Afghanistan: The surge is working, Craig Charney argues in Newsweek. “In fact, Afghanistan’s demography, sociology, military situation, and politics all favor Obama’s counterinsurgency strategy. That’s why it’s working.”
ICG report on Abkhazia: “In the eighteen months since Russia recognised it as independent from Georgia, small but strategic Abkhazia has become increasingly dependent on its giant patron” Russia, the International Crisis Group says in a new report:
In return for recognition and aid, Russia obtained highly prized military-strategic assets in Abkhazia. Moscow has not abided by the terms of the 2008 ceasefire agreements to withdraw its military forces to pre-war numbers and positions. Most recently it signed with the Abkhaz a new agreement to build a joint military base in the entity. To meet its international commitments, Russia should fully implement the terms of the ceasefire agreements and cut back its military presence to what it was before the war.
What should be done?
It is in the interests of all sides to agree to disagree about status topics that can only be resolved over a long time. Abkhazia and Georgia should focus instead on creating economic and humanitarian links without legalistic preconditions. That would benefit both, build stability and give momentum to what must be a lengthy reconciliation process. Georgia should stick to its commitment of not seeking the isolation of Abkhazia.
The EU and UN should continue to implement humanitarian, confidence-building, economic integration and democracy building projects in Abkhazia, as well as finalise agreements with Tbilisi and Sukhumi to make quicker decisions on project implementation.
“Tbilisi has developed a new ‘State Strategy’ on engagement with Abkhazia and become more permissive of international involvement in the entity. This is a step forward”, says Sabine Freizer, Crisis Group’s Europe Program Director. “All sides should focus on projects that avoid the contentious issue of status to build the confidence needed to eventually address issues including the return of roughly 200,000 displaced ethnic Georgians to their homes in Abkhazia”.
Controversy about French sale of warship to Russia. The Times reports:
The scene is set for conflict between France and its Nato allies when President Medvedev of Russia arrives in Paris today intent on ordering up to four powerful warships from French shipbuilders. Washington and the former Soviet bloc members of Nato are alarmed by President Sarkozy’s willingness to sell a 600ft Mistral Class amphibious assault ship, and possibly three more, to the Russian Navy. Georgia, which was subjected to a Russian invasion in 2008, is leading the charge to stop Moscow acquiring Mistrals, which sell for about £400 million each. (…) Russian officials said that no final decision had been taken on the order, but Mr Medvedev indicated in a French media interview last week that he hoped to clinch the warship contract on his Paris visit this week.
Georgia’s national security advisor Eka Tkeshelashvili speaks in an interview with Foreign Policy about the Mistral sale:
“In addition, the Mistral sale is a political sign from France, which was the broker of our cease-fire agreement. It’s a political signal to Russia that it’s OK that they continue to occupy the territory of Georgia and are still aggressive in their rhetoric. It sends the signal that the occupation of our territory is a fait accompli. It’s not even appeasement of Russia. It’s a reward for Russia. (…)
Respect towards the sovereignty of neighboring countries, nonaggression, not intruding into their internal affairs; not occupying other nations’ territory — these are current rules and not from the Cold War. So the country that violates these should [undergo] some restrictions — especially for military armaments.
Russia itself said that if they had had Mistrals [during the August war], they would have finished the job in Georgia in 40 minutes rather than 26 hours. They are open about that. While the French were saying [the ship] is humanitarian and that it’s not military capacity being given to Russia, [Prime Minister Vladimir] Putin was asked by a journalist how the ship will be used while in Paris. He clearly said that the ship will be used whenever, wherever, and however we’ll deem it necessary. They don’t see themselves being restricted in any way by the humanitarian purpose of this ship and by any location — be that the Black Sea or the Baltic Sea.
Reuters has a curtain-raiser about Medvedev’s 3-day state visit to France. And the Figaro’s Pierre Rousselin comments on the French-Russian partnership (in French).
A new player in transatlantic relations. The European Parliament is a force to be reckoned with, say Henry Farrell and Abraham Newman in a piece for Foreign Policy:
Americans may have to update their opinion — and their approach to transatlantic cooperation — now that the European Parliament has made a most unparliamentary gesture: blocking a deal on sharing bank data with the United States. U.S. policymakers saw this deal as a cornerstone of international counterterrorism efforts, but now, those efforts are on hold. The EU Parliament’s move is a sign that it wants to be a player in transatlantic security decisions — and the United States will just have to accept it.
Why Ashton skipped the EU foreign ministers meeting in Majorca. Honor Mahony has an explanation:
It was all down to Kiev’s invitation list, it seems. Ukraine invited EU council president Herman Van Rompuy, EU commission president Jose Manuel Barroso, EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton and EP chief Jerzy Buzek to attend this week’s inauguration ceremony of Viktor Yanukovych.
Barroso did not take up the offer. Nor did Van Rompuy. (…) In light of these pending no-shows, Ashton, who had planned to attend the informal defence ministers meeting, then cancelled to go to Kiev. Her people argue that not to have gone would have sent a poor signal to a country whose Russia-friendly president had just taken the fairly surprising decision to make Brussels rather than Moscow the destination for the symbolic first trip abroad. (…)
I suspect that had she decided against the Ukraine inauguration she would have come in for criticism too.
Rasmussen’s cooperation with Ashton. Nicolas Gros-Verheyde has asked NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen about cooperation with Catherine Ashton. He is working “very well” her, he said, and they have agreed to meet regularly, at least once the month. “We already had fruitful exchanges of views”, which “is very profitable for both of our organisations” (my translation from French).
Paris: Member States to take more influence on EU diplomatic corps. Last week (26 February) French Europe minister Pierre Lellouche has sent a letter to Ashton, Jean Quatremer reports (in French). In the future, EU member states must be consulted before Ashton nominates EU ambassadors, Lellouche says. The list of vacant post must be presented to the member states and a procedure of evaluation established. Paris wants Barroso and Ashton to understand, Quatremer adds, that the new diplomatic service is not an organism where they can place “their” people. Paris thinks however, according to Quatremer, that the controversial appointment of Almeida as EU ambassador to Washington is a good thing, as it opens the door for the appointment of a French diplomat to the post of Secretary General of the EU diplomatic service — the number two of EU foreign policy.
Germany and France dispute Lady Ashton’s ‘excessive’ EU powers, Ian Traynor reports in the Guardian:
Germany is planning to stop what it sees as a British campaign to dominate European foreign policy-making under Lady Catherine Ashton, the Guardian can disclose. Amid growing criticism across the EU of the performance of Baroness Ashton of Upholland, the EU’s new high representative for foreign and security policy, Berlin and Paris are alarmed at the prominence of British officials in the new EU diplomatic service being formed under Ashton. A confidential German foreign ministry document analysing the creation of the EU’s new diplomatic service, seen by the Guardian, has concluded that Britain has grabbed an “excessive” and “over-proportionate” role. Berlin and Paris are anxious that they are losing the battle to win key positions in the new service which is to be the main vehicle for projecting European power globally under the Lisbon Treaty. (…)
“There’s clearly an anxiety in Paris and Berlin that the overall balance will be satisfactory,” said Thomas Klau, a German analyst who heads the Paris office of the European Council on Foreign Relations. “No one has anything against good British candidates, but if it looks like a takeover, it’s different.” (…)
“The inroads to the decision-taking level are easier for the UK than for anyone else,” said a former German diplomat closely following the politics behind the building of the EEAS. “A lot of people are very unhappy. But the French are the only ones doing something about this British dominance.”
In another article, a review of Ashton’s first three months in office, Ian Traynor says that “the knives are out” for Ashton: “In Paris and Berlin, The Hague and Brussels, the whispering campaign against the former leader of the House of Lords is getting louder.”
Yanukovich in Brussels. Today the new Ukrainian president is in Brussels for his first foreign visit. He will meet: in the morning Jose Manuel Barroso and Herman Van Rompuy, for lunch Catherine Ashton, after lunch Jerzy Buzek, President of the Parliament. Reuters has a curtain-raiser, and the Washington Post a backgrounder.
Read today on Global Europe: Hillary’s offer. EU and NATO must work hand in hand / Letter from Washington. By Daniel Hamilton, Director of the Center for Transatlantic Relations at SAIS.
To receive the Global Europe Morning Brief every weekday by email, send an email to globeurope@gmail.com