Mrs Laima Liucija Andrikienė is Member of the European Parliament from Lithuania since 2004. Member of the biggest political group in EP – EPP (European Peoples Party). Together with Mr Knut Fleckenstein, a social-democrat from Germany, she drafted the recommendation of the EP to the Eastern Partnership Summit. The position of the Parliament among others suggests establishing an EaP+ model for the most advanced partners providing them with access to the EU customs and energy union and Schengen visa free travel zone. The report, which is to be voted by the Parliament mid-November also comes with an idea of creation of financial trust fund for Ukraine, Georgia and Moldova of abolition of roaming charges to the EU and calls for collective EU pressure on Russia to resolve conflicts in the partners countries. The work of Mrs Andrikienė and Mr Fleckenstein, has been recently approved by the Foreign Affairs Committee of the EP by overwhelming majority. The text is agreed by the main political groups in the Parliament and will be deposited during the summit as a contribution of the institution.

Laima Liucija Andrikienė spoke to the OPEN Media Hub on October 23, 2017

The European Parliament is preparing for a very busy EU-Eastern Partnership Summit with bold ideas to establish a trust fund for Ukraine, to let countries join customs and energy unions, and even Schengen, to abolish roaming and more. Do you think the member states are ready to follow you in this highly ambitions agenda? 

Working on EP’s recommendation for the EaP Summit we are sending a very clear message. We think that Brussels summit should be forward looking, should inject new dynamism and should produce a very clear political agenda for our Eastern partners and our Eastern Partnership policy. We should not be afraid of being ambitious because EaP policy is a long-term policy and we already have certain achievements we have been proud of. I have in mind the association agreements with Ukraine, Georgia, and Moldova, the free-trade agreements and visa free regime with these three countries. We have certain achievements with Armenia and Azerbaijan and even with Belarus. So, we should go forward. We should not simply be happy with what we managed to achieve and to implement agreements which we have in forced, but to move forward. 

What would be a successful EaP Summit for you? 

A successful summit for me would be a very clear declaration on behalf of the EU member states and our Eastern partners, again looking forward. And if and as we are not in a position to provide membership to our Eastern partners, never the less we have to make concrete steps in this direction and make the processes irreversible. So, a very clear perspective, not in 5 years term, may be in 10 or 15 years term but for the integration of the EaP countries into the Schengen area, their membership in the EU Customs Union, in our common energy union, digital union – all these things. All these steps are possible and depend not only on our political will but upon the homework done by the EaP countries. It is a two-way street and both sides need to go forward. Declaration with very clear benchmarks, giving a vision for the EaP countries will be a successful summit to my mind. 

Eight years after the establishment of the Eastern Partnership, the six countries are at a quite divergent state of integration with EU and have different ideas how far they would like to go. Do you think they still should be kept together under the Partnership or should they be separated and approached individually or grouped by their own speed? Ukraine, Moldova and Georgia are getting more attention in EP’s report. 

The six EaP countries are not equal. They are very different, and their interests are different. In our recommendation we point out to this differentiation and even call it “key”. We cannot use the “one size fits all” approach, no, just the opposite. We have three frontrunners – Ukraine, Georgia and Moldova. And even these three are different. And then we have Armenia, Azerbaijan and Belarus and their interests too should be taken into account. The principle “More for more and less for less” should be implemented. Because the EU has limited resources: financial, human… We should focus more our efforts and resources on those countries that are interested in integrating further and faster with us. 

In your report you are calling EU to maintain collective pressure over Russia to strengthen resilience of the 6 Eastern Partners. How do you see this in practice? 

In addition to what you mention you will find in our recommendation some paragraphs speaking about our cooperation on cybersecurity, defence issues and this is important. I recall amendments tabled by my colleagues from different political groups in the European Parliament and some of them are very strong in that direction. But you know, the recommendation is a compromised document upon which all the political groups agreed. We had huge majority in favour when we voted in the Foreign Affairs committee of this agreement. We are challenged every day and when we have to meet those challenges we have to find a solution. Don’t ask me now, because I do not know, what will happen tomorrow or after tomorrow, but we know the history. We have frozen conflicts in Moldova, two occupied regions in Georgia after Russian military aggression of this country; we have Eastern Ukraine and Crimea, again, occupied, annexed by Russia. In addition to humanitarian assistance, we provide for Ukraine different forms of assistance in order them to meet the challenges they face. For the future we speak about new European investment plan, we would like to have a trust fund to provide bigger assistance to Ukraine, as well as to Georgia. We have a EaP+ scheme. In addition to the micro financial assistance the European Parliament proposes new, different tools and instruments. 

And thus, you will help these countries to diverge from Russia and diminish it influence over them? 

I hope so, but a lot depends of the leadership of the countries. And of the peoples. When I look on Moldova, on the very recent developments, on what president Igor Dodon is doing, his compliments towards Russia, I don’t think this is the right approach. Countries, they have to have very clear priorities. And if closer with the EU, integration to the EU and even membership in the EU are their priorities, they should show that this is the case, and not try to manoeuvre. Then there will be a good result. A lot depends on the countries themselves.

European Commission is working on memorandum for understanding to be signed during the Summit with Belarus. Would you feel comfortable if president Lukashenko comes to Brussels for the signatures? 

I know that an invitation has been extended to president Lukashenko. Nobody knows if the president will come, if he would be here or not. I do not want to forecast but my understanding, and especially because my country, Lithuania is a neighbouring country to Belarus, is that good relations with Belarus are important to us. Any step forward should be welcomed. 

You are suggesting in your report EU should start visa liberalisation dialog with Armenia, what do you consider indispensable in terms of reforms in Armenia in order this to happen? 

Nothing huge has to be invented. We have examples with Ukraine, Georgia and Moldova. They all have visa free arrangements with the EU. Moldova since 2014. Ukraine and Georgia more recently, since this year. So, Armenia should simply follow the example. Eastern Partnership foresees not only their work with the EU but also their joint efforts. They can learn from each other. It is really simple.

Read in our Library: