Power’s changed in the EU. What Europe are Moldova and Ukraine Going to Now?

The other day, the leaders of European countries have assigned key posts in the governing structures of the EU — and so that the new power of the European Union turned out to be absolutely contradictory.  The politicians of the EU countries could not moderate their own ambitions, and the only thing that will be expected from near-border Moldova and Ukraine is the minimum stability of the borders, and nothing more. The disunity of political elites within the European Union is becoming increasingly apparent. What happened this week, the deployment of posts in the EU for the next 5 years, only confirmed that no unity among European officials is foreseen. The post of Chairman of the European Commission may be taken by German Defence Minister Ursula von der Leyen, who is unpopular even in her homeland: Berlin is investigating the case of negligence and embezzlement in the Ministry of Defence of Germany. At the same time, the nominees of German Chancellor Angela Merkel for the posts of heads of the European Commission and the European Parliament were voted down by France and Eastern Europe. The farther in, the deeper.  EU leaders planned to elect as the head of the European Parliament Bulgarian politician Sergei Stanishev, but MEPs made a demarche and ‘punished’ the politician for his Soviet past and ties with Moscow. The Italian socialist David Sassoli was elected as the Chairman of the European Parliament, which caused a lot of annoyance to the countries of the New Europe. The post of President of the European Council was given to Belgian politician Charles Michel, and the current Director of the IMF, Christine Lagarde, who in France is blamed on mistakes in leadership positions, including accusations of negligence, will become the Chairwoman of the European Central Bank. The EU High Commissioner for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy is another crux of the ‘chaos’' biscuit. Josep Borrell, Spainish Foreign Minister, represents one of the 5 EU countries that does not recognize Kosovo’s independence because of its own problems with the separatists. The European bureaucracy is shocked by this conflict and does not understand what will happen to the negotiations between Belgrade and Pristina under Josep Borrell. The Commissioner may not only slow down the Kosovo settlement, but also the EU’s rapprochement with the Balkan states. The contradictory appointments in the European Union say only that the task for the current EU leadership is at least to stabilize the situation within the Union and on its periphery. In this regard, one of the key tasks of the current EU leaders will be building predictable relations with neighbors – but nothing more. This approach categorically excludes any negotiations on the prospect of EU membership for the Eastern partnership countries, especially Moldova and Ukraine. On the other hand, now Kyiv and Chisinau can show their readiness to move along the European path, even when the EU itself is stuck in the transition period. Apparently, Europe expects the initiative of the authorities of Moldova and Ukraine. Brussels will be ready to invest financially, infrastructurally and methodically in the modernization of the adjacent countries of Eastern Europe. The new authorities in Ukraine and the Republic of Moldova receive direct signals about it: for example, the unfreezing of macro-financial assistance to Moldova is an issue almost resolved even despite the presence of the pro-Russian Party of Socialists in power. Moreover, the Government of Moldova reasonably expects expansion of tranches both from the EU as a whole and individual states of the community. Whether the Eastern partnership countries will be able to use the new opportunities pragmatically depends on them. It is of fundamental importance that the Europe to which Ukraine and Moldova are moving today is a complex Union with aggravated chronic problems, a lot of internal contradictions and the growth of ideas of eurosceptics, disappointed with the situation in the EU. For the leadership of Chisinau and Kyiv this may mean that Brussels will not provide any ‘action plans’, and there will be no more opportunities to imitate the reforms proposed by the Europeans. Obviously, in the coming years, the EU’s support to the authorities in Moldova and Ukraine can be very generous, but only if both countries show their political maturity for further development according to European standards. The second thing that should be remembered by the Ukrainian and Moldovan authorities is the change in Europe’s approaches to geopolitical conflicts. The current EU, which is contradictory and sorting itself out, is unlikely to be fed enough with the yesterday’s anti-Russian rhetoric that kept Plahotniuc and Poroshenko in power. Most likely, Brussels will try to look for ways out of foreign policy collisions with Russia and the United States, and will wait for the authorities in Chisinau and Kyiv to progress in resolving the conflicts in Transdniestria and Donbas. Europe’s Eastern neighbors need to develop a ‘fresh’ vision of their foreign policy and approaches to long-standing territorial problems as soon as possible. At the same time, there are no guarantees that these approaches will be unanimously supported by the current EU – the example of the statement by the Moldovan Foreign Minister Nicu Popescu on the “civil war” in Transdniestria clearly showed that current Brussels very cautiously comments on the positions of the new authorities of Moldova. At the end of the day, the European drift for Moldova and Ukraine in the coming years becomes absolutely unpredictable and risky, with no simple decisions and excessive guardianship of EU officials. Perhaps these few years will be the most important maturity test for Ukrainian and Moldovan politicians.