Russian and EU leaders again fail to strike expected compromises on key policy issues

According to the existing protocol, Russia at the summit was represented only by President Dmitry Medvedev, while the EU was represented by two top Brussels technocrats in the persons of the European Council President Herman van Rompuy and European Commission President Jose M. Barroso. “Russia is a real strategic partner to the EU, with whom we have the most intensive and dynamic dialog,” Rompuy said at the summit’s final press conference, noting that there a productive discussion of all the issues of the agenda in a friendly manner. “This why unlike other countries, we do not need a ‘reset’ of relations with Russia, on the contrary, we want a ‘fast forward’,” he added. The other summiteers were also effusive in praising the meeting’s outcomes. “The meeting was concrete, thematic and saturated,” Medvedev said, while Barroso said the meeting took place in “an open and productive environment.”

Though the EU and Russian leaders in every possible way demonstrated full mutual understanding at the final press conference, such affinity, however, proved insufficient in practice to enable them to reach agreements on the main issue at the Rostov summit, as Moscow and Brussels once again failed to find a common ground on their different positions and diverging views on how and when to fully repeal visa regime for ordinary citizens. 

Summit’s illusory results

Though two key documents — a joint declaration on Partnership for Modernization and agreement on the Protection of Classified Information were signed, there was, however, an impression that these documents that have no clear practical applications in the lives of common citizens were specially signed to prevent the summit from a total failure. But this objective was also not fully reached either, as the lack of progress on the long-awaited ‘Roadmap’ containing the conditions and, most importantly, a fixed time framework for abolishing the visa regime hung in the air as thick clouds above the meeting proceedings. 

“Russia is a real strategic partner to the EU, with whom we have the most intensive and dynamic dialog. Therefore, we do not need a ‘reset’ of relations with Russia; we want a ‘fast forward’.”

Besides, Moscow, departing from traditional diplomatic etiquettes, did not try to hide the fact that it was the EU leaders that were not in a hurry to repeal the visa regime for Russian citizens, unlike Russian leaders, who were not only ready to completely open their borders to EU citizens, but even went further to buttress its intention by handing Brussels technocrats a draft agreement containing the Kremlin’s vision on resolution of the issue. Such diplomatic maneuver by the Kremlin was a big surprise for both the EU leaders and the diplomats that accompanied them. Indeed, the Kremlin’s draft-agreement tactic, according to experts in international diplomatic relations, was a brilliant move, despite the fact that it has little or no chance of success, which again was not the end objective of the maneuver. The beauty of the plan, according to these experts, is that both Kremlin and Russian Foreign Ministry policy strategists that worked on the agreement draft knew well in advance that the document will not be seriously considered by the EU leadership anytime soon. 

And, this is just what Russia wants, which will henceforth demand at every opportunity, including all sorts of meetings and summits, some forms of explanations from its EU partners on the fate of this agreement. Brussels, thus put in such position, where it has to constantly justify its stand, will in line with diplomatic etiquette have to offer some explanations not only to Russian officials, but also to media, both domestic and foreign. It goes without saying that the latter will not miss ‘such rare opportunity to constantly terrorize EU officials with inconvenient questions’ on why Brussels does not want to reach a compromise on the visa-annulment issue. 

Speaking on the EU’s foot-dragging policy on the visa-regime issue, Medvedev noted that repealing the visa regime, from the point of view of national security concerns, does not pose a threat to Russia or EU. “This is why for us, there is nothing preventing us from canceling visas for EU citizens even tomorrow. Besides, there is a high level of technical readiness for such policy, including a set of agreements, concerning those, who will violate the law and their subsequent deportations,” he said. “We have just given our European partners the draft of an agreement containing the conditions for repealing the visa regime for both parties,” the Russian leader added, noting that he understands the complexity involved in decision-making processes in the EU, where its 27 member states need to reach a consensus on every issue. “This contrasts sharply with the procedures for adopting such political decisions in Russia, thus making it much easier for Moscow to adopt decisions much faster than in the EU.”

Vladimir Chizhov, the Russian ambassador to EU, has even seen the application of the so-called double standard policy on the visa issue by Moscow’s European partners, noting that he does not think that Russia represents a greater threat for EU than some 50 countries, whose citizens are already enjoying visa-free regimes with EU and other countries, such as the Balkan states of Albania and Bosnia & Herzegovina, which Brussels had already promised simplified or privileged visa regimes with EU states. “Honestly speaking, I sincerely don’t think that EU has any ground to have more concern about Russian citizens than the citizens from the above-mentioned countries.”

The perennial issue of Russia’s WTO membership bid

Another issue, where Moscow and Brussels also failed to strike a compromise is the ongoing negotiation on Russia’s WTO membership bid and EU’s perennial failure to offer clear and strong political support for Russia, except for some non-binding frequent verbal assurances on its understanding of the acute necessity for Russia to become a WTO member. Speaking on this issue, Medvedev again reiterated his favorite expression that some WTO member countries see Russia’s membership as a special reward ‘for compliant behavior’ from Moscow. “The leaders of such countries want a submissive behavior from Russia as a condition for granting it membership in the WTO. But such approach is completely not acceptable to us, as we want our membership in this organization to be a product of objective mutual necessity.”

The same view was also shared by the other representatives of the Russian political and business elite, who, just like in the case of Brussels’ foot-dragging on the visa-free regime agreement with the EU, have also seen the lack of the expected progress on the WTO membership bid ‘another practical manifestation of the double standard policy,’ this time not only by the WTO leadership, but also by heads of member states. 

As a proof of this double standard policy application, Russian officials have often cited a dozen or so of WTO member states, including some former Soviet republics, whose sizes of economies and their states of development are far less than those of Russia. Similarly, the economies of several WTO member states, especially those in the Asian and Pacific regions, cannot be called ‘liberal and free-market oriented,’ and this one of basic conditions for admitting aspiring members to this organization. Some exceptions from the rules were made by the WTO leadership for these countries, but in case of Russia it has refused to make any concessions or such exceptions, they said. One more powerful argument from the Kremlin is the obvious fact that Russia is the only country in G20 today that is not a member of WTO. Predictably, the EU leaders reiterated their support and necessity for Russia’s prompt admission into the WTO, and the summit was adjourned.