Presentation „Russia. Report on Transformation”
Monday, May 25th, 18.00-20.00
The discussion was opened by the moderator, Brendan Donnelly, the Director of the Federal Trust.
Konstantin Simonov, the Editor of the Report, underlined that the publication was focused on appreciating what was going on in Russia and analyzing complex relations between the EU and Russia, but it also touched upon the influence of the US-Russian relations on general foreign policy of Moscow. The year 2008 brought a number of changes to the bilateral relations that are the subject of the publication. To name just some of them – the gas conflict with Ukraine and its influence on Russian energy policy or recent initiatives of the EU. The Report tends not to be political or biased, but is looking for true answers to the questions asked by many people: expert, scholars and politicians. In 2008 the political reality in Russia changed. Experts and scholars tried to predict the directions of development of Russian foreign and domestic policy. The interesting thing is the division of the decision making process between Putin and Medvedev and the depersonalization of politics. As a result, the Russian political scene has changed and undertook serious changes in 2008. When summarizing, Simonov underlined that he hoped that all these issues were clearly described in the Report and they would be interesting for all the readers, including businesspeople, experts and politicians.
Andre Gerrits, an expert from the Netherlands Institute of International Relations Clingendeal, underlined that the excellent report by Simonov accurately reflected unpredictability of the Russian politics. According to Gerrits, among interesting issues mentioned in the report are: the notion of unsystematic opposition, the new paradigm of sovereignty both in the domestic and international politics and the EU-Russians relations as a history of a series of misunderstandings, inconsistency on both sides and mutual frustration. The question is how the EU and Russia can coexist on a cooperative ground? What would be the right instruments? These questions still remain open.
Armand Clesse, a Director of the Luxembourg Institute of International Studies, mentioned that the Report has a number of figures but sometimes it lacks deep analysis. It also tends to be a bit naive and too optimistic.
Valery Fedorov, a Director General of the Russian Public Opinion Research Center, underlined that the discussion that was being held was very important for Russia and indeed, as it was already mentioned, the issue of succession was a central topic, when we analyzed the Russian political scene in 2008. Russia’s image worldwide was influenced by the presidential elections and its influence on building of Russian society. The contradictions between the two members of the “tandem” show that Medvedev has found his place and succeed as a serious politician. The support of the public opinion for this “tandem” proves this fact. Putin and Medvedev have different styles because they are different people, but they are perceived by Russian society as a good team. The war in Caucasus proves that the integrity of the Russian Federation is strong, and it was definitely a big victory of Moscow. In this sense, Russia passed the military exam.
Jan Carnogursky, a former Prime Minister of the Slovak Republic, pointed to the fact that the central issues of the last years’ political discussion in Russia was the question of the succession. The majority of Russian citizens approves the way the succession was held and supports the continuity of the political order. Of course, in Europe such arrangements would not be possible. The Report interestingly reflects the “succession theme.” It also touches upon the conflict in Georgia and the gas crisis. According to Carnogursky, there are no differences between recognizing South Osethia by Russia and Kosovo by the EU. In his opinion, Russia has also won the gas war with Ukraine.
_________________________________________________________________
Opening session: European Union– Russia: towards partnership
Tuesday, May 26th, 10.00-11.30
Traian Basescu, President of Romania - Today we need consulting, judgment and debate, especially in our times. Such actions as this Forum help government bodies in holding a concrete dialogue. The European Union – is an area of prosperity and peace, an economic area with free movement of people. The unique character of the Union – consists in shaking hands with former enemies. It was necessary to present a new development and cooperation perspective to the nations of Eastern Europe. Romania has become a part of the West thanks to its accession to the EU and NATO. Russia is the biggest partner, which is the most problematic one. Russia and the EU cooperate with each other in many areas. Problematic is cooperation in the Black Sea region–energy policy, Caucasus, Russia’s attitude to Eastern Partnership and Black Sea Synergy. The war with Georgia and the gas war with Ukraine have damaged the trust of the UE towards Russia. We need more cooperation and extension of trust areas. Together we can create better conditions for economic cooperation. The aim of actions is to increase the living standards among citizens. The Black Sea is a part of Europe and it must be recognized as such in the policy of both the EU and Russia. The EU through Black Sea Synergy delivered a tool for cooperation in the region. The EU is supported by cross-border cooperation as regards many significant regional and global issues. Romania is a reliable partner for its neighbours, which respects borders and law and order and it will remain as such. In this context we should also remind us about the frozen conflicts in the region and try to solve them according to the letter of the law and mutual respect. We want to build mutual cooperation and trust in relations between the EU and Russia. We hope that the current Forum will contribute to it.
Aleksander Kwasniewski, former President of Poland - We speak about partnership between Europe and Russia. We need cooperation as a condition for development of normal relations. A long list of problems is still up-to-date – the war in Caucasus, the energy crisis in Ukraine, the economic crisis. We must discuss many problems in order to find solutions for them. The aim of our forum is to strengthen relations between the EU and Russia.
Roberta Anastase, Chair of the Romanian Parliament - The Forum is held in the time, when there are many common problems between Russia and the EU. We need a real partnership and dialogue, in order to learn the real view and interests. The process of historical development showed us that no one has absolute truth, but we look for cooperation parameters. Only in this way can we build a geopolitical area, where we will learn how to solve conflicts. Dialogue underpins the foundations of partnership between the EU and Russia. We need to have coherent relations with Russia. Romania has opted for such dialogue with Russia for a long time. Specific ways to engage in dialogue. Partnership must respond to universal values. Today we experience a crisis, which demonstrates that the only way to overcome it is to cooperate. We must sit down to table, identify threats and problems and specify perspectives of cooperation.
Adalbi Shkhagoshev, Member of Russian Duma - Russia and Europe are interconnected and cannot exist without each other. Today the financial crisis is our common challenge. We must put ambitions aside and deal with looking for ways of overcoming the crisis. However, is it possible to forget about one’s own ambitions? No! We must build strategic cooperation. Citizens want to see a different foreign policy. Russia is its’s own boss and shares its views on European problems. Dialogue is a tool for solving mutual conflicts. I emphasize rather regionalization of cooperation. There is a deficit of dialogue on the regional level. Many problems were discussed on the level of the Committee on Difficult Matters between Poland and Russia. But it is not enough. On the economic level we must talk to small and medium size enterprises. The same refers to cultural cooperation. The EU and Russia – have one common challenge: integration of Russia and the EU in many areas. We must try to find fewer minuses in mutual relations and focus on pluses. Russia is ready for dialogue. We are not an analogue of the old USSR. It is not true. We do not live in the USSR, but we build a modern state. It was not Russia, which attacked Georgia, but the latter attacked Ossetia. We had to defend people. I say it as a representative of northern Caucasus. We want to increase together the living standards among citizens and we need to engage in dialogue for this purpose. There is will to do it in Russia; we look for the same in the European Union.
Yves Pozzo di Borgo, Senator, France - It is very important to develop cooperation between our countries. It has become especially crucial after the collapse of the iron curtain. A few years ago we wrote a report on relations of Moscow with other European capitals. Readers of this report had an impression that the iron curtain still existed. But the situation has been changing for many years. We have new priorities in relations between Russia and the EU. Russia is an independent country and it has its own interests. Russia has many problems. The EU is not a simple partner. We deal with changing presidencies, bureaucracy. Today we want to move to different forms of organization. Russia understood the fact that the EU is not uniform and divided. When the Union had 12 members it signed with Russia a treaty. But the situation has been changing. Today Russia should join WTO, where it will be an important element of stabilization and free trade zones should be established between the EU and Russia. Russians and European arrived at different conclusions. Russians are more pragmatic, while Europe is more attached to values. Europe and Russia should create a common area of cooperation following the example of the USA, Canada and Mexico. We must have a cooperation platform between the EU and Russia. It is possible only on all levels – political, economic, social and cultural. Today Russians receive approx. 400 thousand visas because Russians wants to visit France. And we must help them. There is a chance of creating a real partnership between Russia and the EU, but Europe must take advantage of its potential.
Andrej Bogdanov, Director of European Integration Centre, Russia -
If we talk today about defining strategic partnership between Russia and the EU, we must specify how we, the Europeans, want to live in 30 years. I am a representative of a pro-European fraction in Russia, which regards Europe as our common homeland. Today Russia strengthens as energy and technology empire and not a cooperative country. Only European values can make Russia a modern country. NATO has developed in a situation of tension created by realization of foreign interests. Today it does not reflect the reality anymore. But supporting NATO means pushing Russia in the direction of Asian development. I would like to argue with the thesis that Russians are partners for Europe. Russia is a part of Europe and we Russians must realize that. The place of Russia is in Europe and Russian must adopt European values as a part of its own identity. Sociological data confirm that it is a stereotype to support the thesis that Russians do not want integration. According to opinion polls 64% of Russians want the European integration. Russians have already made their choice. They want to be in Europe and they have already been morally ready for it. Russians want to join the EU, despite the opinions of the media both in Russia and in Europe. Neither Russia nor Europe can live without each other. Integration of Russia and Europe is the goal of the Democratic Party of Russia, which wants to fight for power in the European way. The Programme of the party includes integration with Europe, acceptance of the European standards and civil rights. We aspire to accession of Russia to the European Union. There are political forces in Russia, which want Russia to be not only a partner of the EU, but also its member.
__________________________________________________________________
EU and Russia: Common Challenges in Global Politics
Tuesday, May 26th, 12.00-13.30
Mr Adriean Videanu, Minister of Economy of Romania
Romania has a great stabilization potential within the scope of energy policy in Europe. It has proved it during the energy crisis, which in January this year caused a general commotion and was a point of concern for European leaders. Romania, which is a member of the EU, and in the same time maintains good relations with Russia, wants to fulfil the functions of an intermediary between both these entities.
Mr Vladimir Nikitin, Member of the Federal Political Council, “Right Course” Party, Russia
The area, which is occupied by the European Union, is richer quantitatively than the Russian territory. It has more platforms, on which different interests are pursued. These interests translate into challenges appearing in relations between the EU and Russia. However, these challenges, such as for instance approach to human rights, are perceived differently, which is a result of a diverse axiological approaches.
Ms Phil Prendergast, Senator, member of the Joint Committee on European affairs, House of Oireachtas, Ireland
We need to take every possible opportunity to hold dialogue between the EU and Russia. And although it is not always easy, considering differences in geostrategic thinking, we should continue our efforts aimed at improvement of our bilateral relations.
Ms Marina Lebedeva, Director of the World Political Processes Department, Moscow State Institute of International Relations (MGIMO)
Commercial structures appropriate certain functions of the state, going beyond the scope of their competencies and entering the area of other domains. In this way certain sectors of the social life are doubled and overlapping. Crisis situations appear, as a consequence of this transnationalization, because it is difficult to anticipate, who, when and how will perform a specific role.
Mr Marc Ellenbogen, Chairman-Worldwide, The Global panel Foundation, Member of the National advisory Board, US Democratic Party
The Americans have a vague idea of the complicated nature of relations between the EU and Russia. However, it is certain that it is worth looking for these areas, in which joint interests can be followed. In this way a space for dialogue and filling gaps is created in mutual relations.
Mr Valery Fedorov, General Director of the Russian Public Opinion Research Center (VCIOM)
We have to do with regionalization similar to the one, which is known from XIX century. Groups of states focus around a regional leader. The European Union is a key player in Europe, while Russia has ambitions to assert a role of regional leadership in Central Asia and Caucasus.
Mr Dariusz Szymczycha, Senior Consultant, Pressdor, Poland
Poland cares about good neighbourhood relations with Russia. These relations must be based, though, on solid foundations and respect of mutual aspirations in international policy.
__________________________________________________________________
EU and Russia: Foreign direct investments.
Tuesday, May 26th, 12.00 – 13.30
Kira Lukyanova, MP, Member of the Committee on Economic Policy and Entrepreneurship, State Duma, Russia
Its impossible for economy to develop without investments. Over the last 50 years Russia has had to do with great deficit. What is typical for Russian economy is -aging of economic production and strong need for new investments. Now success has come through loans from commercial banks. Due to global economic crisis Russia has had to work even more intensively to create platform for foreign investments. The foreign investments flow increases import, stimulates technological development, and there are other benefits that come with FDI. Through FDI RUSSIA receives know-how. Foreign investors are reluctant to come to Russia so therefore Russia has to improve the climate for foreign investments. The causes are that Russia is not the country that attracts FI. That is due to monopoly procedures in a number of industries, instability of economy, low infrastructure level, unstable financial situation, and of course red tape. Often the procedures are that complex that they discourage potential investors. Foreign capital is mainly attracted to chemical industry and IT.
Vladimir Lebedev, Deputy Head of the Department for External Economic and International Relations, Moscow City Government, Russia
Russia and the EU have to overcome the economic crisis. Moscow is a great market with a number of foreign investments. However in Moscow plots are very expensive in comparison to say Bulgaria, Latvia. Russians invest in Bulgaria, Latvia (automobile industry) because it is easier comparison to the investment environment we have in Russia. Caucasus region – it is an interesting region for Russian investments. However due to a number of conflicts there the potential of the region is not used.
Oleksii Plotnikov, Chairman of the Subcommittee for International Economic Policy, Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine
In Russia 20% of investments are FDI. It is much lower than in highly developed countries. The crisis that has affected Russia recently has come from more stable countries in comparison to the crisis in Russia in 1990’s. Foreign investors are interested in coming to Russia though they are not interested in stimulating foreign investments. Attracting investments in order to bring cut edge technology should be of prior importance to Russia. Recently Russia has not done much in comparison to Ukraine to attract FDI.
Viacheslav Illiaronov, Deputy Chairman of the Committee on Natural Resources and Environment, Chamber of Industry and Commerce, Russia
Commercial loans make 8-9% of foreign investments and another 8% comes with bank investments. Out of 166 countries Russia has 156 position when you take into consideration investment climate. In the oils sector FDI make up to 24 % investments and this is the higher number. The greatest investors in Russia are ; UK, USA, Cyprus and Germany.
__________________________________________________________________
Russian and EU’s Financial Markets. Possible Directions of Development.
Tuesday, May 26th, 15.00 - 16.30
Mr Petro Poroshenko, Chairman of the Supervisory Board, National Bank of Ukraine There is no one simple method to recover financial stability in the conditions of global crisis. Monetary policy must be carried out with double care. Both Russia and EU states need considerate actions in this regard. Banks were discredited due to their irresponsible credit policy, and now they look for assistance from the state.
Mr Anton Moiseev, Executive Director of the Russian-European Centre for Economic Policy, Russia. It is necessary to stabilize the banking system and receive help from the IMF. We should carry out projects related to infrastructure and agriculture. However, before funds are assigned for investment purposes, we should check, if we can reconcile them with current budgetary expenses.
Mr Daniel Daianu, Member of the European parliament; former Minister of Finance of Romania. How is it possible that we did not notice, when black clouds gathered above us? Certainly some states are more and other less resistant to the effects of the crisis. Even emerging markets, which initially seemed to be resistant to the effects of the crisis, become weaker. Budget deficit becomes greater, and – it is followed by the public debt. It is most important to search for safe methods of financing the budget deficit, so that we do not fall into inflation trap.
Mr Dmitry Donskov, Member of the Yaroslavl City Council, Russia
Crisis forces us to reduce investments, and therefore it would be good to introduce legislation supporting public-private partnership.
__________________________________________________________________
USA-EU-Russia: Common Interests In the Post Soviet Space
Tuesday, May 26th, 17.00-18.30
When beginning his key-note speech Lech Walesa, former President of Poland, underlined that his perception to politics was different – he tended to concentrate less on theory and more on the practical sides of the decision making process. Poland, geographically situated between two great nations - Russian and German has a great experience in sensing opportunities and threats. Other nations are not as alert to some signals as Poles are. Nowadays Poland is a member of NATO and the EU and it proves that the realities have changed. Some eras finished and new have started. The old patterns don’t fit to this reality. The present day generations have chances for peaceful and prosperous life. But of course, some things still need to be altered, for example the economic system. What is more, the core moral values need to be cherished. Especially, in the context of the rise of the position of China on the international scene.
Cristian Diaconescu, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Romania, opened his speech with the remark that the EU-Russian relations face a number of challenges. It is important that the relations are built on common values, especially in the post soviet area. The EU-US-Russian partnership requires mutual trust. Common interest needs to reached by building the partnership on symmetric relations, the same set of values and responsible behavior. Energy security is a common long term interest of all sides of the dialogue, including Russia. Romania perceives Eastern Partnership and Black See Synergy as important instruments of the dialogue. Strong political will is a fundament of a constructive discussion on the role of the EU, the US and Russia in post soviet space. In this sense, technical solutions are of a secondary meaning. Diaconescu underlined that bilateral relations in the post soviet space should concentrate on cooperation not competition.
Heydar Djemal, Chairman of the Islamic Committee of Russia, pointed to the fact that the EU, the US and Russia have different interests, various level of bureaucracy and political traditions.
Martha Brill Olcott, Senior Associate at Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington started with the remarks on the great game. The paradigm of the great game has helped to rise the question of NATO expansion to Georgia and Ukraine. What happened in August in Georgia proved that this notion is present in international politics. As for energy policy, both the US and the EU have common goals in post soviet space. On the other hands, the Caspian states have different interest in developing various pipelines. Additionally, China has become an extremely important player. As a result of the Chinese involvement, economic transparency has become a major problem for the EU and the US interest in post soviet states. Olcott also pointed to the fact that resolving the situation in Afghanistan, important form the point of view of stabilizing the post soviet space, requires a new paradigm.
Adrian Severin, Member of the European Parliament presented some thesis on the main topic of discussion. At this point we can observe the multipolar world order. The notion of a shared neighborhood concept is a challenging element of the trilateral dialogue in the post soviet space next to the global responsibility. When dealing with the post soviet countries all this notions need to be kept in mind. Promotion of regional integration and creating a global partner network is also a major challenge, especially for the EU. The concept of soft security should substitute the traditional concept of hard security and should be intensively developed. Free competition, open markets and transparent commercial deals are prerequisites for a global energy security, but firs and foremost for the EU energy security.
Bernard Guetta, Columnist and Editorial Writer from France said that it was not reasonable to expand NATO boarders. Policymakers need to be realistic and pragmatic. The Russian Federation has a common international aim with the EU and the US: global security and stable economy. It should be clear for everybody. Common aims are more important than mutual distrust.
__________________________________________________________
Media debate: democracy and the media.
Tuesday, May 26th, 17.00 – 18.30
The debate was related to the role of the media and journalists in creating the reality. The debate was attended by journalists representing leading media from Poland, United Kingdom Serbia, Romania, Russia, USA. All participants in the debate unanimously emphasized the independence of the media and freedom of speech as the basic determinants of democracy. Every participant in the debate represented a country with a different political culture and, by the same, a different position and power of the media as the so called “fourth power”.
Pawel Lisicki – the editor in chief of “Rzeczpospolita” daily reminded that the media in Poland are subordinated by the parties winning elections.
Vladimir Radomirovic, a journalists from Serbian Politika – the oldest daily published in the Balkans, underscored the investigative role of the media and its contribution to the fight against corruption. Publishing information about corruption among politicians requires a great courage on the part of the newspaper, which can be a victim of accusations of one-sidedness and supporting the “other party”.
Mary Dejevsky, representing “The Independent”, spoke in a similar tone of voice. She reminded the role of the press in creating the recent scandal, which shocked the British public opinion, when abuse of public funds by British politicians came to light. In her opinion, the truth would never come to surface, if the media would not expose it. Mary Dejevski emphasized also that despite presenting the truth, it is also very important to present various points of view.
Cathy Young pointed to the opportunities offered by the Internet – it allows a greater involvement of the public opinion in discussions, but, due to unlimited access, it also creates opportunities for abuse.
__________________________________________________________
EU Energy Security: Is Russia a Reliable Partner or a Risk Factor?
Wednesday, May 27th, 9.00 – 10.30
Huseyn Chechenov, Chairman of the Committee on Education and Science. Council of Federation, Russia
The energy problem exists and nothing has changed in this matter. If the problem exists between provider and customer it could be solved easily – an agreement. The risks should be shared, the Russia in this sense is in difficult and unfair situation, as Europe doesn’t wish to share them. An energy issue should be solved by means of economic instruments, not political.
Adrian Nastase, Vice President of the Chamber of Deputies, Romania
An energy issue is not only the economic matter. We feel the consequences of scarcity of energy resources. The problem of energy security becomes a major problem. EU energy export comes from: 45% - Russia, 35%- Algeria, 20% – Norway. The Europe becomes more dependant on Russia. New solutions appear, but that’s not enough. The energy discussion gain seriousness, since the product – energy – could be used as an instrument of pressure. Ukraine showed us how the situation could be dramatic. In Romania we feel for example the South Stream is aimed to isolate Romania.
Igor Prokofyev, Deputy Director of the Russian Institute for Strategic Studies, Russia
The role of Russia is a special one in the European energy security architecture. Sometimes the interest of company doesn’t feet the interest of the state, even in case of such a huge company as Gazprom. EU treats us as a supplier, and Russia wishes to be the partner. Russia doesn’t want to be a supplier, that’s not enough. The energy sphere is a very conservative, EU won’t be ably to find another supplier of energy fast, the other question, why EU should search for any. EU and Russia can build partnership. On the other hand Russian politicians say they won’t sight the Energy Charta. The Members of EU have no common opinion as well. It is clear we have to find another solutions.
Igor Krugovykh, Russian Gas Society, Russia
What we see now is globalization of regional processes. We are the part of one system. New legal basis has to be built. Russia is a part of Europe, but Europe should not require Russia has to do all the job, Europe has to join Russia. We should create Eurasian energy forum – the aim is to cover all the continent.
Vladimir Socor, Fellow, Jamestown Foundation, USA
The facts are the facts. You just have to recall some of them – Lithuania, Czech Republic, Byelorussia, Hungary, Ukraine. Turkmen gas potential is the same as a Gazprom potential, that’s the reason why Russia blocks every attempt to deliver Turkmen gas to Europe directly. The Russia is not a transit country for gas (this is settled by the Russian domestic law), and it sells the Turkmen gas as its own. South Stream is very likely to be a bluff.
Afif Demirkiran, Member of the EU Hormonization Committee, Grand National Assembly of Turkey
The energy is a strategic product, especially it is important in terms of scarcity of energy resources. Russia is a strategic energy supplier for EU, there is no doubt about it. Turkey plays also decisive role in energy security architecture as a transit point. Every state has its own place and own role, but the international society has to concentrate on the cooperation – all gas/oil pipelines should be treated as means of diversification, not competition.
__________________________________________________________
Approachs to democracy. Universal or national traditions?
Wednesday, May 27th, 10.45 - 12.15
Witalij Portnikow, Radio Free Europe, Ukraine: We have spoken about democracy for 20 years already, with different adjectives. Therefore, does it make sense to discuss it?
Denis Szilnikov, a Member of Political Council of Right Course Party, said that there are different forms of opposition in Russia and it is not like they show in the media, in relations, which show on one side the Kremlin, which governs everything, and on the other hand the opposition members, who either demonstrate or are imprisoned. When we speak in Russia about Russian democratic standards, a heated discussion is started. In his view, revolutions in the name of democracy in the neighbouring countries led to pitiful results – lack of stability of the authority, continuous conflicts and crises. There were not reference points in Russia for building democratic standards. Autocracy and later communism did not build a democratic system. At present we look at the actions of the new president with a cautious optimism, because it can lead to renewed standards as regards free media. We need understanding, moral support.
Andrzej Kremer, Undersecretary of State, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Poland
There are a few important issues in the relations between Russia and Europe, which were mentioned by us during the last meeting, when we tried to reach a consensus on developing mutual relations. Differences in models of democracy in Europe and Russia are obvious. There are differences between Islamic, Russian and other models. Certain models are not accepted in some circles, because they are inappropriate for them. However, Europe regards these models as not democratic. Other types of democracy were regarded to be anti-democratic. A few types of democracy, which are present, are a result of the essence of this process. In Poland we had liberalization: Poles went to the West and saw what liberal democracy and free market meant. It helped in transformations in Poland, and also contributed to collapse of communism. A conclusion is that no government can replace the civil society. Today, we know that democratization cannot be stopped, but it requires yet the existence of civil society. Russia has experienced that democratization without the rule of law is not possible.
Nicolas Miletitch, Editor in Chief, Agence France–Press
Twenty years ago it was not possible to meet in Bucharest with Russians and discuss democracy. In France we have a different model of democracy than in the USA. What one can do, write in the USA is prohibited in France. As a minimum requirement, democracy means the existence of a normal civil society. The contemporary democracy in Russian version is different from the European one. Russia achieved progress during the time of Gorbatchev and Yeltsin. Today we speak about a retraction of this process. The concept of the state has always prevailed in Russia. Until today it seems that Russia cannot understand that a strong state and democracy do not have to be contradictive concepts. Now, we have a return of the cult of Stalin. Again the dissidents from Memorial, from Sacharov, are called agents of foreign countries. These old dissidents have again become enemies.
Cécile Vaissié, Director of the Russian Studies Department, University of Rennes, France
According to Kovaliov, in democracy, it is not the society, which should serve the authority, but the authority should serve the society. In this sense we can speak about a dysfunction of democracy in Russia. Democracy has become the basis for peace. Since France and Germany have been democratic – there have been no war between them.
Olga Zdravomyslova, Executive Director of Gorbatchev Foundation, Russia
Democracy does not only mean the theory, but also experience – it is the question about tendencies of transformation, the directions of modernization, dialogue, which meet with difficulties. Two thirds of the society recognizes that Russia needs democracy. The necessity of the existence of democratic institutions and new parties is not questioned. But many people think that Russia should develop its own model of democracy. Beliefs in the role of the law and the functions of the rule of law have been shaken inn the Russian society. The democratic process was the reason, why authoritarian society vanished. Unfortunately, this process overlapped with the collapse of the USSR, what caused problems. That is why, we ask now – which model of modernization will be adopted by Russia.
Timothy J. Colton, Director of the Devis Centre of Russian and Eurasian Studies
The collapse of the USSR was a result of many processes, but, thanks to them, Russians live today in better conditions. A consensus exists in Russia that its citizens want to build the civil society. Many of them think that contemporary Russia is not democratic. Democracy is a result of concord in the society, which legitimises the authority.
Iurie Rosca, Chairman of the Christian Democratic Party. Moldova
In Moldova there were tendencies to unite Moldova and Romania. There were Romanian territories, which today belong to Ukraine or Moldova. Today, we look for a model of cooperation between Romania and Moldova. We ask, who we are – in terms of language and culture 80% of population is Romanian, but they identify them as Moldavians. Conflicts have occurred again in Moldova today, because the older part of the society has pro-Russian attitude, and the younger generation is more oriented toward Romania. There are voices to unite the former Romanian areas. That is why, we need a new partnership of Kiev, Kishinev and Bucharest in order to guarantee stability in the region.
__________________________________________________________
Russia – Caucasus, is the partnership for peace possible?
Wednesday, May 27th, 10.45 - 12.15
The events of recent months demonstrated that we need to prepare a common approach to the issue of partnership and stabilization in Caucasus. It is a strategically important region, where the biggest world’s players want to strengthen their positions. The USA wants to be present in the region due to the neighbourhood with Afghanistan, Iran, the Middle East. The UE sees in the Caspian region a chance to diversify partially supply of energy resources. Russia treats this region as a territory of its direct influence. Despite geopolitical conditions, there are many internal issues in Caucasus, and without solving them we cannot speak about partnership for peace. One of such problems is the Karabakh conflict. Ashot Grigorian proposed to establish a confederation of Caucasian countries, which could be an associate member of the EU. Through development of economic cooperation it would lead to closer political and cultural relations. On the other hand, the confederation would also cooperate closely with Russia. In his opinion within the scope of Eastern Partnership one can carry out projects aimed at better understanding of the security issue in Caucasus, the role and influence of Russia on this region and the possibility to settle peacefully the issues of all so called ‘frozen conflicts’, which stand on the way to stabilization, integration and development of this region. There is a belief that in order to integrate a specific region and solve its needs it is enough to help it in intensive economic development. However, this case is different, since we need first to solve here internal conflicts. It is the only way to open borders for flow of goods, people and ideas. In order to achieve it we need cooperation of not only Caucasian countries, but also Russia, Turkey, and Iran. Let us hope that with time we will be able to work out positive solutions so that the region of Caucasus will be able to explore fully the possibilities of economic, cultural and social advancement.
__________________________________________________________
Energy security as a common goal for energy consumers and suppliers.
Wednesday, May 27th, 12.30 – 14.00
Natalia Ivanova, Deputy Director of the Institute for World Economy and International Relations, Russian Academy of Sciences
There is a new geographical dimension that we need to take into consideration these days while talking about energy security. We do have new players in the energy market. How can we build the new energy security system?
Robert Beglarian, Member of the Committee for Economy of the Islamic Consultative Assembly, Iran.
Business diplomacy plays the paramount role in building energy security system in the world. Mutual interaction between producers and suppliers is essential in doing so.
Victor Tsibulskiy, Professor, Principle Staff Scientist, RRC Kurchatov Institute, Russia
If production and consumption in Europe is on increase energy security gets worsen. Russia needs to enlarge its resources. Now 1176 bln tons of oil are extracted per year in Russia.
Alexey Khaytun, Director of the Center for Energy Policies, Institute of Europe, Russian Academy of Sciences, Russia
In Russia there is no energy internal market that is highly developed. Is more externally oriented. Prices of oil in Russia are more depended on the external not internal factors and that is very dangerous for Russia. Russia’s energy strategy requires around 5 bln dollars to improve infrastructure. Due to global crisis consumers buy less oil from Russia. Russia urgently needs more foreign investments. Direct investments are of key importance to Russia to overcome the crises crisis adverse effects. What is more? Another gaz network is essential for Russia to solve the other problems that badly effect energy security system in Russia. When it comes to oil prices – they can not be inter-connected . Prices can be set based on political agreements. Finding common grounds in politics is essential in that process.
Marat Terterov, Associate Fellow, Gulf Research Center, United Arab Emirates
Do institutions of global governance work in the energy sector? Do they help to secure energy security? Energy has become highly politicized issue recently so therefore international organizations are required (say OPEC representing the suppliers , IEA based in Paris and others). Energy Charter representing 59 different countries is the initiative that strikes the balance between the producers and suppliers. The problem with Energy Charter is that it can not provide security of energy transit.
__________________________________________________________
The Black Sea region in European policy
Wednesday, 27 May 2009, 12.30 – 14.00
Different views on directions of developing the policy towards the states located in the Black Sea basin and the role of the European Union in formulating it were presented during the debate.
Sergiu Celac, from the Romanian National Centre of Balanced Development,
asked a question whether the European Union is interested in this region and whether it has a vested interest to engage there. In his view this region, which has a great potential, has become closer to the EU after the last enlargement with Bulgaria and Romania, when the European Community "has discovered" that cooperation within the scope of Black Sea Synergy can become a good platform for establishing new relations with Russia.
Yasar Yakis, the Chairman of a European Integration Committee of the Turkish Parliament, emphasized the input of Turkey in development of Black Sea programmes and political initiatives supporting cooperation among the states in this region. It has frequently encountered barriers of legal nature, because in many countries legal acts dating back to Soviet times are still binding. According to Jakis, essential issue for the Black Sea region is quality and scope of Turkish-Russian cooperation.
Vahan Hohannesyan, representing the Armenian parliament, said that close Russian-Turkish cooperation has had a negative impact on his country. Armenia, as one of the smallest countries of the region, does not agree to play the role of an „energy hostage” in Russian conflicts. In his opinion a policy of honest competition and not confrontation should be followed in this area. Vahan Hohannesyan expressed also his support to the idea of suspending trade negotiations by the time when so called "frozen conflicts " in Nogorno Karabakh, Transnistria or Georgia are resolved.
