29.05.2024 (Caucasian Journal). We are honoured today to welcome Dr. Marek DABROWSKI, a non-resident scholar at the Bruegel think tank in Brussels, a co-founder and fellow at the Centre for Social and Economic Research (CASE) in Warsaw, and a visiting professor at the Central European University in Vienna.
Since the late 1980-s, Dr. Dąbrowski has been involved in providing policy advice and conducting research related to monetary and fiscal policies, international financial architecture, perspectives of European integration, and the political economy of transition. He has also worked as a consultant for the EU, World Bank, IMF, UNDP, OECD, and USAID projects. In addition, he is the author of several academic and policy papers and serves as the editor of various publications.▶ ქართულად: Read the Georgian version here.
Alexander KAFFKA, editor-in-chief of CJ: Dear Professor Dabrowski, thank you for your attention to our readers. You are one of the best-known international experts in European Neighbourhood Policy and the “New Eastern Enlargement”, so let me start with the most burning question: Can Georgia's candidate status and membership negotiations be cancelled because of the adoption of a law that has analogues in some EU countries' legislations (such as Hungary)?
Marek DABROWSKI: I am not aware of the analogues of the Georgian "Law on Transparency of Foreign Influence" being currently in force in the EU. The Hungary's 'Sovereignty Protection Act' applies to foreign funding of election campaigns. The previous law adopted in 2017, which specifically targeted NGOs was struck down in 2020 by the Court of Justice of the EU and was revoked by the Hungarian parliament in 2021. Please remember that Hungary remains under Article 7 procedure for breaching the basic principles and values of the EU Treaties.
Rather, the Georgian law reminds me of the infamous foreign agent law introduced in 2012 in the Russian Federation, subsequently amended and tightened several times, which became a major instrument of persecution of political opposition, media, civil society organizations, independent intellectuals and cultural and academic institutions.
I think granting Georgia an EU candidate status in December 2023 despite various doubts … was a form of “geopolitical credit” to the country.
So far, there has been no practice of withdrawing an EU candidate status from any country even if its EU accession process was completely frozen (the case of Turkey). The most likely reaction of the EU is postponing (perhaps indefinitely) the start of EU accession negotiation and reducing various kinds of assistance (including the financial one) to Georgia.
AK: Georgia finally received EU candidate status last December, though, as you observed earlier, in some important fields the country “ backtracked on the earlier reforms conducted in the 2000s and 2010s.” How do you view the EU’s decision now, in particular, compared to earlier decisions on Moldova and Ukraine?
Looking for historical analogies, it reminds me of President Viktor Yanukovych’s last-minute decision in November 2013 to reject signing the EU-Ukraine Association Agreement, which led to tragic consequences for the country and him personally.
MD: I think granting Georgia an EU candidate status in December 2023 despite various doubts concerning the quality of its democratic institutions, and the rule of law, was a form of “geopolitical credit” to the country, the incentive for government and parliament to speed up domestic political and economic reforms and respect the Copenhagen criteria of the EU membership. It also reflected a unique geopolitical window of opportunity for the Eastern Partnership countries to join the EU, which did not exist before 2022, and may not be repeated in the future. It is bad that the Georgian government and parliament are about to miss this opportunity.
Looking for historical analogies, it reminds me of President Viktor Yanukovych’s last-minute decision in November 2013 to reject signing the EU-Ukraine Association Agreement, which led to tragic consequences for the country and him personally.
AK: Georgia enthusiastically welcomed its long-awaited EU prospect. However, there was no referendum or large public discussion, so information about the European future is quite general. When people are unaware of the specific implications of EU rapprochement they could be vulnerable to misinformation. What are the best ways to balance the people’s expectations, and which newer EU members have been successful in this – maybe there are good examples or case studies?
MD: Countries which joined the EU in the past, organized referenda to ratify their accession treaties, that is, in the last stage of the EU accession process. Georgia is very far from this point. Nevertheless, the government should inform society about all aspects of the EU membership and accession process, and counteract disinformation.
I do not think that suspension of a visa-free regime would be a rational response… It would hit the most pro-democratic and pro-European groups of Georgian society.
AK: The restrictions against Georgia which are being discussed include not only economic measures but also political ones – such as the suspension of visa liberalization. But that could be especially painful for the young Georgians who were the main driving force in the recent mass protests. Do you think some of such measures can be counterproductive? What steps would be more adequate, in your view?
MD: I do not think that suspension of a visa-free regime would be a rational response. You are right that it would hit these groups of Georgian society, which are the most pro-democratic and pro-European. It would also mean reducing people-to-people contacts with the EU, making society more vulnerable to anti-European propaganda and disinformation. Instead, I would consider personal sanctions against those who were instrumental in the adoption of the "Law on Transparency of Foreign Influence".
The most likely reaction of the EU is postponing (perhaps indefinitely) the start of EU accession negotiation and reducing assistance to Georgia.
AK: If Georgia manages to steer clear of the menacing European restrictions and remains firmly on the European rapprochement path, what practical changes can the average Georgian anticipate in the years ahead? Do you believe that the necessary reforms will have an impact on the people’s lives be-fore formal membership, which seems distant?
MD: Continuation of the EU accession and adoption of the required economic and institutional reforms should help in the acceleration of economic growth, gradual integration with the Single European Market, more trade in goods and services (including tourism), increasing inflows of foreign investment, and economic and financial aid, and better functioning of public services and public administration in Georgia. All this would mean a higher living standard, more chances for economic and institutional modernization, and more economic and political stability.
AK: If there is anything that you would like to add for our readers, the floor is yours.
MD: I hope Georgia can avoid the anti-democratic and anti-European backlash and will continue its EU accession process.
AK: Thank you very much!
Read the Georgian language version here.
Funded by the European Union. Views and opinions expressed are however those of the author(s) only and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Union or the Directorate General for Communications Networks, Content and Technology. Neither the European Union nor the granting authority can be held responsible for them. Caucasian Journal appreciates award of Display Europe micro-grants scheme in preparation of this interview.
No comments:
Post a Comment