A New Agreement between the EU and Russia: Why, what and when?
The 10th anniversary of the Partnership and Cooperation Agreement (PCA) between the EU and Russia, which falls on 1 December 2007, is already prompting thoughts on whether and how to replace it. This raises basic issues about the form, purpose and content of bilateral treaties in the context of an integrating Europe. This Policy Brief looks at the relative merits of 6 possible scenarios:
1. Retire the PCA without replacement
2. Extend the status quo
3. Extend the status quo, adding a Political Declaration on Strategic Partnership
4. Replace the PCA with a short Treaty on Strategic Partnership
5. Replace the PCA with a comprehensive Treaty on Strategic Partnership
6. Negotiate a Treaty of Strategic Union
We argue that the model of the comprehensive multi-sectoral treaty, well known to the EU and its neighbours that aspire to membership, is not suited to the case of Russia, which is not an applicant for membership. Attempts to produce weaker derivatives of this model result in long-winded and pretentious texts that are thin or devoid of legally-binding substance. The treaty form also involves extremely long and risky ratification procedures on the side of the EU and its member states, and is extremely inflexible, even possibly becoming outdated before entry into force. For the foreseeable future, it would be best to focus efforts on concrete, sector-specific agreements.
We advocate a three-stage concept, starting with an extended status quo in the short-run (scenario 2), trying to give useful effect to the four Common Spaces agreed in May 2005 and various sector-specific agreements. This could lead on in the medium-term to a Political Declaration on Strategic Partnership (scenario 3) to revise and update priorities after Russia’s WTO accession and more experience with the four Common Spaces. In the long term, we would like to see a Treaty of Strategic Union (scenario 6), as and when there is a greater convergence and mutual trust on matters of political values.
| Attachment | Size | Hits | Last download |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1331.pdf | 171.12 KB | 5971 | 1 day 9 min ago |
The 10th anniversary of the Partnership and Cooperation Agreement (PCA) between the EU and Russia, which falls on 1 December 2007, is already prompting thoughts on whether and how to replace it. This raises basic issues about the form, purpose and content of bilateral treaties in the context of an integrating Europe. This Policy Brief looks at the relative merits of 6 possible scenarios:
1. Retire the PCA without replacement
2. Extend the status quo
3. Extend the status quo, adding a Political Declaration on Strategic Partnership
4. Replace the PCA with a short Treaty on Strategic Partnership
5. Replace the PCA with a comprehensive Treaty on Strategic Partnership
6. Negotiate a Treaty of Strategic Union
We argue that the model of the comprehensive multi-sectoral treaty, well known to the EU and its neighbours that aspire to membership, is not suited to the case of Russia, which is not an applicant for membership. Attempts to produce weaker derivatives of this model result in long-winded and pretentious texts that are thin or devoid of legally-binding substance. The treaty form also involves extremely long and risky ratification procedures on the side of the EU and its member states, and is extremely inflexible, even possibly becoming outdated before entry into force. For the foreseeable future, it would be best to focus efforts on concrete, sector-specific agreements.
We advocate a three-stage concept, starting with an extended status quo in the short-run (scenario 2), trying to give useful effect to the four Common Spaces agreed in May 2005 and various sector-specific agreements. This could lead on in the medium-term to a Political Declaration on Strategic Partnership (scenario 3) to revise and update priorities after Russia’s WTO accession and more experience with the four Common Spaces. In the long term, we would like to see a Treaty of Strategic Union (scenario 6), as and when there is a greater convergence and mutual trust on matters of political values.
-en-1175
[list_price] => 0.00000 [cost] => 0.00000 [sell_price] => 12.00000 [weight] => 300 [weight_units] => g [length] => 0 [width] => 0 [height] => 0 [length_units] => cm [pkg_qty] => 0 [default_qty] => 1 [unique_hash] => 5e6bd007876b722aefb202787c6388fb [ordering] => 0 [shippable] => 1 [tags] => Array ( ) [path] => book/new-agreement-between-eu-and-russia-why-what-and-when [field_book_isbn] => Array ( [0] => Array ( [value] => [safe] => ) ) [field_price] => Array ( [0] => Array ( [value] => 12 ) ) [field_book_series] => Array ( [0] => Array ( [value] => 90 [safe] => 90 ) ) [field_book_number] => Array ( [0] => Array ( [value] => 103 [safe] => 103 [view] => 103 ) ) [field_book_short_title] => Array ( [0] => Array ( [value] => [safe] => [view] => ) ) [field_book_author_external] => Array ( [0] => Array ( [value] => Fabrizio Tassinari and Marius Vahl [safe] => Fabrizio Tassinari and Marius Vahl ) ) [field_book_old_path] => Array ( [0] => Array ( [value] => 1331 [safe] => 1331 ) ) [field_book_downloads] => Array ( [0] => Array ( [value] => 5851 [safe] => 5851 ) ) [field_book_pages] => Array ( [0] => Array ( [value] => 16 [view] => 16 ) ) [field_book_price_pdf] => Array ( [0] => Array ( [value] => 0.00 ) ) [field_book_published] => Array ( [0] => Array ( [value] => 2006-05-22 00:00:00 [timezone] => Europe/Brussels [timezone_db] => Europe/Brussels [date_type] => datetime ) ) [field_book_publication_date] => Array ( [0] => Array ( [value] => 2006-05-22T00:00:00 [timezone] => Europe/Brussels [timezone_db] => Europe/Brussels [date_type] => date [view] => 22 May 2006 ) ) [field_book_author] => Array ( [0] => Array ( [nid] => 208 [view] => Michael Emerson ) ) [field_image_cache] => Array ( [0] => ) [field_type] => Array ( [0] => Array ( [value] => BOOK [format] => [safe] =>BOOK
[view] => Printed book ) [1] => Array ( [value] => [format] => [safe] => [view] => ) [2] => Array ( [value] => [format] => [safe] => [view] => ) ) [print_display] => 1 [print_display_comment] => 0 [print_display_urllist] => 1 [signup] => 0 [uc_order_product_id] => [0] => [taxonomy] => Array ( [taxonomy_term_15] => Array ( [title] => Foreign and Security Policy [href] => taxonomy/term/15 [attributes] => Array ( [rel] => tag [title] => ) ) [taxonomy_term_90] => Array ( [title] => CEPS Policy Briefs [href] => catalog/90 [attributes] => Array ( [rel] => tag [title] => Present concise, policy-oriented analysis of topical issues in European affairs, with the aim of interjecting the views of CEPS researchers and external collaborators into the policy-making process in a direct and timely fashion. ) ) ) [files] => Array ( [1071] => stdClass Object ( [fid] => 1071 [uid] => 1 [filename] => 1331.pdf [filepath] => files/book/1331.pdf [filemime] => application/pdf [filesize] => 175225 [status] => 1 [timestamp] => 2009-09-15 14:38:37 [nid] => 1175 [vid] => 1175 [description] => 1331.pdf [list] => 1 [weight] => 0 ) ) [flatrate] => Array ( ) [shipping_type] => small_package [shipping_address] => stdClass Object ( [first_name] => Radoslav [last_name] => Minkov [company] => CEPS [street1] => place du Congres 1 [street2] => [city] => Brussels [zone] => 94 [postal_code] => 1000 [country] => 56 [phone] => ) [usps] => [weightquote] => Array ( ) [build_mode] => 0 [readmore] => 1 [content] =>The 10th anniversary of the Partnership and Cooperation Agreement (PCA) between the EU and Russia, which falls on 1 December 2007, is already prompting thoughts on whether and how to replace it. This raises basic issues about the form, purpose and content of bilateral treaties in the context of an integrating Europe. This Policy Brief looks at the relative merits of 6 possible scenarios:
1. Retire the PCA without replacement
2. Extend the status quo
3. Extend the status quo, adding a Political Declaration on Strategic Partnership
4. Replace the PCA with a short Treaty on Strategic Partnership
5. Replace the PCA with a comprehensive Treaty on Strategic Partnership
6. Negotiate a Treaty of Strategic Union
We argue that the model of the comprehensive multi-sectoral treaty, well known to the EU and its neighbours that aspire to membership, is not suited to the case of Russia, which is not an applicant for membership. Attempts to produce weaker derivatives of this model result in long-winded and pretentious texts that are thin or devoid of legally-binding substance. The treaty form also involves extremely long and risky ratification procedures on the side of the EU and its member states, and is extremely inflexible, even possibly becoming outdated before entry into force. For the foreseeable future, it would be best to focus efforts on concrete, sector-specific agreements.
We advocate a three-stage concept, starting with an extended status quo in the short-run (scenario 2), trying to give useful effect to the four Common Spaces agreed in May 2005 and various sector-specific agreements. This could lead on in the medium-term to a Political Declaration on Strategic Partnership (scenario 3) to revise and update priorities after Russia’s WTO accession and more experience with the four Common Spaces. In the long term, we would like to see a Treaty of Strategic Union (scenario 6), as and when there is a greater convergence and mutual trust on matters of political values.
| Attachment | Size | Hits | Last download |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1331.pdf | 171.12 KB | 5971 | 1 day 9 min ago |
The 10th anniversary of the Partnership and Cooperation Agreement (PCA) between the EU and Russia, which falls on 1 December 2007, is already prompting thoughts on whether and how to replace it. This raises basic issues about the form, purpose and content of bilateral treaties in the context of an integrating Europe. This Policy Brief looks at the relative merits of 6 possible scenarios:
1. Retire the PCA without replacement
2. Extend the status quo
3. Extend the status quo, adding a Political Declaration on Strategic Partnership
4. Replace the PCA with a short Treaty on Strategic Partnership
5. Replace the PCA with a comprehensive Treaty on Strategic Partnership
6. Negotiate a Treaty of Strategic Union
We argue that the model of the comprehensive multi-sectoral treaty, well known to the EU and its neighbours that aspire to membership, is not suited to the case of Russia, which is not an applicant for membership. Attempts to produce weaker derivatives of this model result in long-winded and pretentious texts that are thin or devoid of legally-binding substance. The treaty form also involves extremely long and risky ratification procedures on the side of the EU and its member states, and is extremely inflexible, even possibly becoming outdated before entry into force. For the foreseeable future, it would be best to focus efforts on concrete, sector-specific agreements.
We advocate a three-stage concept, starting with an extended status quo in the short-run (scenario 2), trying to give useful effect to the four Common Spaces agreed in May 2005 and various sector-specific agreements. This could lead on in the medium-term to a Political Declaration on Strategic Partnership (scenario 3) to revise and update priorities after Russia’s WTO accession and more experience with the four Common Spaces. In the long term, we would like to see a Treaty of Strategic Union (scenario 6), as and when there is a greater convergence and mutual trust on matters of political values.
-en-1175
[list_price] => 0.00000 [cost] => 0.00000 [sell_price] => 12.00000 [weight] => 300 [weight_units] => g [length] => 0 [width] => 0 [height] => 0 [length_units] => cm [pkg_qty] => 0 [default_qty] => 1 [unique_hash] => 5e6bd007876b722aefb202787c6388fb [ordering] => 0 [shippable] => 1 [tags] => Array ( ) [path] => book/new-agreement-between-eu-and-russia-why-what-and-when [field_book_isbn] => Array ( [0] => Array ( [value] => [safe] => ) ) [field_price] => Array ( [0] => Array ( [value] => 12 ) ) [field_book_series] => Array ( [0] => Array ( [value] => 90 [safe] => 90 ) ) [field_book_number] => Array ( [0] => Array ( [value] => 103 [safe] => 103 [view] => 103 ) ) [field_book_short_title] => Array ( [0] => Array ( [value] => [safe] => [view] => ) ) [field_book_author_external] => Array ( [0] => Array ( [value] => Fabrizio Tassinari and Marius Vahl [safe] => Fabrizio Tassinari and Marius Vahl ) ) [field_book_old_path] => Array ( [0] => Array ( [value] => 1331 [safe] => 1331 ) ) [field_book_downloads] => Array ( [0] => Array ( [value] => 5851 [safe] => 5851 ) ) [field_book_pages] => Array ( [0] => Array ( [value] => 16 [view] => 16 ) ) [field_book_price_pdf] => Array ( [0] => Array ( [value] => 0.00 ) ) [field_book_published] => Array ( [0] => Array ( [value] => 2006-05-22 00:00:00 [timezone] => Europe/Brussels [timezone_db] => Europe/Brussels [date_type] => datetime ) ) [field_book_publication_date] => Array ( [0] => Array ( [value] => 2006-05-22T00:00:00 [timezone] => Europe/Brussels [timezone_db] => Europe/Brussels [date_type] => date [view] => 22 May 2006 ) ) [field_book_author] => Array ( [0] => Array ( [nid] => 208 [view] => Michael Emerson ) ) [field_image_cache] => Array ( [0] => ) [field_type] => Array ( [0] => Array ( [value] => BOOK [format] => [safe] =>BOOK
[view] => Printed book ) [1] => Array ( [value] => [format] => [safe] => [view] => ) [2] => Array ( [value] => [format] => [safe] => [view] => ) ) [print_display] => 1 [print_display_comment] => 0 [print_display_urllist] => 1 [signup] => 0 [uc_order_product_id] => [0] => [taxonomy] => Array ( [15] => stdClass Object ( [tid] => 15 [vid] => 3 [name] => Foreign and Security Policy [description] => [weight] => 4 ) [90] => stdClass Object ( [tid] => 90 [vid] => 4 [name] => CEPS Policy Briefs [description] => Present concise, policy-oriented analysis of topical issues in European affairs, with the aim of interjecting the views of CEPS researchers and external collaborators into the policy-making process in a direct and timely fashion. [weight] => 0 ) ) [files] => Array ( [1071] => stdClass Object ( [fid] => 1071 [uid] => 1 [filename] => 1331.pdf [filepath] => files/book/1331.pdf [filemime] => application/pdf [filesize] => 175225 [status] => 1 [timestamp] => 2009-09-15 14:38:37 [nid] => 1175 [vid] => 1175 [description] => 1331.pdf [list] => 1 [weight] => 0 ) ) [flatrate] => Array ( ) [shipping_type] => small_package [shipping_address] => stdClass Object ( [first_name] => Radoslav [last_name] => Minkov [company] => CEPS [street1] => place du Congres 1 [street2] => [city] => Brussels [zone] => 94 [postal_code] => 1000 [country] => 56 [phone] => ) [usps] => [weightquote] => Array ( ) [build_mode] => 0 [readmore] => 1 [content] => Array ( [print_links] => Array ( [#weight] => -101 [#value] => [#title] => [#description] => [#printed] => 1 ) [display_price] => Array ( [#weight] => -10 [#access] => 1 [#value] =>BOOK
[#delta] => 0 ) [#title] => [#description] => [#theme_used] => 1 [#printed] => 1 [#type] => [#value] => [#prefix] => [#suffix] => [#children] => Printed book ) [1] => Array ( [#formatter] => default [#node] => stdClass Object *RECURSION* [#type_name] => book [#field_name] => field_type [#weight] => 1 [#theme] => text_formatter_default [#item] => Array ( [value] => [format] => [safe] => [#delta] => 1 ) [#title] => [#description] => [#theme_used] => 1 [#printed] => 1 [#type] => [#value] => [#prefix] => [#suffix] => ) [2] => Array ( [#formatter] => default [#node] => stdClass Object *RECURSION* [#type_name] => book [#field_name] => field_type [#weight] => 2 [#theme] => text_formatter_default [#item] => Array ( [value] => [format] => [safe] => [#delta] => 2 ) [#title] => [#description] => [#theme_used] => 1 [#printed] => 1 [#type] => [#value] => [#prefix] => [#suffix] => ) [#title] => [#description] => [#children] => Printed book [#printed] => 1 ) [#single] => 1 [#attributes] => Array ( ) [#required] => [#parents] => Array ( ) [#tree] => [#context] => full [#page] => 1 [#field_name] => field_type [#title] => type [#access] => 1 [#label_display] => inline [#teaser] => [#node] => stdClass Object *RECURSION* [#type] => content_field [#children] => Printed book [#printed] => 1 ) [#title] => [#description] => [#children] =>| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
| 1331.pdf | 171.12 KB |
The 10th anniversary of the Partnership and Cooperation Agreement (PCA) between the EU and Russia, which falls on 1 December 2007, is already prompting thoughts on whether and how to replace it. This raises basic issues about the form, purpose and content of bilateral treaties in the context of an integrating Europe. This Policy Brief looks at the relative merits of 6 possible scenarios:
1. Retire the PCA without replacement
2. Extend the status quo
3. Extend the status quo, adding a Political Declaration on Strategic Partnership
4. Replace the PCA with a short Treaty on Strategic Partnership
5. Replace the PCA with a comprehensive Treaty on Strategic Partnership
6. Negotiate a Treaty of Strategic Union
We argue that the model of the comprehensive multi-sectoral treaty, well known to the EU and its neighbours that aspire to membership, is not suited to the case of Russia, which is not an applicant for membership. Attempts to produce weaker derivatives of this model result in long-winded and pretentious texts that are thin or devoid of legally-binding substance. The treaty form also involves extremely long and risky ratification procedures on the side of the EU and its member states, and is extremely inflexible, even possibly becoming outdated before entry into force. For the foreseeable future, it would be best to focus efforts on concrete, sector-specific agreements.
We advocate a three-stage concept, starting with an extended status quo in the short-run (scenario 2), trying to give useful effect to the four Common Spaces agreed in May 2005 and various sector-specific agreements. This could lead on in the medium-term to a Political Declaration on Strategic Partnership (scenario 3) to revise and update priorities after Russia’s WTO accession and more experience with the four Common Spaces. In the long term, we would like to see a Treaty of Strategic Union (scenario 6), as and when there is a greater convergence and mutual trust on matters of political values.
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
| 1331.pdf | 171.12 KB |
The 10th anniversary of the Partnership and Cooperation Agreement (PCA) between the EU and Russia, which falls on 1 December 2007, is already prompting thoughts on whether and how to replace it. This raises basic issues about the form, purpose and content of bilateral treaties in the context of an integrating Europe. This Policy Brief looks at the relative merits of 6 possible scenarios:
1. Retire the PCA without replacement
2. Extend the status quo
3. Extend the status quo, adding a Political Declaration on Strategic Partnership
4. Replace the PCA with a short Treaty on Strategic Partnership
5. Replace the PCA with a comprehensive Treaty on Strategic Partnership
6. Negotiate a Treaty of Strategic Union
We argue that the model of the comprehensive multi-sectoral treaty, well known to the EU and its neighbours that aspire to membership, is not suited to the case of Russia, which is not an applicant for membership. Attempts to produce weaker derivatives of this model result in long-winded and pretentious texts that are thin or devoid of legally-binding substance. The treaty form also involves extremely long and risky ratification procedures on the side of the EU and its member states, and is extremely inflexible, even possibly becoming outdated before entry into force. For the foreseeable future, it would be best to focus efforts on concrete, sector-specific agreements.
We advocate a three-stage concept, starting with an extended status quo in the short-run (scenario 2), trying to give useful effect to the four Common Spaces agreed in May 2005 and various sector-specific agreements. This could lead on in the medium-term to a Political Declaration on Strategic Partnership (scenario 3) to revise and update priorities after Russia’s WTO accession and more experience with the four Common Spaces. In the long term, we would like to see a Treaty of Strategic Union (scenario 6), as and when there is a greater convergence and mutual trust on matters of political values.
Related Publications
- Into EurAsia – Monitoring the EU’s Central Asia Strategy
- On Thin Ice? (Mis)interpreting Russian Policy in the High North
- Abnormalisation:The bumpy road to Turkish-Armenian rapprochement
- Transforming Turkish Foreign Policy: The Quest for Regional Leadership and Europeanisation
- Missile Defence: A View from Turkey
- Obama’s Missile U-Turn
- Scrapping the missiles – a tipping-point?
- Bilateral Disputes between EU Member States and Russia
- Russian Games with the WTO
- Russian Foreign Policy in Times of Crisis: Greater compliance or resilient self-confidence?
Related Articles
- Europe as a global actor: Views from the Spanish Presidency
- Assessing Globalisation: What do China and India mean for the EU and the US?
- India in the 21st century: Perspectives
- Challenges and Opportunities Facing the Transatlantic Community
- War or Crime? Military Action in Peace Keeping and Legal Responsibility - Proceedings of a Challenge Seminar