This is a report covering the outcomes of the third meeting within the project “German-Russian International Affairs Dialogue” or GRID, implemented jointly by the Körber Foundation and Russian International Affairs Council. The session took place on April 15-16, 2016, in Berlin and gathered members of Russian and German business and expert communities, as well as government officials.
This is a report covering the outcomes of the third meeting within the project “German-Russian International Affairs Dialogue” or GRID, implemented jointly by the Körber Foundation and Russian International Affairs Council. The session took place on April 15-16, 2016, in Berlin and gathered members of Russian and German business and expert communities, as well as government officials.
The report states that Russia and the EU are adapting to the changed environment of the bilateral relationship that should be seen as “the new normal.” The participants repeatedly underlined that the return to the business-as-usual pattern is out of question. At the same time, the German analysts stressed the importance of preserving and strengthening the institutions of the united Europe for Russia despite a future Brexit and other EU challenges. A dramatic emaciation or even disintegration of the EU would entail the rise of NATO and East European countries (which are traditionally tougher on Russia than the Old Europe), an overall decrease of opportunities for investment, transfer of knowledge and technology, as well as for the Russia trade. Hence, Moscow should better stop playing the card of the intra-EU differences and show more reserve toward the EU domestic affairs.
Quite well has worked the forecast for minor reinforcement of NATO contingents in East Europe after the Warsaw summit of the alliance. At that, the recent session of the Russia-NATO Council has only confirmed that the forum offers very limited opportunities for a substantive buildup of Russia and NATO interaction on European security.
A separate section is devoted to the Ukraine situation and dynamics of the Ukrainian domestic processes. Expert believes that the Minsk Agreements are unlikely to be implemented any time soon, with the same referring to the Ukraine settlement. The EU countries generally feel the Ukraine fatigue because of poor progress in the Ukrainian domestic politics and harsher crises in the EU that put Ukraine on the backburner.
Despite major differences between the German political and business elites on cooperation with Russia within the EU-EEU format, large German exporters underlined that if the EEU becomes institutionally successful, creates a single market and removes the double regulation problem, the European and primarily German businessmen would alter their approach to the prospects of Eurasian integration, thus enabling a on-point EU-EEU dialogue.
Finally, the discussion has once again proven that the EU is not willing to become actively engaged in the Syrian crisis, first of all militarily. European participants reiterated that Russia and the United States remain the key actors in the region, while the EU can see no efficient tools to influence the regional situation. Although not seen by the regional countries negatively, the EU seems frustrated about the products of its official development assistance programs. The multibillion investments in the socio-economic infrastructure and political institutions of the Middle East and North Africa have failed to lower the socio-economic tensions and avert the migration crisis and the surge of refugees in the industrialized European countries.
The discussion has again demonstrated the need for a Track-2 Russia-EU dialogue aimed at overcoming the confidence crisis in relations between Russia and the European Union and between Russia and Germany.
