This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 BRUSSELS 000114 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SENSITIVE 
 
DEPARTMENT FOR EUR/ERA 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PREL ECON PGOV PHUM ZL XH XF XI EUN ETRO USEU BRUSSELS
SUBJECT: ACTION PLANS FOR THE EU NEIGHBORHOOD: DO THEY 
MATTER? 
 
(U) This cable is sensitive but unclassified.  Please handle 
accordingly. 
 
¶1.  (U) SUMMARY:  In recent weeks, the European Union 
announced with great fanfare seven "Neighborhood Action 
Plans" -- one step in the process of defining and 
developing the EU's relationships with the countries in its 
"Neighborhood" that at this point seem unlikely to become 
membership candidates.  The Action Plans are agreed areas for 
political and economic engagement that will bring partner 
countries closer to EU norms.  While the Action Plans do not, 
in 
and of themselves, create binding obligations on either 
party, they are seen as a step forward in creating stronger 
ties between the EU and its neighbors.  END SUMMARY. 
 
CONCEPT AND HISTORY 
=================== 
 
¶2.  (U) For much of its history, the EU has been able to 
influence neighboring states by wielding the carrot of EU 
membership.  In 2003, former External Relations 
Commissioner Chris Patten noted &the promise of EU 
membership8 was &the Union,s most successful foreign 
policy 
instrument.8 But with the most recent enlargement, and 
Croatia, Turkey, and perhaps other Balkans states all 
waiting in the wings, many in the EU believe that the Union 
is reaching the limits of membership expansion.  Patten 
noted that the EU now needed &new ways8 to shape the 
neighboring countries that were unlikely to be EU 
candidates. 
 
¶3.  (U) In 2003, the EU devised the European Neighborhood 
Policy (ENP) to support the Common Foreign and Security 
Policy,s (CFSP,s) strategic objective of building security 
around the EU,s borders.  The ENP aims to encourage 
democracy, the rule of law, and market economies through 
engagement, but does not promise eventual EU membership. 
According to former Enlargement Commissioner Gunter 
Verheugen, the Union wants to give those neighboring 
countries that respect common values (such as human rights 
and sustainable development) a &real stake in the enlarged 
EU.8  To implement the ENP, the EU has negotiated with 
seven of its neighbors an "Action Plan" (AP) -- a lengthy 
customized list of goals and priorities defining progress 
over three to five years.  The APs seek a comprehensive 
approach in creating &a ring of friends8 to avoid a new 
dividing line in Europe, according to former President of 
the Commission Romano Prodi and External Relations 
Commissioner Benita Ferrero-Waldner. 
 
¶4.  (SBU) Originally, the ENP was designed to engage the EU, 
s new neighbors to the east: *Russia, Ukraine, Moldova, and 
Belarus.  The APs were intended to be highly conditional, 
tying* 
progress on specific economic and political reforms with 
specific EU commitment and funding.  As the EU 
developed the ENP, however, it has changed dramatically. 
First, Russia balked at being considered merely as a 
country on the EU,s periphery, and has insisted the EU 
develop a separate &partnership8 with Moscow.  Next, the 
EU, 
s southern members lobbied successfully to expand the ENP 
to include the EU,s Mediterranean partners of the Barcelona 
process.  Finally, as the first tranches of APs were 
negotiated, both the partner countries and the EU were 
reluctant to impose the strict conditionality originally 
envisioned.  As a result, the Action Plans are rather vague. 
 
NOT A PATH TO MEMBERSHIP 
======================== 
 
¶5.  (SBU) Since the policy,s inception, EU officials 
stressed that the ENP was not an enlargement policy.  The 
emphasis on the &neighborhood8 as distinct from potential 
membership implies that a country that is considered a & 
neighbor8 is likely to remain an outsider.  The Commission 
simply offers that the fulfillment of AP priorities may 
lead to a &new privileged partnership.8  Although the 
neighborhood policy raises the unresolved question of where 
Europe,s limits are, EU leaders seem unlikely to address 
that question before the Union digests the May 2004 EU 
enlargement, the largest in its history, the probable 2007 
accession of Bulgaria, Romania, and the likely eventual 
accession of Turkey and the former Yugoslav republics. 
¶6.  (SBU) The negotiations over Ukraine's Action Plan 
illustrated the limits of the EU's willingness to deal with 
the issue of potential membership for neighbors.  According 
to a Ukrainian official, Ukraine pushed hard during the 
negotiations for more concrete language on membership.  But 
they counted themselves fortunate to achieve the following 
nebulous sentence:  "Consideration will be given to the 
possibility of a new enhanced agreement, whose scope will 
be defined in the light of the fulfillment of the 
objectives of this Action Plan and of the overall evolution 
of EU-Ukraine relations.  The advisability of any new 
contractual arrangements will be considered in due time." 
In short, Ukraine wanted the AP to open the door to EU 
membership; the EU offered somewhat lesser formula that 
does not slam the door shut.  As a senior EU official 
recently noted, Ukraine's Action Plan is an enlargement 
program without the word enlargement; if Ukraine does 
everything in the plan, enlargement negotiations would take 
only "ten minutes."  (Comment.  Assuming, of course, that the 
EU had made the political decision to extend membership to 
Ukraine -- which it has not.  End Comment.) 
 
CURRENT ACTION PLANS 
==================== 
 
¶7.  (U) In December 2004, the Commission adopted and the 
Council endorsed the first Action Plans for Moldova, 
Ukraine, Morocco, Tunisia, Jordan, Israel, and the 
Palestinian Authority.  The APs then passed to the relevant 
Association or Cooperation Council for approval.  In 
Ukraine,s case, the Commission recommended that the 
EU-Ukraine Cooperation Council approve the AP only after & 
developments in Ukraine make it possible8 -- a condition 
that included holding a free and fair presidential election 
rerun on December 26, 2004.  According to Ferrero-Waldner, 
the Commission plans to conclude APs for Egypt, Lebanon, 
Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia in 2005. 
 
¶8. (U) Although based on common elements, the EU 
differentiated the Action Plans, depending on the specific 
issues of mutual importance to the EU and the other party. 
For example, the Action Plan with Israel calls for 
"progress toward a comprehensive settlement of the Middle 
East conflicts" and non-proliferation of weapons of mass 
destruction, while the strategies in Ukraine's plan include 
strengthening democracy and ensuring a free press. 
 
WHAT'S IN IT FOR NEIGHBORS? 
=========================== 
 
¶9.  (U) The Action Plans do not, in and of themselves, 
offer the neighbors dramatic new benefits.  While they 
reference other agreements to which the EU and a given 
neighbor may be party, and discuss potential areas of 
cooperation, they do not include promises of funding or 
other legally binding commitments.  But they engage the EU 
politically in helping its partners to help themselves, by 
obliging the neighbors to reform their systems in exchange 
for an EU promise of deeper integration.  The benefit to 
the neighboring countries is the potential for long-term 
opportunities for mutual growth and improved relations with 
the EU.  Neighbors may expect that, over time, the 
Neighborhood Policy will lead to concrete benefits such as 
more favorable trade conditions, eased travel restrictions, 
and cultural and scientific exchanges. 
 
¶10.  (SBU) Rather than committing new funding, in the Action 
Plans the EU commits political will to the &new privileged 
partnership,8 leaving its general &philosophy8 toward the 
neighboring countries unchanged, according to a Council 
official.  The APs largely call on each 
partner to fulfill its previous commitments to the EU and 
the international community, such as the Association 
Agreement, the Partnership and Cooperation Agreement, or 
United Nations treaties.  In some cases, EU policies 
counter US policies, such as the requirement that the 
partners sign and ratify the International Criminal Court 
Treaty or the Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, 
Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-Personnel 
Mines and Their Destruction. 
 
¶11.  (U) There is potential, albeit indirect, for the 
Action Plans to result in new funding for the EU,s 
neighbors.  As part of a broad plan to simplify EU 
assistance, a European Neighborhood and Partnership 
Initiative (ENPI) is being set up as one of four main EU 
funding mechanisms.  It is unclear how large this mechanism 
will be, and the commission has explicitly avoided making any 
firm commitment for new funding in the seven Action Plans 
already negotiated, but implicit in the ENPI is the concept 
that neighbors who make progress in implementing their 
Action Plans will be encouraged with additional EU 
assistance. 
 
¶12.  (SBU) COMMENT:  The goals listed in the Action Plans 
are optimistic and ambitious, while corresponding 
guarantees and safeguards seem few.  A Commission official 
working on relations with 
Russia, Ukraine, Moldova, and Belarus, told us that the 
implementation 
of the Action Plans depends on the political will of the 
parties, rather than on specific funding mechanisms.  If 
the EU remains committed to the neighborhood policy -- and 
if the neighbors cooperate -- the Action Plans may become 
an important step in securing stable relationships between 
the EU and the nations, which border it.  END COMMENT. 
 
¶13.  (U) More information about the European Neighborhood 
Policy can be found at: 
http://europa.eu.int/comm/world/enp/. 
 
Schnabel 
c