Ukraine should revise the Association Agreement with the EU not only in the economic but also in the security area - Ivanna Klympush-Tsintsadze
20 July 2021, 09:39
The Chair of the Committee on Ukraine's Integration into the EU took
part in the Razumkov Center's discussion on the prospects for the
development of the Ukraine-EU security partnership.
Ivanna Klympush-Tsintsadze noted that she was quite skeptical about serious and thorough cooperation between Ukraine and the EU in the field of security, taking into account several factors. First, there was a slowdown in the dynamics of the EU security program PESCO. This Permanent Structured Cooperation (PESCO) Program was established in 2017 in response to the security challenges. Participation in PESCO is voluntary. So far, 25 EU countries have joined it. At the same time, according to the Chair of the Committee, with the change of administration in the United States, the dynamics of work within PESCO in the EU has decreased, and instead the intensification of cooperation within NATO is revitalised.
“Ukraine should set ambitious goals for itself if PESCO continues to develop - not only to be a recipient of certain programs that are created in the European Union, but to try to become the one who forms the security component of cooperation with the EU. I do not see any systematic efforts from Ukraine in this direction, as well as no special appetite in the EU,” Ivanna Klympush-Tsintsadze said. At the same time, according to the Chair of the Committee, Ukraine's main efforts should be focused on cooperation with NATO and Euro-Atlantic integration.
The Chair of the Committee is also convinced that the Eastern Partnership is not the format in which security cooperation with the EU could be developed: “Attempts to include a security component in this format have always met resistance from the European Union. There has never been a readiness in this area, and there is still no readiness to deepen the Eastern Partnership in this direction. The European Union is approaching security cooperation with the countries on the eastern flank quite cautiously”.
Ivanna Klympush-Tsintsadze welcomed the decision of the associated trio countries - Ukraine, Moldova and Georgia to outline their intentions for EU integration. “It is good that the three countries see the need to join forces and institutionalize their cooperation, but at the same time, I do not see an appetite on the part of the European Union to respond fully, capaciously and objectively to this request. In order for this to happen, Ukraine has to work not only with the European Commission and the European Council, but also with specific member states. I do not see such work yet,” the Chair of the Committee said.
Ivanna Klympush-Tsintsadze is convinced that the Association Agreement with the EU also does not fully reveal the needs for cooperation in the field of security and defence. “When we have the opportunity to revise the Agreement, there should be an ambition to improve the part related to security and defence cooperation. There is no such ambition. The government has decided to focus exclusively on economic indicators, which, of course, need to be updated. But the security part of the dialogue is not currently taking place between Ukraine and the EU,” the Chair of the Committee stated.
She also reminded that in the implementation of security and defence projects the institutional capacity of the state is fundamental. According to Ivanna Klympush-Tsintsadze, the institutional capacity has started to deteriorate in Ukraine today. “The number of staff in the Government Office for Coordination of European and Euro-Atlantic Cooperation is now reduced from 54 to 36 or 38 people. If anyone thinks that in this context it is possible to seriously work on the implementation the Association Agreement, I am convinced that it is not. Resources, financial instruments, ambitions and institutional capacity are the elements, that are needed for us to advance in security, military and defence cooperation with the EU,” the Head of the Committee summed up.
Ivanna Klympush-Tsintsadze noted that she was quite skeptical about serious and thorough cooperation between Ukraine and the EU in the field of security, taking into account several factors. First, there was a slowdown in the dynamics of the EU security program PESCO. This Permanent Structured Cooperation (PESCO) Program was established in 2017 in response to the security challenges. Participation in PESCO is voluntary. So far, 25 EU countries have joined it. At the same time, according to the Chair of the Committee, with the change of administration in the United States, the dynamics of work within PESCO in the EU has decreased, and instead the intensification of cooperation within NATO is revitalised.
“Ukraine should set ambitious goals for itself if PESCO continues to develop - not only to be a recipient of certain programs that are created in the European Union, but to try to become the one who forms the security component of cooperation with the EU. I do not see any systematic efforts from Ukraine in this direction, as well as no special appetite in the EU,” Ivanna Klympush-Tsintsadze said. At the same time, according to the Chair of the Committee, Ukraine's main efforts should be focused on cooperation with NATO and Euro-Atlantic integration.
The Chair of the Committee is also convinced that the Eastern Partnership is not the format in which security cooperation with the EU could be developed: “Attempts to include a security component in this format have always met resistance from the European Union. There has never been a readiness in this area, and there is still no readiness to deepen the Eastern Partnership in this direction. The European Union is approaching security cooperation with the countries on the eastern flank quite cautiously”.
Ivanna Klympush-Tsintsadze welcomed the decision of the associated trio countries - Ukraine, Moldova and Georgia to outline their intentions for EU integration. “It is good that the three countries see the need to join forces and institutionalize their cooperation, but at the same time, I do not see an appetite on the part of the European Union to respond fully, capaciously and objectively to this request. In order for this to happen, Ukraine has to work not only with the European Commission and the European Council, but also with specific member states. I do not see such work yet,” the Chair of the Committee said.
Ivanna Klympush-Tsintsadze is convinced that the Association Agreement with the EU also does not fully reveal the needs for cooperation in the field of security and defence. “When we have the opportunity to revise the Agreement, there should be an ambition to improve the part related to security and defence cooperation. There is no such ambition. The government has decided to focus exclusively on economic indicators, which, of course, need to be updated. But the security part of the dialogue is not currently taking place between Ukraine and the EU,” the Chair of the Committee stated.
She also reminded that in the implementation of security and defence projects the institutional capacity of the state is fundamental. According to Ivanna Klympush-Tsintsadze, the institutional capacity has started to deteriorate in Ukraine today. “The number of staff in the Government Office for Coordination of European and Euro-Atlantic Cooperation is now reduced from 54 to 36 or 38 people. If anyone thinks that in this context it is possible to seriously work on the implementation the Association Agreement, I am convinced that it is not. Resources, financial instruments, ambitions and institutional capacity are the elements, that are needed for us to advance in security, military and defence cooperation with the EU,” the Head of the Committee summed up.