Wednesday

26th Jun 2019

Opinion

Learning from the past: EU aid in the Eastern Partnership

  • Molodva: Brussels must change its bureaucratic and self-referential approach (Photo: EUobserver)

Ukraine, in particular, badly needs effective external aid. But EU aid for reforms in Eastern Partnership countries has so far failed to bring tangible results.

Brussels must change its bureaucratic and self-referential approach if its ambition is to reach ordinary people in this region.

Read and decide

Join EUobserver today

Support quality EU news

Get instant access to all articles — and 18 year's of archives. 30 days free trial.

... or join as a group

For seven years now, the EU has made direct transfers to the state budgets of its eastern partners (minus Belarus) to support reforms in anything from energy and justice to water sanitation.

A total of around €1.2 billion, 60 percent of bilateral aid, was envisaged for this so-called budget support, with Ukraine, Moldova and Georgia receiving the highest amounts, and Armenia and Azerbaijan the least.

What happened with this aid, given the different attitudes of eastern governments to EU-style reforms, let alone their problems with corruption and inefficient public administration?

The answer from a major research project carried out at Polish Institute of International Affairs (Pism) is that too often nothing happened: the EU has trouble spending money.

In the cases of Moldova and Georgia, Brussels managed to release around half the promised resources; but due to lengthy procedures, the majority of operations have not yet been finalised.

The others - Armenia, Azerbaijan and Yanukovych’s Ukraine - had problems meeting the basic condition of transparency in public financial management, meaning the EU could not release the funds. The last two countries received payments of no more than one third of the planned amount.

Where the EU did manage to spend money it brought very slim results. The recipient administrations were at ease drafting strategies, but implementation lagged behind.

In general, the countries fulfill the conditions of financial tranches: Moldova ranks the highest (at almost 100%), with Georgia (90%) and Armenia (85%) close behind, while Ukraine (60–70%) and Azerbaijan (50%) are at the back of queue.

But even fulfilling the conditions does not necessarily mean the progress of reform. Particularly in the case of Armenia NGOs warn that the government is only maintaining a façade.

Therefore, not only the varying levels of political willingness in respective governments is to blame for mixed results. The EU has its own sins to confess: overambitious miscalculations in choosing sectors and conditions, while focusing too little on the real implementation of the reforms.

Examples include the highly corrupt Ukrainian energy sector requiring billions of euros to reform which was an EU focus but received relatively little funding.

In Georgia, meanwhile, decentralisation of regional development was a priority where there was no real political taste for such changes.

EU ambitions do not go hand in hand with proposed volume of money. On the contrary the EU would like to trigger massive reforms requiring significant national funding which the countries do not usually have.

Small countries such as Moldova, Georgia, and Armenia appreciate EU aid as budget support constitutes between 1-5 percent of their annual national budgets. But they are all too poor to commit to costly reforms in real terms.

In case of Ukraine, EU funds are peanuts (only 0,1% of national budget).

In almost all countries, the EU finds it hard to monitor results as there are no effective monitoring mechanisms, either in civil society (Georgia being an exception) or the administration itself.

The weakness of public administration systems makes it more difficult to perform. EU advisory services cannot help as they are launched untimely, usually one year after the programme starts.

Also, transparency and communication is lagging behind: the EU and EaP governments find it difficult to communicate the benefits of reforms to people, bar some dry and selective facts about the volume of money.

The Eastern Partnership (EaP)is approaching its fifth anniversary. To ensure a positive future in the coming years even more important than the quantity of money is the question of quality.

This will be no mean feat for Brussels to deliver. In order to ensure political backing for EU reforms in the EaP region, bigger funds should be given to the best performing governments and more co-operation with international financial institutions is required.

Conditions for reforms should be more focused and better consulted with various interest groups, as it was successfully done in Georgia’s agricultural reform.

Public pressure is crucial and to achieve this, more innovative campaigns explaining the substance of supported reforms on people’s wellbeing are needed.

And NGOs should be given the right to participate in EU aid monitoring committees to ensure its transparent use.

At the end of a day, the effectiveness of EU aid is not only important for fulfilling EU geopolitical ambitions, but it touches the wallets of EU tax payers.

A longer version of the report is available here.

The writer is a researcher at Pism, a Warsaw-based think tank

Disclaimer

The views expressed in this opinion piece are the author's, not those of EUobserver.

Gagauzia: A new attack on the Eastern Partnership?

In Gagauzia, a part of Moldova which few people have heard of, a referendum on Sunday saw an overwhelming vote in favour of joining Russia’s Customs Union instead of EU integration.

Eastern partnership countries: Democracy in limbo

While in Georgia, Moldova, and Ukraine commitment to European integration and political will to reform seem to have fostered democratisation, prospects in Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Belarus remain gloomy.

EU-Vietnam trade deal a bad day for workers' rights

Behind the smiles and handshakes, the signature of the EU-Vietnam trade and investment deals agreed on Tuesday and to be signed this week have dire consequences for human well-being and our ability to prevent climate and ecological breakdown.

News in Brief

  1. EU universities to share students, curricula
  2. Migrant rescue ship loses Human Rights Court appeal
  3. Denmark completes social democrat sweep of Nordics
  4. Johnson offers 'do or die' pledge on Brexit
  5. Weber indirectly attacks Macron in newspaper op-ed
  6. EU to sign free trade deal with Vietnam
  7. EU funding of air traffic control 'largely unnecessary'
  8. Share trading ban looms as Swiss row with EU escalates

Six takeaways on digital disinformation at EU elections

For example, Germany's primetime TV news reported that 47 percent of political social media discussions were related to the extreme-right AfD party, when in fact this was the case only for Twitter - used by only four percent of Germans.

Stakeholders' Highlights

  1. International Partnership for Human RightsEU-Uzbekistan Human Rights Dialogue: EU to raise key fundamental rights issues
  2. Nordic Council of MinistersNo evidence that social media are harmful to young people
  3. Nordic Council of MinistersCanada to host the joint Nordic cultural initiative 2021
  4. Vote for the EU Sutainable Energy AwardsCast your vote for your favourite EUSEW Award finalist. You choose the winner of 2019 Citizen’s Award.
  5. Nordic Council of MinistersEducation gets refugees into work
  6. Counter BalanceSign the petition to help reform the EU’s Bank
  7. UNICEFChild rights organisations encourage candidates for EU elections to become Child Rights Champions
  8. UNESDAUNESDA Outlines 2019-2024 Aspirations: Sustainability, Responsibility, Competitiveness
  9. Counter BalanceRecord citizens’ input to EU bank’s consultation calls on EIB to abandon fossil fuels
  10. International Partnership for Human RightsAnnual EU-Turkmenistan Human Rights Dialogue takes place in Ashgabat
  11. Nordic Council of MinistersNew campaign: spot, capture and share Traces of North
  12. Nordic Council of MinistersLeading Nordic candidates go head-to-head in EU election debate

Latest News

  1. EU moves to end car-testing 'confidentiality clause'
  2. EU parliament gives extra time for leaders on top jobs
  3. Europe's rights watchdog lifts Russia sanctions
  4. EU-Vietnam trade deal a bad day for workers' rights
  5. EU 'special envoy' going to US plan for Palestine
  6. Polish judicial reforms broke EU law, court says
  7. EU study: no evidence of 'East vs West' food discrimination
  8. Russia tried to stir up Irish troubles, US think tank says

Stakeholders' Highlights

  1. Nordic Council of MinistersNew Secretary General: Nordic co-operation must benefit everybody
  2. Platform for Peace and JusticeMEP Kati Piri: “Our red line on Turkey has been crossed”
  3. UNICEF2018 deadliest year yet for children in Syria as war enters 9th year
  4. Nordic Council of MinistersNordic commitment to driving global gender equality
  5. International Partnership for Human RightsMeet your defender: Rasul Jafarov leading human rights defender from Azerbaijan
  6. UNICEFUNICEF Hosts MEPs in Jordan Ahead of Brussels Conference on the Future of Syria
  7. Nordic Council of MinistersNordic talks on parental leave at the UN
  8. International Partnership for Human RightsTrial of Chechen prisoner of conscience and human rights activist Oyub Titiev continues.
  9. Nordic Council of MinistersNordic food policy inspires India to be a sustainable superpower
  10. Nordic Council of MinistersMilestone for Nordic-Baltic e-ID
  11. Counter BalanceEU bank urged to free itself from fossil fuels and take climate leadership
  12. Intercultural Dialogue PlatformRoundtable: Muslim Heresy and the Politics of Human Rights, Dr. Matthew J. Nelson

Join EUobserver

Support quality EU news

Join us