Mr. Erwan Fouéré:

I thank the Chairman and the other members of the committee for their questions. I will start by responding to the most difficult question, which relates to President Putin and Russia. There is no doubt that many people in the West were taken by surprise when President Putin, with the stroke of a pen, tore up the rulebook that had been agreed by the international community after the fall of the Berlin Wall. Next year, we will celebrate the 40th anniversary of the signing of the Helsinki Final Act, which was a remarkable achievement in the middle of the Cold War. It is a sad reflection on the times we live in that it would simply not be possible to rewrite that agreement today due to the extent of the frostiness that has seeped into East-West relations. Indeed, we are on the threshold of a new cold war. There is no doubt about it.

It is very easy to rewrite history in hindsight. Many of us in the think-tank community, if I can put it that way, believe the EU underestimated the impact of its efforts to reach out to Ukraine, especially in 2004. Perhaps there was a lack of appreciation of how this would be felt in Russia, which always saw and still sees Ukraine as being very much part of its sphere of influence, just as it does with Transnistria and Moldova. We are faced with that situation. Crimea is lost, unfortunately, even if it is important not to recognise that from a legal point of view. I doubt very much if it will ever be possible to redress that situation. We are facing a worsening crisis in eastern Ukraine, where the recent elections were not able to take place, or took place to a very limited extent, because of the security situation there. There is no doubt that we are on the threshold of a new frozen conflict. Transnistria, which is a region of 500,000 people on the border between Moldova and Ukraine, has seen a protracted frozen conflict since the break-up of the Soviet Union in 1992. A process of dialogue with Transnistria is under way. Those negotiations are not working as they should because of the impact of the Ukrainian crisis. I fear that eastern Ukraine will become another Transnistria. This is extremely worrying because it would affect the future of Ukraine.

I am working with the crisis management initiative that was set up by Martti Ahtisaari to promote dialogue with different personalities in Ukraine, including members of parliament and representatives of civil society. In July, we brought people involved in the Northern Ireland peace process to talk to people in Ukraine about elements of that peace process in terms of dialogue that could be useful for the dialogue in Ukraine. There is no ongoing dialogue at all at the moment. Efforts have been made by the current Swiss chairmanship of the OECD to launch a process of dialogue. It was hoped that this might get under way after the recent elections, but the security situation is such that it has not been possible. Dialogue is the only way to find a solution that must involve constitutional issues regarding what sort of powers to delegate to the eastern province. The big problem is knowing who we should talk with. Who do the so-called elected leaders in eastern Ukraine represent? All of that is very suspect. Of course it is fuelled and supported by Russia. At the moment, the prospects are not very positive. I am afraid they will only get worse before they get better.

The EU must maintain its support for Ukraine. When I walked around the Maidan central square in Kiev in June, I was struck by the number of EU flags everywhere. I asked myself whether the Union is capable of responding to the aspirations of those flying the EU flag. Is the EU able and willing to respond to the aspirations of the majority of the people of Ukraine who want to come closer to the EU? It is true that it took quite some time for the EU to get its act together and move forward with different programmes. A lesson was learned on both sides in terms of relations with Russia, with which we need to develop some sort of dialogue, and in terms of strengthening support for Ukraine as it moves from the current conflict situation to a post-conflict situation. There are no magic solutions, unfortunately. A great deal of energy and effort will be required on the part of the EU to deal with this matter. I have mentioned the impact that this issue has had on the western Balkans.

As I indicated, President Putin's visit to Serbia a few weeks ago was a demonstration of force by Russia and a statement that the European Union is not the only transformative power, so to speak, in the western Balkans. Russia, with its narrative on human rights issues, gets a hearing in a number of countries in the western Balkans which are much closer to authoritarian methods of government than to the western democratic systems to which we are used. It is for this reason that the European Union needs to be much more engaged and assertive in its overall relations with the western Balkans.
I will respond to the other issues raised individually. On Bosnia and Herzegovina, it is true that we have given ample warnings to Bosnia and Herzegovina that they need to maintain their commitments to reforms and the implementation of European Court of Human Rights decisions regarding minorities. There is a feeling somehow, certainly on my part but it is shared by others, that the hands-off approach of the EU in the past two or three years was not the correct one and there should have been much greater direct involvement by the European Union. If it was possible to reach a beginning of normalisation between Kosovo and Serbia, there is no reason this could not also be done in the case of Bosnia and Herzegovina. The new High Representative, Ms Mogherini, has indicated that this matter will be discussed next week at the Foreign Affairs Council and that there will be an initiative on the issue. This is important.
As members will be aware, the British Foreign Secretary and German Foreign Minister issued an open letter last week to the people of Bosnia-Herzegovina. The letter was a gentle hint to the European Union that it must be much more proactive in the country. It is not only a question of reform. The constitutional issues that arise must also be considered because the Government of Bosnia-Herzegovina is dysfunctional. I suggested that one possible model for a constitutional debate would be the Irish Constitutional Convention which concluded its work recently. I suggested that the composition of the convention could provide some lessons or useful hints for Bosnia-Herzegovina.
On the level of support for European Union membership in the western Balkans, there is no doubt that it remains very high. This is reflective of the aspirations of the citizens in the region who view their only future and security as being within the European Union, rather than outside of it. That will remain a constant, even if a number of issues are undermining the credibility of the European Union. Developments in Hungary have without doubt affected the credibility of the European Union because they show double standards. The EU speaks of respect for civil society and the media in the candidate countries. Why is it allowing the developments taking place in Hungary? A second aspect is that some member states are hijacking the enlargement agenda to suit their own interests. I refer to bilateral disputes such as in the case of Cyprus with regard to Turkey and Greece with regard to Macedonia on the issue of the latter country's name. These disputes are also undermining the credibility of the enlargement policy and show that the EU needs to discuss them in some form to reduce these double standards.
I briefly alluded to the Russian influence. The narrative of Russia is affecting human rights issues, including human rights for the gay and lesbian community and ethnic minorities. This is a further reason for the European Union to take a proactive approach.
On the use of the carrot and stick, visa liberalisation offers a good example of this approach. Each of the countries was given a clear list of reforms on border controls, security of documents such as passports, immigration, the rule of law and so forth. They all implemented these reforms because they knew the reward would be visa free travel. It is a challenge for the European Union in the enlargement process, which is much longer. The accession of Croatia took eight years, from 2005 until last year, and the enlargement negotiations have become more complicated. When Ireland joined the European Economic Community, I believe the acquis consisted of some 10,000 pages of legislation. This has since increased to approximately 180,000 pages of legislation, which must be absorbed in the candidate countries. How to maintain the attractiveness of enlargement for western Balkan countries is part of the challenge. While the tools are available, the European Union must use them in a much more effective manner. This would also strengthen its leverage.
The issue of civil society was raised. I highlighted this matter because it is absolutely fundamental, particularly when one is dealing with societies in transition, such as those in the western Balkans, where institutions are still weak and governments are not accountable to citizens. Even if civil society organisations are relatively weak in some countries, there are a few organisations at grassroots level which can make a difference and they need to be supported. The European Union needs to be much more systematic in the support it provides for civil society and the media because this elements strengthen accountability.
I agree that the European Union must accept its internal weaknesses. It would be to our credit if we were to do that. However, the more we allow the disrespect of basic democratic principles to go unsanctioned within the EU, for example, in the case of Hungary, the more we give reasons to small nationalist groups, minorities and oligarchs in the Balkan countries to do whatever they want because they see what is happening in member states. It behoves the European Union to be much more consistent in our approach in order that the aspiration in the western Balkans to join the European Union is viable and succeeds. People in the western Balkans realise that there is no future other than as members of the European Union. We must take advantage of this and work as diligently as possible to ensure their aspirations are eventually realised, even if it takes longer than we would have liked. I hope I have responded to all the questions.