THE EU "EASTERN PARTNERSHIP" POLICY: ECONOMY VERSUS POLITICS

被引:0
作者
Sergeev, Egor A. [1 ]
Habarta, Andrzej A. [1 ,2 ]
Vorotnikov, Vladislav V. [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Russian Federat MGIMO Univ, Moscow State Inst Int Relat, Minist Foreign Affairs, 76 Vernadskogo Prosp, Moscow 119454, Russia
[2] Russian Acad Sci IE RAS, Inst Europe, 11-3 Mokhovaya Str, Moscow 125009, Russia
来源
MIROVAYA EKONOMIKA I MEZHDUNARODNYE OTNOSHENIYA | 2022年 / 66卷 / 12期
关键词
European Union; Eastern Partnership; European Neighborhood Policy; financing; Ukraine; Georgia; Moldova; Poland;
D O I
10.20542/0131-2227-2022-66-12-27-37
中图分类号
D81 [国际关系];
学科分类号
030207 ;
摘要
The Eastern Partnership as one the European Union's external activities is rarely analyzed through the prism of financing. At the same time, the analysis of instruments, volumes, dynamics and structure of financing allows not only to assess the efficiency of the funds spent in partner countries, but also to identify the real place of the Eastern Partnership in the structure of the EU foreign policy priorities. The aim of the study is to define the true role of partnership in the foreign policy of the Union. Analyzing the main directions and instruments of financing has resulted in a number of conclusions. Firstly, in terms of funding, the Eastern Partnership is inferior in importance not only to other countries and regions, which receive financial aid within the framework of the EU official development assistance, but also to the Southern Neighborhood. Secondly, the evolution of instruments has led to a further decrease in this role and the actual dissolution of financing the Eastern Partnership in the system of the EU official development assistance. Hence, we can conclude that the political component prevails over the economic one in case of the Eastern Partnership. Thirdly, the recipient countries within the framework of the program are clearly divided into two groups, based on the intensity of funding, and a larger amount of funds correlates not so much with the fulfillment of economic conditions, but with political loyalty and a demonstration of a pro-European foreign policy vector. Fourthly, even in the main beneficiary countries, the effectiveness of financing is very limited, since it does not lead to implementation of the stated goals. All this allows us to draw the key conclusion that the EU, within the framework of the Eastern Partnership, continues to build global regimes, the neighborhood being one of them. That is why the financing is aimed rather at stabilizing this neighborhood than at its active development.
引用
收藏
页码:27 / 37
页数:11
相关论文
共 35 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 2021, BUDGET SUPPORT TREND
[2]  
[Anonymous], 2021, E PARTNERSHIP RENEWE
[3]  
[Anonymous], COMMISSION STAFF WOR
[4]  
[Anonymous], 2021, KIEV POST 1210
[5]  
[Anonymous], 2019, EBRD SAYS TIME RIPE
[6]  
[Anonymous], 2014, TOTAL AMOUNT ALLOCAT
[7]  
Arutyunyan O.V, 2012, VESTNIK SAINT PETERS, P115
[8]   "Eastern Partnership" after the Ukrainian Crisis: The Value of Stability or Stable Values? [J].
Bolgova, L. .
CONTEMPORARY EUROPE-SOVREMENNAYA EVROPA, 2019, (07) :115-123
[9]  
Bulatov A.S, 2019, S WAY EC INDEPENDENC
[10]  
Crombois J.F., 2017, POLITEJA, V14, P109, DOI [10.12797/Politeja.14.2017.49.07, DOI 10.12797/POLITEJA.14.2017.49.07]