All English posts
“Over the last 7 years (2007-13) only through the EU Cohesion Funds (the biggest in the EU’s regional assistance) the member states are supposed to receive about € 350bn attributed to more than 450 national and regional projects in the 27 member states. 
For example, in the Baltic States, Latvia will get € 4,6bn, Lithuania – € 6,9bn and Estonia – € 3,4bn; just to compare, Poland has got already € 67bn of the EU development grants since it joined the EU in 2004…
Over the next 18 months, the EU-27 governments will decide on the block’s next “financial programming” for 2014-20 with a total expenditures at the level of 1 trillion Euros… According to the Commission’s proposal published at the end of June 2011, the spending figures are the following (out of total € 1,025bn for the whole 2014-20 period) in %:
Economic growth & cohesion – 48;
Common agricultural policy – 27,5;
Other natural resources spending – 10;
Global action – 6,8;
Administration – 6,1;
Security & citizenship – 1,8.
Main contributors to the EU budget are known well: Germany, France, Italy, Sweden, the Netherlands, the UK and Denmark, which “donate” the lion share of the EU-27 budget. The main recipients are well known too: Poland, Greece, Belgium, Hungary, Portugal and the three Baltic States, though in much less degree…
The new EU member states from Eastern Europe are afraid that “milking the EU budget” through cohesion funds would come to an end. The Commission authorities argued that these worries were groundless: in the budget proposal the cohesion funds equal 37 per cent of the total budget (which is actually 2 per cent more that in the previous budget term).
However, some say, there are some grounds for assistance’s reduction, e.g. in the cohesion fund a new line of expenses is envisages, so–called “connectivity fund” of about € 40bn aimed to build cross-border infrastructure projects. In fact, these projects include high-speed railways and pipeline connections which might be of a primary benefit for the rich member states.
Besides some proposed changes in the eligibility rules for various EU funds would make in more difficult for poorer states to get financial support.
According to a Polish study, wealthy states can benefit from cohesion funds for the Eastern members: each euro in cohesion financing in Poland gives 36 cents to the richer states in the form of additional demand for goods and services. (Financial Times, 22 August 2011, p.5)…”
Article – Eugene Eteris – The Baltic Course.
Russian concern about growing Chinese influence in the former Soviet Union and particularly Central Asia is increasing. Putin’s desire to form a new Eurasian Union is an effort by Moscow to reassert authority over its old dominions.
The core of Kremlin’s concerns is the slow but steady progress of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization — China, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan. In the last 10 years the S.C.O. has evolved into something different from what it was created. Now it is honing in on regional development.
Russia feels like a junior partner in the S.C.O. Using its money, China has secured energy contracts, and infrastructure. Beijing has also established Confucius Institutes to teach Chinese in all the Central Asian states. Growing numbers of Central Asian students can be found at Chinese Universities.
Article – Raffaello Pantucci, Alexandros Petersen – New York Times
October 21st – 22nd, 2011 – Hotel della Città et della Ville, Garzanti Hall, Corso della Repubblica 117, Forlì
In collaboration with: The Interregional Non-Governmental Organisation for the Promotion of Cultural Cooperation with EU Countries; Master MIREES; Punto Europa; Associazione Italiana degli Slavisti And with the support of: Fondazione Garzanti ONLUS – Forlì; Camera di Commercio Industria ed Artigianato della Provincia di Forlì-Cesena, Italian Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
Friday, October 21st, 9:30-13.00
1st Session: Leading Russia to the Future
Welcome Address
Patrick Leech, City Councillor of Forlì for Culture and International Relations
Chair Ilya Roytman, President, The Interregional Non-Governmental Organisation for Promotion of Cultural Cooperation with EU Countries, Moscow.
Speakers
Problems and Perspectives of the next Russian Presidential Elections
Oxana Gaman-Golutvina, Russian Political Science Association, Moscow
The Approaches of Putin and Medvedev towards Modernization and Russian Society’s Reaction
Elena Shestopal, Moscow State University
Russian and EU Relations: A Common Neighborhood?
Paolo Calzini, JohnsHopkins University, Bologna Center
Russia’s Modernization, What Role does the Church Play?
Nicolai Petro, Universityof Rhode Island Kingston
Education and Universities: Collaboration in the Humanities
Marcello Garzaniti, University of Firenze
Discussants
Denis Alekseev, International Foundation for the Unity of Orthodox Christian Nations, Moscow
Irina Esipova, Adviser to the Minister of Energy of Russia, Moscow
Discussion
Friday, October 21st, 15.00-19.00
2nd Session: Politics and Economics under Stress
Chair
Stefano Garzonio, University of Pisa
Speakers
Actual Problems of Improving Security for the Purposes of Russia’s Economic Modernization
Sergey Sudakov, MGIMO-University, Moscow
Facing Today’s Economic Challenges: Is There Room for Sustainable Development in Russia?
Gianpaolo Caselli, Universityof Modena
The Crisis of the Euro in Relations between Europe and Russia
Hartmut Lehmann, University of Bologna
Russia‘s Modernization: an Opportunity for Combining Western and Eastern Foreign Policy Vectors?
Tomislava Penkova, ISPI, Milano
Importing Modernization from Outside? The Place of Europe
Serena Giusti, ISPI, Milano
Discussants
Domenico Mario Nuti, University of Rome “La Sapienza”
Dmitri Golovanov, Department of Legal Support Ministry of Regional Development of the Russian Federation
Discussion
Saturday, October 22nd, 9.30-13.00
3rd session: The New Claims of Culture in a Globalized World
Chair
Speakers
Influence of Globalization on Social Human Rights in Russia
Darya Boklan, RussianAcademy for Foreign Trade, Moscow
Russia and the West in a Globalizing Perspective
Robert Craig Nation, US Army War College, Carlisle
Modernization, Democracy and Russian-Ukraine Relations
Vladimir Paniotto, NationalUniversity of Kyiv-Mohyla Academy
EU and Russia vs. Shifting Middle Eastern Geopolitics
Albert Bininashvili, Columbia University, New York
The Afghanistan Question and the Western-Russian Reset in Relations
Dick Krickus, University of MaryWashington
The Current Situation in the Middle East: Russian and European Visions
Ilya Roytman, President, The Interregional Non-Governmental Organisation for Promotion of Cultural Cooperation with EU Countries, Moscow
Discussant
Gleb Cherkasov, Kommersant Newspaper, Russia
Discussion
Discussants and contributors
Sara Barbieri,University of Bologna
Simona Berardi, University of Bologna
Jean Blondel, European University Institute, Florence
Liudmila Buglakova, University of Bologna
Alberto Chilosi, University of Pisa
Artūras Gailiūnas, Minister CounsellorPermanent Mission of Lithuania in Geneva
Guido Franzinetti, Universityof Eastern Piedmont
Olga Kalinkina, The Interregional Non-Governmental Organisation for Promotion of Cultural Cooperation with EU Countries, Moscow
Natalia Levykina, The Interregional Non-Governmental Organisation for Promotion of Cultural Cooperation with EU Countries, Moscow
Yulia Muzyka, The Interregional Non-Governmental Organisation for Promotion of Cultural Cooperation with EU Countries, Moscow
Mara Morini, University of Parma
Giuseppe Motta, University of Rome “La Sapienza”
Elvira Oliva, PECOB
Fernando Orlandi, CSSEO, Levico Terme
Andrea Panaccione, UNIMORE, Modena
Armando Pitassio, University of Perugia
Predrag Šimić, Universityof Belgrade
Paolo Sorbello, PECOB
Estonia, “the eurozone is our achievement!”
16 Oct 2011
“For several years now the world has lived in the shadow of the recession. Indeed, for some member states of the European Union, the financial crisis still looms large, and it is consequently affecting the eurozone as a whole. But although the recession hit hard, it highlighted Europe’s ability to react to serious problems in an effective way…
Having only acceded to the eurozone this year, the government of Estonia is frequently asked whether we regret our decision to adopt the euro at a time when we have to support countries for whose problems we are entirely blameless. The answer I give has always been, and will always be, the same: the euro is of enormous benefit to Estonia in any event, which is why we view our transition to the single currency as such an achievement.
At the same time, being part of the eurozone means that we have to meet all of the obligations that this entails. It is a question of solidarity, which is one of the cornerstones of the EU. We do not know when we may need the help and support of others; providing it is a moral duty. Moreover, it means that a crisis situation in one member state of the eurozone is far from being just that country’s problem: in a common market, one nation’s concerns are shared by everybody.
Of course, we should not forget that every country is still primarily responsible for its own economy and finances, which is why the loans from the support funds are issued on such strict conditions. Measures designed to promote growth will only work once a country has put its finances in order: public services cannot be provided using borrowed money, and doing so is neither sustainable nor morally justifiable. Consequently, this financial support, coupled with decisive action on the part of governments, will ensure the desired results and emergence from the crisis…
In Estonia we did not only keep our revenues and expenditures in balance, but were guided by the principle that its pays to boost your financial reserves when the general economic situation allows you to do so. Although there were recommendations to increase the level of public debt, the Estonian government decided against this and also did not use its reserves for a kind of ‘economic doping’. If we had done so, we would not only have to repay loans, but would also be accruing substantial amounts of interest – happily we are now able to invest that money in new economic growth.
On average, the EU spends 3 per cent of its gross domestic product every year paying interest on loans; in Estonia, however, we only pay 0.2 per cent, whilst also earning more from the placement of our reserves than we pay in interest overall. Furthermore, Estonia has the lowest public sector debt in the EU, which stands at 6.6 per cent of GDP.
Hopefully we will soon be speaking of the financial crisis in the past tense, enabling us to focus our efforts on the other challenges facing the EU. It seems strange, for instance, that we have yet to fully develop the internal market that forms the basis of our economic growth and wellbeing. For Estonia, the development of the internal market means, first and foremost, its adaptation to the demands of the digital age. Business operators and ordinary citizens alike must be able to carry out processes via electronic channels with other countries as easily as they are able to do so in their own nation. If this does not happen, there is no point to the term internal market in the context of the EU.
Estonia, however, has good reason to be satisfied with the e-services it provides… Estonian citizens have come to take the likes of the e-Tax and Customs Board and e-elections for granted, not to mention the other services that reduce bureaucracy and make their lives much simpler.
The Arab spring, meanwhile, has brought another serious problem to the attention of the EU this year: illegal immigrants and refugees. To some extent this has tested the very principles on which the EU is based: the debates that ignited earlier in the year about reinforcing the Schengen zone included proposals regarding the temporary closure of borders. The reinforcement of the Schengen zone is not about restoring national borders, but restoring trust. Doing so depends on us acting together – it is important that all member states fulfil their obligations on an equal footing and help those having difficulty meeting theirs.
Reinstating national borders is something we can and should only consider under exceptional circumstances. It must be the last resort in a situation where requirements are not being met and there are no signs of improvement. Even then a collective decision would be needed. Understanding and compassion must be shown to refugees, who are seeking security and a sense of certainty – positive assurances that the EU offers to its own citizens. Over the decades the EU has grown into an area of great stability that no crisis has yet managed to destroy.
The bigger this area of stability is, the better for the EU as a whole. It is for this reason that Estonia is one of the countries that supports, in principle, the continued expansion of the EU, since this will underpin peace and stability in Europe. As such, we must keep our door open to those who share our values and who are willing to work hard to meet the conditions of accession.”
Andrus Ansip, Prime Minister of Estonia. Complete Article In PublicServiceEurope
Pope Wojtyla’s statue unveiled in Moscow.
15 Oct 2011
A new statue of the Pope John Paul II was unveiled in Moscow on Friday. “This is an extraordinary gesture by the Russian authorities for all Christians living in Russia,” Fr Jozef Zaniewski, rector of Moscow Cathedral of the Immaculate Conception, said. “John Paul II loved Russia and wanted to come here, but he was not able to do it during his lifetime,” Zaniewski continued.
Located in the backyard of the Library of Foreign Literature, the monument was created by Ukrainian sculptor Alexander Vasyatkin and Russian artists Ilya and Nikita Feklin. The decision to unveil it comes after John Paul’s former secretary, Cardinal Stanislaw Dziwisz, donated an ampoule of the Pope’s blood to the cathedral.
The presentation ceremony of the Polish Pope’s statue took place on the day of the 33rd anniversary of the beginning of the conclave, which saw Cardinal Karol Wojtyla elected as pope two days later.
SUMMARY POINTS
(1) Real sector performance improved in August despite a more challenging external environment.
(2) Industrial production growth accelerated to 8.9% yoy, benefiting from stronger domestic demand.
(3) Ukraine may have the second largest harvest this year; however, due to grain export duties and a good harvest in neighboring countries, Ukraine’s grain export potential remains untapped.
(4) State budget deficit amounted to UAH 8.6 billion, or 0.8% of full-year forecast GDP. However, due to higher Naftogaz imbalances, the broad fiscal deficit is projected to reach 4% of GDP in 2011.
(5) The government amended the pension law in September and developed a draft 2012 budget law, targeting a general government sector deficit of 2.5% of GDP. However, the IMF is unlikely to restore financing without an increase in natural gas tariffs to the population.
(6) Thanks to a generous harvest, consumer inflation eased to 8.9% in August but is likely to speed up to about 10-11% yoy at the end of the year.
(7) High volatility on international financial markets, worse economic growth prospects and vulnerability of the Ukrainian economy to external shocks caused Hryvnia depreciation pressures to intensify in August-September.
(8) The National Bank of Ukraine is following a tight monetary policy to both reduce inflationary pressures and maintain Hryvnia stability.
(9) The current account gap widened to $3.3 billion over January-August, or 2% of full-year GDP, and is projected to reach 4.5% of GDP in 2011.
(10) Ukraine’s external debt financing needs remain high. From July 2011 to June 2012, Ukraine has to repay more than $53 billion.
(11) With the current level of international reserves at $38 billion and assuming there is no major external shock, Ukraine’s foreign currency needs look manageable. However, as external risks are high, restoration of cooperation with the IMF looks crucial to reduce Ukraine’s vulnerabilities
ANALYTICAL REPORT: by Olga Pogarska, Edilberto L. Segura
SigmaBleyzer Private Equity Investment Firm & The Bleyzer Foundation (TBF), Kyiv, Ukraine
U.S.-Ukraine Business Council (USUBC)
Poland-Polonia, exit polls
9 Oct 2011| Parties | 2007 | 2011 |
| Piattaforma civica – Civic Platform – PO | 41,5% – 209 seats | 39,6% |
| Legge e Giustizia – Law and Justice – PiS | 32,1% – 166 seats | 30,1% |
| Lista Palikot – Palikot’s movement |
Non partecipò – Did not stand |
10,1% |
| Socialdemocratici – Democratic Left A. – SLD | 13,2% – 53 seats | 7,7% |
| PSL Polish People party | 8,9% – 31 seats | 8,2% |
| PJN – Poland comes first |
Non partecipò – Did not stand |
2% |
TVP – TVN24 Warsaw 21h.
Affluenza alle urne 2011 – 48,92%
Turnout in 2011 – 48,92%
Affluenza in 2007 – 53,88%
Turnout in 2007 – 53,88%
The Heads of State and Government and representatives of the EU and its member states express their deep concern at the deteriorating human rights, democracy and rule of law situation in Belarus, deplore the continuing deterioration of media freedom in Belarus and call for the immediate release and rehabilitation of all political prisoners, an end to the repression of civil society and media and the start of a political dialogue with the opposition. The EU is also deeply concerned about reports that prisoners are denied access to their families and lawyers as well as to medical care while being put under psychological and physical pressure. The European Union has consistently offered to deepen its relations with Belarus and, while reaffirming its policy of critical engagement, reiterates that such a deepening is conditional on progress towards respect by the Belarusian authorities for democracy, the rule of law and human rights.
From EU site
The Heads of State or Government and representatives of the Republic of Armenia, the Republic of Azerbaijan, Georgia, the Republic of Moldova and Ukraine, the representatives of the European Union and the Heads of State and Government and representatives of its Member States have met in Warsaw on 29-30 September 2011 to renew their commitment to the objectives and continued implementation of the Eastern Partnership. The President of the European Parliament and the representatives of the Committee of the Regions, the Economic and Social Committee, the European Investment Bank and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development were also present at the Summit.
The Prague Summit in May 2009 launched a strategic and ambitious Eastern Partnership as a specific dimension of the European Neighbourhood Policy, to further support Eastern European countries’ sustainable reform processes with a view to accelerating their politicalassociation and economic integration with the European Union. The agenda agreed in Prague contains the guiding principles of the Eastern Partnership, and the participants of the Warsaw Summit re-affirm their commitment to implement them fully.
The Warsaw Summit recognises that reinforced reform efforts serve a common interest, and need therefore to be applied in a spirit of shared ownership and mutual accountability. The Eastern Partnership is based on a community of values and principles of liberty, democracy, respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, and the rule of law. All countries participating in the Eastern Partnership are committed to these values through the relevant international instruments. Any European Union Member State is also committed to them through the Treaty on European Union.
The participants of the Warsaw Summit acknowledge the European aspirations and the European choice of some partners and their commitment to build deep and sustainable democracy. They highlighted the particular role for the Eastern Partnership to support those who seek an ever closer relationship with the EU.
Much has been achieved already. Political and economic reforms have been implemented in partner countries and relations between the EU and its Eastern European partners have deepened significantly. There is more trade and economic interaction between the EU and its Eastern European partners than ever before. In order to consolidate this trend, the EU and most of its partners are engaged in negotiations on Association Agreements which will also lead to Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Areas as soon as the conditions are met.
At the same time, they are engaged in progressing towards increased mobility across the continent. Dialogues on visa-free regimes have been launched with Ukraine and the Republic of Moldova. Visa-facilitation and readmission agreements are being implemented with Georgia and similar agreements will be sought with the Republic of Armenia, the Republic of Azerbaijan and the Republic of Belarus.
It is part of the essence of the Eastern Partnership to engage with all strands of societies, beyond governments. The Warsaw Summit welcomes the establishment of the Euronest Parliamentary Assembly, as well as the increased role of civil society, through the Civil Society Forum. It welcomes the creation of an Eastern Partnership Business Forum and of the Conference of Regional and Local Authorities of the Eastern Partnership.
Recognising and welcoming the progress made so far, the participants of the Warsaw Summit underlined that much remains to be done to reach the goals of the Eastern Partnership, including by adapting existing instruments of co-operation. In this regard, they welcomed the publication of the Communication of the High Representative and the Commission on the review of the European Neighbourhood Policy. Greater differentiation and mutual accountability will allow individual partners to better meet their aspirations, needs, and capacities. According to these principles, the pace of reforms will determine the intensity of the cooperation, and partners most engaged in reforms will benefit more from their relationship with the European Union, including closer political association, deeper gradual economic integration in the EU Internal Market and increased EU support. This entails support for civil society and social and economic development, as well as comprehensive institution-building, strengthening respect for human rights and the rule of law, greater market access, increased EIB financing in support of investments and greater facilitation of mobility in a well-managed and secure environment. The resolution of conflicts, building trust and good neighbourly relations are essential to economic and social development and cooperation in the region.
The participants agree that the Eastern Partnership must be significantly strengthened and commit to stepping up its implementation, with the objective of building a common area of democracy, prosperity, stability and increased interactions and exchanges. They also agree that the achievements and the progress of the Eastern Partnership must bring direct and clearly perceived benefits to the citizens of partner countries, and they commit to enhancing their efforts to make the Eastern Partnership visible to all.
—
The Heads of State or Government and representatives of the Republic of Armenia, the Republic of Azerbaijan, Georgia, the Republic of Moldova and Ukraine, the representatives of the European Union and the Heads of State or Government andrepresentatives of its Member States, are committed to the success and the development of the Eastern Partnership, and have therefore agreed to the following:
1. Adeeper bilateral engagement: Political association, Socio-Economic integration and Mobility.
2. Participation in EU programmes and Agencies and enhanced sector cooperation.
3. Strengthening of multilateral co-operation.
Full statement – Warsaw Summit – 29-30 September 2011
EUBAM and SECI Center team up for BRUT project.
27 Sep 2011
Project BRUT, an initiative of the SECI Center, to which the European Union Border Assistance Mission to Moldova and Ukraine (EUBAM) has become a partner, was launched in Odessa.
A project covering multiple levels of law enforcement activities, such as countering drug trafficking, preventing the proliferation of weapons of mass-destruction, developing integrated border management, BRUT additionally aims to strengthen the customs capabilities in the major sea ports of the Black Sea region, and to upgrade risk-management systems.
Those participating in BRUT – a name taken from the first letters of the participating countries, and which runs in Odessa until Friday – include representatives from SECI Center member states, specifically from the ports of Varna and Burgas (Bulgaria), Constanta (Romania), Ambarli (Turkey) and Odessa (Ukraine) itself. Observers from Moldova, and representatives from the Dutch Customs Administration, the Central Asian Regional Information and Coordination Centre (CARICC), the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), and the US Department of Energy, will also attend.
“The BRUT project is further proof of the strong emphasis EUBAM places on international cooperation,” said the head of EUBAM, Mr Udo Burkholder, during this morning’s opening remarks. “Coordination of our efforts is vital in tackling all manner of illicit activities. We are delighted to be teaming up with the SECI Center once again for this initiative.”
“Project BRUT’s scope primarily focuses to put the foundation stone for building up a solid bridge of long term law enforcement cooperation across the Black Sea region, connecting countries and international law enforcement organizations from Europe and Asia,” stated Petros Petroff, SECI Center Deputy Director.
BRUT is a result of a 2005 initiative and a follow-up to the SECI Center’s Kalkan project, conducted in the same region in 2009, when EUBAM acted as observer. It also complements EUBAM’s Operation Phenomena, which is being carried out at Odessa and Illychevsk ports in southern Ukraine.
Welcome
We are a group of long experienced European journalists and intellectuals interested in international politics and culture. We would like to exchange our opinion on new Europe and Russia.
Categories
- Breaking News (11)
- CIS (129)
- Climate (2)
- Energy&Economy (115)
- EU Eastern Dimension (85)
- Euro 2012 – Sochi 2014 – World Cup 2018, Sport (43)
- Euro-Integration (135)
- History Culture (198)
- International Policy (261)
- Military (74)
- Interviews (18)
- Italy – Italia – Suisse (47)
- Odd Enough (10)
- Poland and Baltic States (126)
- Religion (31)
- Russia (421)
- Survey (4)
- Turning points (4)
- Ukraine (176)
- Российские страницы (113)
Archives
- November 2020
- October 2020
- September 2020
- August 2020
- July 2020
- May 2020
- April 2020
- March 2020
- January 2020
- December 2019
- November 2019
- October 2019
- September 2019
- August 2019
- July 2019
- June 2019
- May 2019
- April 2019
- March 2019
- February 2019
- December 2018
- November 2018
- October 2018
- September 2018
- August 2018
- July 2018
- June 2018
- May 2018
- April 2018
- March 2018
- February 2018
- January 2018
- December 2017
- November 2017
- October 2017
- September 2017
- August 2017
- July 2017
- May 2017
- March 2017
- January 2017
- December 2016
- November 2016
- October 2016
- September 2016
- July 2016
- June 2016
- May 2016
- April 2016
- February 2016
- January 2016
- November 2015
- October 2015
- September 2015
- June 2015
- April 2015
- March 2015
- February 2015
- January 2015
- December 2014
- November 2014
- October 2014
- September 2014
- August 2014
- July 2014
- June 2014
- May 2014
- April 2014
- March 2014
- February 2014
- January 2014
- December 2013
- November 2013
- October 2013
- September 2013
- August 2013
- July 2013
- June 2013
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
Our books
