EU/Ukraine talks – hawks, doves and economics
In a sun-drenched Brussels for the EU summit.
Over dinner, the 28 will discuss what next on Ukraine. They will agree to add some more names to the list of Russians barred from city breaks in EU countries (I paraphrase) and whose assets are frozen. They could struggle to agree much more right now, but some are pushing for more.
We are in phase two (b) or “phase two plus” of a three phase process.
Phase two started with the punishment for moving into Crimea – 21 named individuals whose assets were frozen and travel restricted.
Phase two (b) is the additional punishments for having escalated the situation by annexing Crimea (there had been approaches to Russia to see if it would agree to re-run the referendum under internationally agreed rules and with Ukraine’s consent but Sergei Lavrov didn’t nibble on those). The punishment for annexation will be a few more names added to the banned list plus some cancelled EU-Russia talks and upping the economic support and links with Ukraine.
Phase three is the really hot potato.
This involves the “serious consequences” that would follow if Russia moves in on Eastern Ukraine. David Cameron would like to start ever so slightly fleshing out what those consequences are for Russia at this summit – in effect, clarifying the threat of phase three as part of phase two plus.
This is all closely choreographed with the US and a short while ago President Obama said he was ready to impose sanctions on Russia’s arms industry in the event of further escalation of the situation in Ukraine.
His previous announcements have happened at the end of EU consultation – this one precedes the talks and looks like it is intended to goad or embarrass the 28 into coming into line.
Yesterday it sounds like Chancellor Merkel, in a phone call with David Cameron, might have overcome initial German resistance to identifying sectors that EU sanctions would hit in the event of Russia invading Eastern Ukraine (for “resistance” read “Frank-Walter Steinmeier,” her foreign minister).
Things move about in the dove/hawk alignments amongst the 28.
Britain is being seen as a bit more hawkish coming into this summit, and the PM is making a point of meeting with the Baltic states and the Scandinavians ahead of the main plenary session.
But the UK is not where it would’ve been under Tony Blair, say, amongst the most hawkish in the pack (but then the US has a very different sort of President from Tony Blair’s heyday too).
A week ago, a senior foreign office source told me of the UK: “we are comfortably in the middle.”
Even if we’ve edged into being a bit more hawkish since then we are not outliers and, standing back, the EU as a whole has responded to a forced re-drawing of the map of Europe with little more than some travel bans.
That, EU sources say, is because the work is not yet done on the economic consequences of Europe going harder on Russia.
Well, up to a point. The truth is the bulk of countries didn’t have the appetite to risk their own economic well-being in punishing Russia. The bulk are content to write off Crimea as a done deal and irreversible. If Russia doesn’t do anything drastic in addition, they would in time return to normal relations.
EU sources insist the positive moves towards Ukraine, help with trade and the signing of the association agreement tomorrow, will weigh heavily with President Putin and could be worth more in leverage than sanctions threats.
There will be some talk of energy security here, which is all about trying to make EU countries less dependent on Russian energy. But that’s bound to incur extra costs.
As the EU banking deal secured down the road in the European Parliament reminds us, this is an EU still reverberating from the shocks of the Eurozone crisis and 2008 and there is a deep aversion to rocking the economic boat which President Putin has exploited so far largely unpunished.
Follow @GaryGibbonBlog on Twitter