Yalta European Strategy

Agenda 2020 a year after. 
Progress report. 
Kiev-Yalta June 2007

“Ukraine in the European Union: Agenda 2020”, report of the Yalta European Strategy presented in July 2006, stressed that Ukraine’s future lies firmly in the European Union. It has also foresaw regular monitoring and reporting on the country’s progress in implementing recommendations of Agenda 2020 and edging closer towards membership in the European Union. This report is first in a series which will examine Ukraine’s progress on an annual basis and assess whether the prospect of membership has become a more realistic one. The years 2006-2007 have been a tumultuous period on Ukraine’s political scene. Parliamentary elections led to months of coalition talks before a government was formed under the Viktor Yanukovych. A few months had passed before a new political crisis erupted. Somewhat surprisingly, political turmoil has not been very detrimental to the strong economic growth and progress in relations with the European Union, although more optimal results could have been reached if stability prevailed on the political scene. The overall reading of Ukraine’s progress gives therefore a mixed picture. The country has weakened its international standing by engaging in months of introspection. At the same time, it has structurally moved closer to the European orbit by continuing the reform effort. Should Ukraine be able to overcome its political problems, it is likely to improve significantly its prospects of joining the European Union in 2020.

Ukraine’s EU membership prospects.

Agenda 2020 recalled that in line with the Treaty on the European Union Ukraine has every right to apply for membership in the European Union as a European country which respects the principles on which the Union is founded. Last year has brought a number of developments inside the European Union which have strengthened that political orientation, although other factors may pose a challenge to Ukraine as it proceeds on the path towards the European Union. Just like Agenda 2020 recommended, the European perspective for Ukraine has been recognized by the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the European Parliament which adopted a report on Ukraine on 5 June 2007 in which it stated that EU membership remains a long term prospect for a democratic and reformed Ukraine. Some member states such as the United Kingdom said in February that Ukraine could find itself knocking on the EU door if fit made better progress in battling corruption and bolstering the rule of law. “I am convinced that the Ukraine can aspire to EU membership in the future if it makes progress on these issues”, Europe minister Geoff Hoon said. Similarly, the Director General for External Relations in the European Commission Eneko Landaburu said that Ukraine now represents a success in the neighbourhood policy and developments “will go in the direction of EU accession where it has a place (Agence Europe, 16 May 2007).

In parallel, the EU has gone through a heated strategic debate about enlargement which reconfirmed in December 2006 the open door policy but introduced a number of new parameters which will make future accession processes more challenging. Progress towards a new institutional settlement within the EU continued in the first half of 2007 which brought forward the prospect of enhancing the EU’s internal readiness to invite new members. At the request of the Netherlands, the idea of writing Copenhagen criteria into the new treaty will be examined in the course of the Intergovernmental Conference. This should not be of concern to Ukraine given that no new criteria are being introduced but only old ones are confirmed in the primary law of the Union. Such a development could help to dispel public concerns in the EU member states about the successive rounds of enlargement.

The other challenge which has emerged inside the European Union has to do with the enlargement policy of the new French president Nicolas Sarkozy who campaigned on the grounds of opposing Turkey’s entry into the European Union. Forestalling Turkish accession could have serious implications for the entire enlargement process, even though Mr Sarkozy’s objections to Ankara’s bid would not necessarily be valid with respect to Ukraine. The standing problem which Ukraine must factor into the equation is the requirement to hold a referendum in France on each successive accession beyond Croatia. For the time being, it remains for Ukraine to hope that the French political class will itself reach the conclusion that just as it now prefers to ratify the new EU treaty in the parliament, it should do the same with respect to the outcome of accession negotiations. Ukraine should use the opportunity of the new French president’s change of course on treaty ratification to argue that it should not only concern future EU rulebooks but also agreements to enlarge the bloc to future members. After all, it is beyond doubt that the internal rules of the game of the EU are at least as fundamental in nature if not more than the size of the organization. Ukraine should use all channels of communication at its disposal to make sure its case is well presented to the European decision-makers and public opinion.

The other significant internal EU hurdle for Ukraine’s future accession will begin to be tackled in the autumn of 2007 when the review of the EU budget is meant to be launched. Ukraine should monitor that debate very closely and encourage “friends of cohesion policy” to ensure that sufficient resources are earmarked for the purpose in the long-term perspective.

First things first – state of play

Agenda 2020 recalled that Ukraine’s relations with the European Union are currently part of the European Neighbourhood Policy and recommended that Ukraine’s seeks ways of enhancing that relationship. Last months have brought a number of interesting developments in the area including ideas of the German EU presidency to enhance ENP as well as its earlier informal intention to explore the possibility of differentiating Southern and Eastern neighbours. The latter idea has met with reservations of the Mediterranean EU member states and has since been reformulated in the fashion which achieves the same effect but does so in a more subtle manner. In its non-paper presented in March 2007, the German EU presidency suggested rewarding neighbouring countries which perform better in an individualized fashion. This interesting idea would have in fact allowed for distinguishing the status of strong performers such as Ukraine among all the ENP countries. It should therefore be strongly welcomed and supported by the Ukrainian government.

On the domestic front, Ukraine has in the meantime struggled to maintain its image as a reforming country. Although parliamentary elections in March 2006 were widely hailed as demonstrating the country’s democratic credentials, the ensuing political crises have effectively wiped out the respect and sympathy which Ukraine gained at the time of the “Orange Revolution”. Having said that, it is also clear that the political turmoil has not affected in too adverse a fashion Ukraine’s progress in implementing the EU Action Plan. The European Commission has made a very high assessment of the way the priorities of the Action Plan are put into effect which points to a consolidation of the public administration and its gradual realignment with EU policy-making. Ukraine has advanced the reform process in some important areas such as reduction of poverty. Freedom of the media and free speech have not been put into question.

Ukraine’s progress has been reflected in the consolidation of its relations with the European Union. The EU and Ukraine initialed the visa facilitation and readmission agreement at their summit in October 2006 and negotiations on the new post-PCA agreement were launched in March 2007.

Political dialogue between the EU and Ukraine has covered four sets of issues: democracy and human rights, regional and international issues, security challenges such as terrorism as well as disarmament and non-proliferation. Targeted assistance has been provided to Ukraine to help in its efforts to implement commitments under the PCA. Shared values have been stressed by the EU as the basis for Ukraine to come closer to the EU within the European Neighbourhood Policy.

Cooperation in the field of Common Foreign and Security Policy continued with important joint initiatives being taken by the EU and Ukraine. As in 2006, searching for ways of improving prospect for the settlement of the Transnistrian conflict have been the EU’s and Ukraine’s priorities also in 2007. Ukraine is one of the mediators under a five-party agreement of 1997 (Moldovan government, Transnistria, Russia, Ukraine, OSCE). Since the Orange revolution, Ukraine has proposed a new plan for the resolution of the Transnistrian conflict, the so-called Yushchenko Plan, as a result of which the EU and USA have become observers in the negotiation process. Border guard services and customs services of Moldova and Ukraine carried out a joint operation between 1 and 16 October which was encouraged and facilitated by the European Union Border Assistance Mission Headquarters in Odessa. The objective was to improve co-operation and complementarity between national agencies.

Ukraine has aligned itself with the EU common positions on all issues except for Kosovo. Ukraine has participated in the EU's police mission (EUPM) in Bosnia and Herzegovina and in the EUPM in the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. Tighter control systems have resulted in an increase of the number of people refused entry at the border crossing points, an increase in the number of potential illegal immigrants stopped from crossing the border, decrease in the illegal movement of goods and cargo and large-scale smuggling detections. Crisis management has been discussed thoroughly as well as issues related to the fighting of terrorism, the non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and arms export control. The EU has expressed concern on different occasions, about Ukrainian arms sales to conflict regions and invited Ukraine to subscribe to the principles of the EU code of conduct on arms exports.

Ukraine has followed the path of strong growth reaching 7.1% in 2006, largely as a result of private consumption and accelerated fixed investment. The economy remained strongly dependent on the public sector which provides for 60 percent of the country’s employment. Legal approximation with the EU law has remained on track, although implementation has lagged behind. Reforms have been undertaken to the set of norms on money-laundering. Ukraine has acceded to the relevant international conventions as far as fight with corruption is concerned. There has been an improvement in the investment climate. The country has launched a one-window shop procedure to make establishing enterprises easier. The banking sector functions more effectively. The government is committed to pension reform. Telecommunications sector has recently been opened to foreign investment. At the same time, amendments to the procurement law were a major setback which led to the limiting of the disbursement of foreign assistance. It is for that reason that the World Bank has only been able to pay 5-10 percent of the funds it has committed. It is also difficult to see substantial progress in the area of health reform. More effort will be needed to strengthen the independence of regulatory authorities, especially competition authorities, and the quality of corporate governance, including in the area of company law, protection of minority rights, mandatory accounting and audit standards. More progress is also needed as far as the performance of customs services is concerned.

Keeping the fiscal deficit and inflation under control will remain crucial. Measures to strengthen the independence of the National Bank of Ukraine will be important as well as inflation-targeted monetary policy. Imposition of grain export quotas and delays in the full adjustment of energy prices are examples of interference in the market economy which should be avoided. Structural reform process should be continued included revision of social spending. On 19 January 2007, the European Commission and Ukraine initialed a new bilateral Steel Agreement with a quota for 2007 of 1.32 million tones, up from 1 million tones in 2006. Ukraine and the European Commission signed a Memorandum of Understanding on agriculture on 18 October which will provide a structured framework for establishing consultation and cooperation on agricultural issues. In November 2006 the EU launched the Technical Assistance and Information Exchange instrument TAIEX programme in Ukraine. TAIEX provides short-term technical assistance and advice in the field of approximation and harmonization of the European legislation.

Energy has gained a different meaning in EU-Ukrainian relations since the gas crisis with Russia at the beginning of 2006. Ukraine’s economy is highly energy-inefficient with a five times larger energy input to produce a tone of steel as compared to the European Union. In September 2006, the EU and Ukraine signed a Memorandum of Understanding on energy cooperation. Options for reform of the Ukrainian gas transit system, adoption by Ukraine of EU legislation on oil stocks, the electricity and gas sectors, the extension of the Odessa-Brody pipeline, the completion of the oil and gas Boyarka metrology centre, work on renewables and energy efficiency are all envisaged under the scope of the Memorandum. The issue was also discussed by the EU-Ukraine summit which put particular emphasis on enhancing security of energy supplies in Ukraine and the gas transit to the EU market. The Joint Statement issued after the summit spoke of “cooperation for identifying options for reform of the Ukrainian gas transit system as well as the adoption by Ukraine of the EU legislation with respect to oil stocks, the electricity and gas sectors, the extension of the Odessa-Brody oil pipeline, the completion of the oil and gas Boyarka metrology centre, energy efficiency and renewable energy sources”. The EU and Ukraine will also undertake joint infrastructural projects and enhance the transparency of cross border energy flows. Ukraine intends to accede to the Energy Community Treaty in the foreseeable future. On 18 October 2006 Commissioner Piebalgs and Ukrainian Energy Minister Boiko signed the first Progress Report on the implementation of EU-Ukraine Memorandum which outlined progress in the areas of nuclear safety, electricity and gas markets, security of energy supplies and transit of hydrocarbons and coal as well as energy efficiency and renewable energies. As far as energy security is concerned, the EU assists Ukraine in identifying options for reform of the Ukrainian gas transit system and in adoption by Ukraine of the EU legislation with respect to oil stocks, the reform of the electricity and gas sectors. "Ukraine and Russia should make this situation more transparent. [We need to show] what the real prices are and what the real financial sources are here, the flowing of money, and risks of dirty money and money laundering. To know the real situation, the real operators, the real deal, is key", Valentyn Nalyvaichenko, the acting chief of the SBU, the state security service has said.

The implementation of environmental objectives of the Action Plan in 2005 has been moderately good. Ukraine has participated in meetings of the Danube-Black Sea Task Force and in the Eastern European, Caucasus and Central Asia component of the EU Water Initiative. Work of the Joint Ukraine-EU Working Group on Climate Change has been resumed and a seminar held to promote a more strategic and holistic approach to waste management, building on EU experience. Strengthening of administrative capacity building in the environment field must proceed further. Ukraine is also expected to play a full part in the international responsibility to protect the unique ecosystem of the Danube delta. The EU welcomed Ukraine's initiative to launch, together with neighbouring countries, an international "Conference on the Conservation and Sustainable Development of the Danube Delta", which was held in February 2006. Ukraine is also expected to live up to its commitments as a party to the International Commission for the Protection of the Danube River (ICPDR) and the Black Sea Commission. Ukraine has prepared a national inventory of greenhouse gases and will have to continue making progress on implementation of its commitments under the Kyoto Protocol.

Co-operation in the area of transport has primarily concerned the legislative convergence and integration of Ukraine’s transport infrastructure into the European transport networks including Pan-European Transport Corridors, the Black Sea and the TRACECA corridor. The European Commission has worked closely with the Ukrainian Civil Aviation Authorities to discuss further alignment of Ukrainian legislation with EU standards, primarily the ones concerning safety. Ukraine was the third country to sign a cooperation agreement in the GALILEO programme after China and Israel and is actively participating in the regional transport co-operation framework initiated at the Baku (AZ) November 2004 Caspian Ministerial Transport Conference, which covers aviation, security of transports, road and rail safety and inter-operability and Infrastructure.

People-to-people contacts which Agenda 2020 strongly recommended were boosted with with the initialing of the visa facilitation and readmission agreements at the EU-Ukraine summit in October. Dialogue on education has been advanced, also in the bilateral format. “Civic Education – Ukraine” project has included 100 pilot schools and focused on the curriculum development, teacher and community development, special needs education, gender and social equity. In December 2006 the Commission launched a new “Erasmus Mundus External Co-operation Window” under which Ukrainian students can also apply. In addition, work has been completed on the new European Neighbourhood instrument which will offer increased opportunities for project financing to Ukrainian partners.

Further implementation of the Action Plan and negotiations on the new enhanced agreement.

Clearly, the Action Plan has remained the framework for EU-Ukraine relations in 2006 and 2007. The less political the objectives, the more progress there has been. The priority of consolidating the country’s political system and developing a proper equilibrium between state institutions has not been entirely met. A detailed assessment was made public on 4 December 2006, when the Commission published a progress report on the Action Plan. This opened the door for the opening of negotiations on a new Enhanced Agreement. However, the pace of progress has stalled in some areas, including independence of the judiciary, corruption and weak enforcement of legislation. Constitutional reform process that would include a system of checks and balances between the main state organs is still an unfinished business.

The EU and Ukraine have strengthened their bilateral dialogue with meetings at all possible levels, from heads of state and government to political directors and working groups, including the EU-Ukraine Cooperation Council meeting on 14 September which discussed the political and economic agenda of the new government, human rights and rule of law, cooperation on CFSP and regional matters, trade and economic issues, transport and environment. The EU-Ukraine Action Plan was also reviewed at the 10th EU-Ukraine summit on 27 October 2006. Apart from initialing the readmission and visa facilitation agreements, the summit stressed the importance of the implementation of the Memorandum of Understanding on Energy Cooperation and discussed issues of foreign and security policy, nuclear safety as well as regional issues. The recent conclusion of the horizontal air services agreement between the European Community and Ukraine was strongly welcomed. They reaffirmed the importance of cooperation in the area of Justice, Liberty and Security.

Illegal migration, organized crime and human trafficking have been a frequent subject of discussions including between the German EU presidency and the Ukrainian government given that Ukraine is one of the main points of origin for victims of human trafficking and has a long common border with the EU. There is EU assistance for Ukraine as far as setting up facilities for refugees and illegal migrants are concerned. Valentyn Nalyvaichenko, the acting chief of the SBU, the state security service, pointed to the dangers of corruption, weak institutions and a lack of co-ordination in pursuing big criminal cases.

The revised Action Plan on Justice, Freedom and Security (JFS) has been endorsed by the Cooperation Council on 18 June 2007 and covers the sectors of migration and asylum policies, border management, visa, document security, fight against international crime and terrorism, money laundering, including financing of terrorism, human trafficking, drugs, customs, corruption, and detention and imprisonment. Agreements on visa facilitation and readmission are expected to enter into force before the end of 2007.

Progress towards WTO accession has not been as smooth as expected with significant delays resulting from the tortuous legislative process in the parliament. Neither the President, nor the Prime Minister have been in the position to break the deadlock and seal off the legislative package in time for the early entry of Ukraine into the WTO. In June 2007, President Viktor Yuschchenko promised to sign into law measures on a wide range of issues from agricultural subsidies to intellectual property rights which are essential for finalizing WTO entry. They had been a few days earlier passed by Ukraine’s parliament, incidentally just before it approved laws required to call early parliamentary elections. Earlier legislative bills approved with WTO entry in mind had concerned sectors such as banking, insurance, meat products and legal services. WTO membership is intended to improve the investment climate and help the quality of legislation. It will also mean that state aid to sectors such as coal production or the steel sector will be targeted rather than arbitrary. Sectors such as metallurgy or chemical industry will benefit strongly but agricultural producers will have to compete more aggressively on the world market. An improvement in access to external markets will make it possible to increase exports by 40 per cent. Russia has exercised pressure on Ukraine to join WTO at the same time which Kiev has resisted. At the same time, the forthcoming Russian entry will mean a stronger framework for Ukraine in which to defend its interests in relation to its bigger neighbour. The EU has supported Ukraine’s bid in contacts with its key negotiation partners. EU technical assistance has helped Ukraine to come closer towards meeting the necessary requirements. The twinning programme has started with partners being sought for improvements in key areas such as the regulation of civil aviation. Preparations have been made to make operational the European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument which will allow for substantial increases in funding for Ukraine.

On 8 March 2007, Commissioner Benita Ferrero-Waldner announced that the European Commission will provide a substantial increase in financial assistance to Ukraine in the next years with the amount of 494 million euro available for the years 2007-2010. Ukraine will also benefit from increased lending from the European Investment Bank. It will be eligible to draw on the proposed Neighbourhood Investment Fund. Resources from the Governance Facility are meant to grant additional support on top of the national allocation. Assistance is to focus in particular supporting the implementation of the EU-Ukraine Memorandum of Understanding on Energy and promoting integration of Ukraine’s energy market with that of the EU, strengthening Ukraine’s capacities in the areas of border and migration management, strengthening the independence and effectiveness of the judiciary, addressing environmental challenges.

Review of the Action Plan and Association Agreement.

As we have seen, the European Union concluded the review of the EU-Ukraine Action Plan in the autumn of 2006 and concluded that substantial progress had been achieved. On 13 September 2006, the European Commission presented draft negotiating directives and invited the Council to agree a mandate for the EU to negotiate an enhanced agreement with Ukraine to replace the existing Partnership and Cooperation Agreement. This agreement will entail a significant degree of political and economic integration with Ukraine including Free Trade Area. Kiev will be able to gradually participate in the shaping of EU policies and programmes. The new agreement has been described as comprehensive, biding and evolutionary. All three of these characteristics are important.

Comprehensive character means that the agreement will be go beyond a free trade zone to include also provision concerning foreign policy and justice and home affairs. The binding character of the agreement will distinguish it from the Action Plan which is a political agreement. Finally, evolutionary scope will allow for extending the framework of the partnership without the need to negotiate a new legal basis. In terms of the type of the new agreement, it will carry features of an association agreement based on Article 310 of the Treaty establishing the European Community and reflected in the jurisprudence of the European Court of Justice (Demirel case).

The new economic package would establish a Free Trade Area (FTA) and deep free trade, envisaging zero tariffs for goods, services, capital and labour with transition periods for the more sensitive areas; removing non-tariff barriers and harmonization of Ukraine’s regulatory regime with that of the EU, especially in the area of competition and company law. Harmonisation of regulation and removing barriers to trade will attract new investment and improve conditions for cross-border trade. Obviously, Ukraine would be able to count on the EU’s assistance in the process. Comprehensive FTA would extend to the sensitive agricultural, steel and textile products. Reduction of non-tariff barriers would lead to the gradual participation of Ukraine in the internal market. The new agreement would also enhance cooperation in different policy fields including the environment, energy, transport and education.

There will be non-community elements of cooperation in the areas of external relations as well as freedom, security and justice, thus making the agreement a cross-pillar one, based on a combination of Article 300 TEC and Article 24 TEU. This could complicate the adoption of the agreement from the procedural point of view given that it would have to involve the European Community, the European Union and the Member States.

Ukraine will have to carry out a detailed impact assessment analysis to determine the extent and the pace of market opening and regulatory alignment which it would like to see as a result of the negotiations. The lesson learned from the process of EU enlargement to include Central European new Members is that the heavy costs of compliance need to be identified at an early stage and adequately addressed. It can be assumed that Ukraine would ask for transitional arrangements on short-term capital movements which would be legitimate given the stage of development of the country’s financial sector as well as its exchange rate. Substantial efforts will be needed to achieve compliance with standards for industrial production and phyto-sanitary requirements. Linking the energy grid would require costly compliance and price adjustment. Regulations concerning safety in the workplace will have to be implemented as well.

Institutional aspects of the new agreement will be very important. The stronger the institutions, the more recourse Ukraine will be able to make to them. The new arrangement will require an institution with a fully-fledged decision-making power and ability to adopt binding decisions. Turkey, for example, has relied heavily on the Association Council on issues relating to the movement of persons.

The talks on the new enhanced agreement were launched on 5 March 2007. Commissioner Ferrero-Waldner said on that occasion: “Ukraine has made remarkable progress in democratic and economic reform since the Orange Revolution. The negotiations of the new agreement will bring Ukraine and the EU yet another step closer together. The negotiations of a free trade area will deepen our economic integration, while further political co-operation will advance areas such as democracy, human rights and the rule of law. Ukraine is also a key energy partner for the EU, and the new agreement will help us to go further in ensuring energy security, improving energy safety, and environmental standards, and progress towards integration of our electricity and gas markets.” Council President Frank-Walter Steinmeier said that the talks should be completed “within a reasonable time-frame”.

In spite of Ukraine’s efforts, the mandate for the European Commission does not envisage offering a European perspective for the country. Minister Steinmeier explained this situation to the Ukrainian interlocutors by referring to the on-going reform process within the European Union which the German Presidency hoped to advance. Yalta European Strategy stressed in the Agenda 2020 document that it believes an association agreement should be signed with Ukraine, modeled after agreements signed in early 1990s by the recent Central European entrants to the European Union. In spite of the lack of reference to the European perspective in the mandate of the agreement, it could be argued that it will have all the features of an association agreement. Its concept envisages extension of the four freedoms of the single market – the free flow of goods, capital, services and persons. It is meant to establish “deep free trade” and hence combine a free trade zone with an approximation of regulatory regime. The mandate also foresees an enhanced political dialogue and closer involvement of Ukraine in the EU’s activities within the Common Foreign and Security Policy.

Preparations for the launching of the negotiations on the new Enhanced Agreement took more time than Agenda 2020 had assumed . As we have seen, negotiating directives for the European Commission were only agreed in January 2007. The talks themselves have not been as inclusive of Member State efforts as envisaged in the document. The prolonged process of negotiating the agreement posses a considerable risk to the entire time-table of generating momentum for Ukraine’s entry into the European Union. What it means is that now Ukraine has to mobilize all its efforts to make the negotiations a success. It needs to prepare a sound and balanced set of negotiating instructions. It has to improve the coordination of national policy-making and work closely with the European Commission and the Member States. The quality of the new enhanced agreement will be crucial for determining Ukraine’s chances of accession to the EU in 2020. It is worth investing all the efforts in making it a success.

In an important further development, the European Commission proposed on 4 December 2006 new ways to strengthen the European Neighbourhood Policy with the objective of bringing the policy into sharper focus, concentrating on key areas of mutual interest like people to people contacts, deepening trade relations, stronger co operation on energy migration and visa issues as well as financial support. An important contribution will be a new Neighbourhood Investment Fund.

Looking forward to Ukraine’s EU membership application.

Agenda 2020 recommended that Ukraine chooses wisely the time to apply to join the European Union given that a premature application might run the risk of outright rejection. This recommendation remains valid. Ukraine should continue stressing its European aspirations so as to keep the flame of enlargement burning and leave nobody in doubt about its long-term objective. It should also use the next few years in order to elaborate its EU Accession Strategy, a document which would spell out the most important reforms needed for enhancing its prospect of EU membership. The Strategy should assess progress achieved to date and spell out in a detailed fashion the commitments that the country is prepared to undertake in the future. Ukraine should consider tabling its application for membership in the second half of 2011 and prepare to launch an intensive diplomatic campaign raising awareness of the EU institutions and the Member States of the results of the Ukrainian reforms. The Ukrainian government should do everything possible to ensure that the European Commission’s opinion on its application is a positive one. This requires effective lines of communication to be opened to the European Commission and expert support in the Member States to be made operational. Ukraine should also encourage Member States supportive of its aspirations to advance internal consolidation of the Union. In spite of the changing nature of the European Union, it remains the case that deepening of the integration process and the streamlining of the procedures will have to be a parallel process. 

Ukraine should also commission expert studies of the implications of its membership application, both in the context of the internal as well as external dimension. Ukraine should also prepare for an active diplomatic campaign in the final phase of the negotiations on the Financial Perspective 2014-2020, so as to ensure that its pre-accession needs receive a solid financial backing.

Ukraine is well-advised to prepare at an early stage its administration and diplomatic service for the period of accession negotiations. Long-term training and language programmes should be launched, so as to make sure that by the time accession talks are open in 2013 or 2014, an experienced team would be in the position to lead the negotiations. It will be important for Ukraine to set up a smooth political decision-making with an effective transmission mechanism into the functioning of the institutions. Kiev should also ensure at that time that the negotiating framework proposed by the European Union does not multiply conditions of entry. Ukraine should prepare well for the screening of community legislation that will follow the opening of accession negotiations. It should also insist that the first negotiating chapters are opened before the entire screening exercise is concluded.

Towards a happy end…

Agenda 2020 anticipated that Ukraine’s accession negotiations could be finalized by 2019 and have to be reflected in the financial perspective 2021-2027 given the size of Ukraine’s agricultural sector and its developmental needs. Transition periods upon application of the community law will be essential in areas such as environment, free flow of persons or competition policy. Stringent conditions of membership are to be expected and the government will be wise to prepare the public opinion for that outcome. An equally active stance will be necessary vis-à-vis the European public opinion so that to improve the prospects of the ratification process.

Generally, in the period of 2006-2007 Ukraine has edged closer towards fulfilling the aspiration of membership in the European Union in 2020 although the political crisis has made the challenge of demonstrating Ukraine’s case all the greater. In spite of the numerous doubts about the future of the enlargement process, the strong economic upturn in the European Union as well as the re-emerging strategic debate have helped to support the cause of Ukraine regardless of the domestic political setbacks. Ukraine should capitalize on these phenomena and make its way towards the EU irreversible.