a democratic majority when we speak to the other EU institution, but also, to third actors. And there, they are very much, of course, afraid, if we do not agree on certain topics, it will be much easier for the right-wing groups, for the right-wing parties, to destroy, or to make themself heard.
Sebastien Maillard
Yeah.
Natalie Sabanadze
Please.
Orysia Lutsevych
I will just add to Viola’s list, I think it’s a good exercise and thank you for this question. I think the key issue Ukraine has to resolve is the real separation of powers. This is the, you know, the keystone of any democratic society. And where in Ukraine the risks are is where there is especially diffusion between judiciary and executive, and executive as, of course, is, you know, coming now, especially under the power of the President. And we have to cut that cord, because that allows for all kinds of problems, for, you know, control of the opposition, for takeover of some of the assets.
And Ukraine will come out of this war in a complicated situation, where the share of the state of enterprises increases. Ukraine will have to have a transparent privatisation, will have to ensure that no new vested interests appear. And how that process will be done will, to a large degree, define the landscape of Ukrainian economy. This is so important. Decentralisation, Viola mentioned, and one key reform that is required across agencies and ministries, it’s public administration. People are underpaid, people are undertrained. They are representing some private interests, rather than working, in some cases, for the public interest.
I would say this is one of the reform that was put on hold by Zelenskyy when he came to power. You know, he – I think he’s a better war time President than he was at the beginning, the peacetime President. His, you know, attitude to institutions is questionable. You can dis – you go back to his track record, the Parliament was, basically, rubberstamping a lot of things, rather than really executing oversight and democratic accountability. So, that, I would say is the list, and EU is perfect for that. It’s really the list for Ukraine.
It’s an interesting question, because, you know, I come back to this pre-wartime, while Zelenskyy was elected on the national populist ticket. He was the one who spoke against elites, he was the one who spoke, “We’ll, you know, put people – corrupt elite to jail.” It’s very much the agenda in many anti, you know, anti-European parties. So, in that way, Ukraine is already European, so I think, yes, it will still want to join European Union.
Natalie Sabanadze
Sebastien, I would like you to comment, also, on the rise particularly of pro-Putin, right-wing parties in Europe. We can call them like this, because it’s – the ideological affinity is very clear, and I will add couple of questions from the chat. What would be the benefits of Ukraine’s membership to the EU? We always talk about the benefits for Ukraine, but how about to the EU?
Sebastien Maillard
Well, first of all, on the question regarding the future European elections in – on the 9th of June next year, yeah, anything could happen still. I also don’t believe in a completely blocked Parliament. I suppose it will be even more split than it is today, with a difficult majority to find. But what I also observe is how the War in Ukraine has divided far-right countries, for instance, and we saw some Finnish go from one group to the other group, because they felt at ease with the group where the pro-Russians are. They were all, I think, yesterday in Florence, gathering around Salvini, where Le Pen was and others.
But the ECR, Meloni’s group, who is pro-NATO and pro-Ukraine, I don’t – they have a – the gap between the two groups has increased. It would be – and I know how far the compromise can go with such a group on – because it depends who also is in it in the next year’s election. But maybe they may move a bit more to the – towards the EPP, which is also, I think, torn on those issues. So, yes, it would be a difficult Parliament, anyhow. But we must also remember that the – I mean, the EU, it’s not just the European Parliament. I mean, it’s also the Council of the EU, where you would have Ministers from the future Dutch Government, from Slovakia, from – that will also weight in the decision-making.
So, the – I mean, we see it in the case of Hungary, I mean, it takes only one country to veto. So, the open elections, of course, are very important, and – but, I mean, it’s one of the two co-legislators, and I’m also worried about the – how the European – the Council of Ministers evolve. So, that’s – perhaps just one side comment on the staged accession, to make myself a bit more clear on this.
I believe it’s fit for Ukraine, because when we speak about enlargement, you know, we’re talking about nine countries, I’m not even mentioning Turkey, which is another story, and which could be another debate. But for the nine countries: Moldavia, Ukraine, Georgia, and the six Western Balkans, they’re all very different. And the, perhaps, staged accession, I think can be – make sense for a country as huge and big as Ukraine, which is perhaps the biggest to integrate. I don’t believe it’s make any sense for a country like Montenegro, which has already 32 chapters open for accession, and it’s – we are not in the same stage. Bosnia, Herzegovina, its neighbour, is a completely different order. I mean, it’s – the state building is very fragile.
So, I think if you want to keep some merit-based, I think we – I’m not saying there is a one size fits all solution for everyone, but I think staged accession is part of the solution for this enlargement, especially when it comes to a country as – to the size and with the financial consequences as Ukraine. By the way, Serbia, I know is completely against any staged accession, because they’re afraid that – and I was in Belgrade recently, where they’re afraid that it will – that it can be a trick from the West – from the member states to…
Natalie Sabanadze
Derail it.
Sebastien Maillard
…keep that – to derail it.
Natalie Sabanadze
Hmmm hmm.
Sebastien Maillard
And Orbán, right, to clarify this, is very supportive of Serbia’s entry to the – to…
Natalie Sabanadze
Nothing ever.
Sebastien Maillard
…to – so, it’s – yeah, it’s – that’s why when we talk about enlargement, it’s always, I think, very important to specify which country we’re talking about, because it’s…
Natalie Sabanadze
Yeah.
Sebastien Maillard
They’re all different stories. You had another question, I think.
Natalie Sabanadze
Yes, I had a question from the chat on benefits of Ukraine’s accession to the EU, and I would like each of you to answer it. But I’ll give you a little break and take one more question from the floor. Yes, please?
Alan Flowers
Yes, I’m Alan Flowers. I’m not a member here, but I’m an Academic – British Ac – Alan Flowers, I’m a British Academic who’s been engaged with Ukraine for around about the last 20 years, and it’s lovely to hear Olysia [means Orysia] saying exactly what I’ve experienced, the massive human – the mineral resources, agricultural, particularly the human resources. Which by the way, I’d like to remind this House that Britain, with its British Council and Creative Spark Programme, spawned hundreds and hundreds of start-up ideas. And unfortunately, the war has got under way, and this is exactly the sort of creative potential.
So, you know, listening to Viola that the soil’s not good enough to some Western countries, you might like to expand on that, as that’s really the line of my question, slightly following up a bit on what David was saying earlier. You know, where are these problems that we’ve got? Because it seems to me if they just listen to Olysia, it’s a no-brainer. There’s so much to gain, except that huge elephant in the room, and I’ve personally experienced it, the whole corruption, and the whole political issues that you are highlighting, and I think we’d like to tease a bit more on that out.
But I’d like to do it in the context of, I was there in 2014, we had the association agreement with DCFTA. Perhaps you’d like to comment on, you know, where was the lost opportunity there? Because winding nine years forward, we don’t seem to have got to where I would have hoped we would have been when we were there in 2014, and corruption, I’ve personally experienced it, I think, Viola, a little bit of rose-coloured spectacles there. I mean, I’ve been running projects there, I get stopped from getting on a train if I don’t have a ticket, ‘cause the Conductor knows about the anti-corruption process, and they’re worried they’ll lose their job.
Natalie Sabanadze
Alright, thank you.
Alan Flowers
But the big money, tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands, I’m suffering from viring and all the usual stuff. It’s not being clobbered.
Natalie Sabanadze
Okay, thank you. So, how do we sell Ukraine’s accession to European public? Viola, maybe we…
Viola von Cramon-Taubadel
No, I mean…
Natalie Sabanadze
…start…
Viola von Cramon-Taubadel
…exactly what the gentleman has mentioned. I think the potential is huge. I was in 2004, in Poland giving lectures why Ukraine would be a valuable member for the European Union, while everyone was laughing at me. And I think this is – I fully agree, if we had started a little bit earlier, I think that the DCTFA was actually a good tool to strengthen the civil society, to make sure that the next generation is very much aware that they have dismissed the Soviet culture of bribes and so on.
But nevertheless, the public administration people are underpaid, and there is a lot to do. But the digitalisation, the IT, not just the agriculture, but in general, the labour is very skilled. There is a lot, also, on the academic in different spheres, where we can co-operate, where we can benefit from, and in general, it is a question of stability and security. I mean, that is, maybe not for everyone here in Britain, Britain is not in the EU, but everyone else in the European Union, to feel, but it would make a difference. And we need to make sure if we want peace and stability in this con – on this continent, we have to make sure that Ukraine is part of that, an integral part of that, and that people are not leaving the country. And this – that it’s not a buffer zone left to Putin and his terror regime and stuff like this.
And to be honest, if we are not reacting now, the longer the – we wait, the more expensive it will, and the harder it will be to make sure that, yeah, that people trust themselves in our ability to give them this EU perspective. And at the moment, I think it looks very far away, but if you speak to the people in Ukraine, but also outside the country, they’re very much committed. And if we provide the right environment, political, economical environment, I’m pretty sure the majority will return, and they will invest, and they will definitely reconstruct the country with even more ambition.
Orysia Lutsevych
Can I just jump in? I think there’s no world of yesterday, it’s over. Two years ago, when Russia annexed Ukraine, there’s no more waiting room. There’s no more safe space, where you can say, “This will be a space, and we’ll deal with you, well…
Viola von Cramon-Taubadel
True.
Orysia Lutsevych
…maybe later.” No, I mean, I think this is the urgency, and I think Ursula von der Leyen said it well, “You have to answer this call to history, history is happening now.” If we, as the European community, do not have an answer, then Putin will provide us an answer, and I’m not sure we’re going to like it what we hear. Because we see what his answer, is basically dragging the de-modernising agenda.
So, we simply have to choose, we cannot stand in between, there’s no in between, and I think that that is quite ironic, when you think about it today, of – I was just thinking, I don’t know if you read recently the Kundera’s essay, “The Kidnapped West,” where ironically that he was quoting the Hungarian, right? Speaking now of Hungary today, saying, “We are dying for Hungary, and we are dying for Europe.” Ukrainians are dying for Ukraine and they’re dying for Europe. We still, kind of, in some places, hear it vaguely, as there was a wakeup, I agree this change, and the sea change. But when it comes to action and urgency of action, this is where we are perhaps not hearing the dying voices of Ukrainians as we are sitting here.
I think next year will be critical, because I – if we procrastinate, you know, in different ways, and we could have various ways of procrastination, we’re going to have bigger drama, in the end, we’ll have a bigger bill. I mean, there was an interesting study by the GLOBSEC think tank, that calculated the cost of defeat of Ukraine just for Poland. They said, “Right now, Poland supplies 5 billion of miliary assistance to Ukraine equivalent. If Ukraine falls, it will be 25 billion just to secure the Polish border.” So, in the end, you know, whichever argument you choose, moral, cost-benefit analysis, civilisational, we know what we should be doing, but we have to do it.
Natalie Sabanadze
Sebastien, your reaction.
Sebastien Maillard
Okay, I agree that the – postponing the decision, especially next week, for the – on opening accession talks with Ukraine is the best Christmas gift we can give to Putin, because the longer we wait, then the more dangerous it gets. And why Ukraine can be benefit from its membership to the EU? Of course, it’s not a benefit you can – it takes years because you really get the whole sense of it, and it’s a country that has to be rebuilt. It’s a – you know, we’ve said it’s a huge – it requires demining.
But I think we must understand the added value of Ukraine in the EU, seen also the way the EU project is changing in a multipolar world, in the Chinese and American re-value. If EU is to become a full-fledged power in its own right in this world, Ukraine can strengthen EU for its defence, for its agriculture, for its energy, for its…
Viola von Cramon-Taubadel
Technology.
Sebastien Maillard
…digital skills, for technology, for – so on all those aspects, I’m confident that Ukraine makes EU more powerful. And it makes sense if you see the EU as a – not just a peace project, as it is, but as a – also becoming a power project. And when we come about power, world power, then, yes, we definitely need Ukraine, and I think that’s the long-term agreement to have it in.
And, of course, it deserves some cost. I mean, it’s not a – it cannot just be a free ride, and I understand that Polish Farmers or Polish Truck Drivers are worried about the – we need a level playing field be – in – at the end of the day, to have, I mean – and – but at least these are – that’s why I believe it can have to be —has to be done step-by-step. It cannot be done suddenly overnight, but on a clear track, that the Ukraine belongs to the EU.
Natalie Sabanadze
And, you know, the end goal…
Orysia Lutsevych
It’s keeping this momentum…
Natalie Sabanadze
Yeah…
Orysia Lutsevych
…that is so important.
Natalie Sabanadze
…the end goals should be clear.
Sebastien Maillard
Hmmm hmm.
Viola von Cramon-Taubadel
Absolutely.
Natalie Sabanadze
And we’ll take…
Sebastien Maillard
And, by the way, the momentum is in Ukraine and Moldavia, but unfortunately, not in the Western Balkans, who are not, I think, taking the opportunity. They could get more to really also get on board.
Viola von Cramon-Taubadel
But this is important. We should really make sure that do not leave the Western Balkan states out. Because…
Natalie Sabanadze
Yeah.
Viola von Cramon-Taubadel
…when I speak about stability and peace and security, Western Balkan…
Natalie Sabanadze
Yeah.
Viola von Cramon-Taubadel
…they are a integral part of that, as well.
Sebastien Maillard
Hmmm hmm.
Viola von Cramon-Taubadel
Without, we will not – I mean, this might, I mean, hopefully not explode, but it’s a very fragile…
Natalie Sabanadze
And Russian influence is…
Viola von Cramon-Taubadel
…situation.
Natalie Sabanadze
…not…
Viola von Cramon-Taubadel
Yeah, absolutely.
Natalie Sabanadze
…negligible there, right?
Viola von Cramon-Taubadel
It’s…
Natalie Sabanadze
Okay, we’ll take one more round, and that will be it. Yes, you were waiting before…
Member
A member of Chatham House.
Natalie Sabanadze
…and then I come to…
Member
The question is about presidential elections in Ukraine, and all aspects of it. Practicality, feasibility, optics, parliamentary elections and freedom of speech, now, whether it may be hijacked by Russians and have a negative effect. Because we know Russians are very skilled in manipulating people’s brain. So…
Natalie Sabanadze
Please, thank you.
Member
Shall I wait for the mic?
Natalie Sabanadze
Yeah, it’s coming.
Bogdan Zupan
Hi, my name’s Bogdan Zupan, I’m a Journalist. I wanted to ask you about this argument that was mentioned today that Ukraine is too rich and produces too much food, and that’s why it’s so scary. But I remember other scary situation, when in London, basic food items disappeared from the shelves, and how people complained just recently about the rising prices for basic food, like bread and pasta, and other things. So, isn’t it something wrong with that argument? Shouldn’t we put to the people who consume food, who need it, rather than talking about, I don’t know, some parts of agricultural lobby? Wouldn’t be – wouldn’t it be powerful argument for Ukraine’s accession in the EU?
Natalie Sabanadze
Thank you.
Viola von Cramon-Taubadel
Well, first, maybe your question. I think the whole idea came up with some alt-right Republicans not willing to pay the next tranche of financial aid. And they were questioning why it is a democracy if they do not hold elections. With this spin, it was picked up, partly in Ukraine, but then everyone realised this is not a question, we can’t hold elections during a war. We do not have the electoral law for this. How about Soldiers sitting in the trenches? How about everything, 8 million, 6 million people, out of the country, how to organise that? This can’t be transparent, inclusive, fair, free election, this is impossible.
Now, there is another wave of discussion, and it becomes more seriously, but I don’t think this is realistic, not during this hot war time. But at one point, Ukrainians will have to decide whether they have to adopt a new regulation under martial law, or how are they going to deal with this? But I have seen that this is maybe also in the interest of the ruling party, or in the interest of Zelenskyy himself. I don’t know what is the reason for that, but I think it’s rather risky. And I think the way of manipulation and the traumatized society, many people are emotionally so heartly affected by the war, so many casualties, I think that is a huge risk going with this.
So, during the summer, I have realised that actually most of the moderate voices are extremely reluctant to put forward, but they try to say the European Union wants that. No, nobody in the European Union has ever asked for that, so I told them, “No, this is not the reason.” If you want to have them, then please discuss this internally, but none of us, and none from the member state. As I said, Washington was the – behind that.
Your question regarding the benefit in terms of food production, absolutely right. We are net importer, and we could easily use some of the grain and then other food was – what happened now was exported to countries where it is highly needed. So, I mean, we have a Polish government who uses these solidarity corridors, as they are called, solidarity lanes, for their own political reason. Romania is completely silent. Even there is a lot of grain transport going on.
So, I would say, some, let’s say, neighbouring countries, such as Slovakia and Poland, use the extraordinary situation that the harbours, the ports, can’t be used in the way which was in the past. But normally, I think if we go on a step-by-step approach, and if we reform the Common Agriculture Policy, there shouldn’t be a problem to integrate Ukraine. So, I wouldn’t be afraid.
Natalie Sabanadze
Sebastien or Orysia?
Orysia Lutsevych
I agree with Viola. I mean, overall, I think she – you gave a great answer. There’s one thing that Ukraine doesn’t need to prove, that it’s a democracy. It has had six, you know, you know, elections, and it has peacefully changed the power. There has never been a state capture in – and when there were risks to elections, Ukrainians went to the streets to defend elections in 2004, something very important to remember. And then, when they – they were also waving European flags back then, saying, “We want to be member of the European Union, as well.”
Sebastien Maillard
Hmmm.
Orysia Lutsevych
But I think Zelenskyy also said it well, “It’s important to defend the integrity of elections.” And even if they do some kind of elections, who will recognise them and free and – as free and fair? So, this has been totally put on the – you know, in the drawer, very deep, because of the war and who is the main enemy, and this is where the effort of already quite exhausted population and the armed forces has to be directed, mobilised, to fight that one battle.
And, I think, one thing maybe to mention, before we wrap up, is that I think Ukraine not only exports grain, but it exports electricity. Before…
Sebastien Maillard
Hmmm.
Orysia Lutsevych
…Russia was heavily hitting, you know, its energy infrastructure, it was exporting electricity to Europe.
Natalie Sabanadze
Hmmm.
Orysia Lutsevych
It – you know, it is exporting services. Ukrainian creators are, you know, very active in all kinds of digital – and I think this is where, when we are making this calculus, we – Europe will not be stronger without Ukraine, Europe will not be more resilient. Europe will be more fragile because of these interlinkages that will actually reinforce Europe as the project – as – European Union as the project are so key.
So, I say we should make it a shared success. Sometimes, we keep Ukraine, or other accession countries, at arm’s length saying, “Well, you know, you do the homework, then we’ll discuss.” I think it’s important to make it a shared success. If there is a real determination in some countries, and maybe not everywhere, but in those countries where is that determination, it has to be a shared project of reconstruction of Ukraine, which will be the project, the economic project of the century in Europe.
Natalie Sabanadze
Sebastien…
Sebastien Maillard
Hmmm.
Natalie Sabanadze
…last word.
Sebastien Maillard
Just a comment on the – I agree what has been said on the elections, what sense does it make to organise elections during the war? Let’s just remember, I think in this country, in the UK, the – during the Second World War, elections were postponed. So, I think we can understand that it’s – that the time for elections to be done properly. But I think to finish, I – we must also perhaps reflect on what it would mean not to enlarge, we…
Natalie Sabanadze
Hmmm hmm.
Viola von Cramon-Taubadel
Yeah, hmmm, that’s a good point.
Sebastien Maillard
…said it elsewhere, where it – before, I think, you know, enlargement has been very popular in France, and before 2004 – after 2004. The fact that today Poland, all the other countries, are in, it’s not questioned. But what would have happened if they had not been entered? I mean, it’s – we would definitely not be where we are. And if Ukraine was not to become a member state, if – and we flipped out for any accession perspective, I think with the Russian neighbour it has, I mean, it’s just also a threat for us directly, and not just for the neighbouring countries, such as Poland and Baltic States, but it’s a deep geopolitical concern for all of us.
So, I think the question can be answered both the benefit, but also the cost, of non-enlargement, which is, I think…
Natalie Sabanadze
Yeah.
Sebastien Maillard
…is something very – that I hope the European Council next week will reflect on seriously.
Natalie Sabanadze
Thank you. I think this is a great note to end this discussion. We saw how much is at stake. It’s survival of Ukraine as a European democracy, but also, the European Union as a global power. How it manages this process will define its role in the global affairs. Thank you.
Orysia Lutsevych
Thank you.
Sebastien Maillard
Thank you [applause].
