Double standards of single Europe: myth or reality
If we base on the date of Maastricht treaty conclusion, this year the EU can celebrate its first modest anniversary. 20 years ago the Economic and Monetary Union was established, new conditions for uniform policy in the field of finance, economy, safety, internal affairs and justice were created. It’s known that time of the conclusion of the treaty was chosen specifically. Till 1992 the collapse of socialist system had practically been terminated and the bipolar system of the world had been destroyed. The United States of America were a uniform pole of force.
In those difficult conditions leaders of the West European countries have approved the strategic decision, namely, to try to create on the old continent a new centre of force being able to serve as a counterbalance of US influence in geopolitical & economic fields, thus not affecting military ambitions of Washington. Similar ideas were met with lively response by many residents of the West Europe, in particular, by the author of this article. 20 years ago it was seemed that period of history characterized by wars, disorders, sufferings of people was finished. There was a hope that a new era of stability, peace, European brotherhood was slightly opened. Residents of «old Europe» dreamt about new «Big Europe», occupying the territory till Russian borders.
20 years have passed. United Europe has really expanded its borders, but not to the Russian borders. It has stopped on borders of the former USSR with a relatively small territorial exception in the form of Baltic region. For ordinary european national, especially from the West, such situation is entirely clear. «Old» EU countries have already tired of feeding «new» brothers, recently accepted to the Union. The situation around Belarus, Moldova and Ukraine is problematic. Namely at this time different scientific concepts arise. They are presented to the public namely at the time when it’s necessary to convince the audience that politicians are simply compelled to pass unpopular decisions. For example, it relates to the decision, passed contrary to laws of geoeconomic developments, to stop European Union expansion to the east. A civilisation there, probably, is of another quality.
The situation around integration aspirations of Ukraine into the Unio can serve as a bright illustration.
This state is a peer of Maastricht treaty. 20 years ago its people passed decision on exit from the totalitarian USSR and on building of the democratic state, taking as a model European values and approaches. All last years this country tried and did the best to become really European state. In its turn EU also participated in this process. Periodically we directed different recommendations and lectures to Ukraine, and also threatened to break its European dream if the leadership of this country for any reasons goes beyond the framework of the policy recommended by the EU. Economic feasibility of Ukrainian joining with its powerful transport potential to EU was affected by a political factor. West European countries began the EU history from economy, but in case of Ukraine they focused on a political aspect.
Growing pressure by the EU institution on the eve of parliamentary elections in Ukraine serves as a bright evidence of this fact. Kiev is accused in absence of supremacy of law in the country. Ukrainian EU integration is connected with requirements to release ex-prime minister lady Тіmoshenko from prison and so on. And all these facts are witnessed on the background of real progress of Ukrainians in the issue of transparency of election process and harmonization of the local legislation with the European standards. I consider such situation as prejudicialness of EU representatives towards estimations of social&political processes in Ukraine and on presence of double standards in their foreign policy!!!!!
So, some representatives of EU political establishment consider the ex-prime minister of Ukraine Тіmoshenko to be the political victim-fighter for democracy. But they don’t wanna deep into “history” of her criminal prosecution. And as a result ordinary europeans have a stereotype attitude towards Ukrainian power. They found it as authoritarian state. The unwillingness of Kiev to conduct proceeding in case of Lady U. with involvement of the western experts is ostensibly one of arguments for such conclusions. Nevertheless the President of Ukraine V.Janukovych in conversation with his American counterpart B.Obama has round up support and understanding in this case.
Moreover there are efforts to bring a charge against Ukrainian leadership in unwillingness to amend local legislation with the purpose of its harmonization with European norms. Nevertheless critics miss the fact that draft of a new criminal code of Ukraine is basically constructed on the European standards and practice of law enforcement bodies of the West countries. Amendments to the legislation on public prosecutor’s office and advocacy will become the next step of reform of Ukrainian legislation. New wordings of laws on elections, public organizations and public information are passed. Reforms in tax and customs fields are carried out, process of deregulation of economy is under way.
At the same time some European politicians already make statements on undemocratic elections to the Ukrainian parliament, that will be held in November, in case of opposition defeat. Thus, if the opposition wins elections in Ukraine, the results will be automatically recognized by the Europe as fair and the Ukrainian democracy all is safely?
As an example of the preconvinced approach of EU leaders to the Ukrainian problem serves the criticism of very sharp attitude from Christian Democratic Union (Germany) on a situation in Ukraine. They underline, that Angela Merkel loses unanimous support among colleagues and will be obliged to compromise concerning issues of reorganization of relations with Ukraine. First of all it is connected with a position of powerful representatives of business circles in Germany, wishing to normalize relations with official Kiev in expectation of splash in bilateral economic cooperation. Recently six large German corporations and over 130 firms addressed requirement to the Federal Chancellor to liberalize a visa regime between two countries and to assist signing of the agreement on a free trade area with Ukraine. As German experts realize, the democracy in Ukraine should become a consequence of local economy development, first of all – medium business, instead of result of accession to power of “good” leaders instead of “bad” one.
I must admit, that despite the preconvinced treatment of situation in Ukraine by some European politicians, the country leaders has an intention to follow the course on construction of a democratic society and development of civilized partner relations between all countries of the world.
Arsenio Escolar, editor by 20minutos.es