Orkhan Sattarov, the head of the European Bureau of Vestnik Kavkaza
One of the authors of the Eastern Partnership Program of the EU, the Foreign Minister of Sweden, Carl Bildt, is a contradictory person. Sometimes his statements are far from diplomatic ethics and resemble an expert’s view, rather than speeches by a top diplomat. Several months ago Bildt stated that Orthodoxy is a threat to Western civilization, and it is more dangerous than Islamic fundamentalism. He thinks that Orthodoxy is dangerous because it is conservative – especially in the question of sexual minorities and family relations.
The Swedish minister says that Vladimir Putin’s support of the Syrian government of Bashar Assad and Russia’s position on Ukraine are explained by taking care of Orthodox communities in the countries. It seems Bildt is a supporter of the confrontational theory of a conflict between Orthodox and Western civilizations. “In the first decade after the dissolution of the Soviet Union Russia demonstrated devotedness to Western values in its foreign and internal policy and tried to instill them in Russian society. The current Russian leadership did its population’s bidding and became an opposition to the West,” Bildt said two months ago.
So, the protector of European values is dissatisfied with the fact that the current Russian authorities listened to their people in the sphere of cultural and foreign policy – even though, isn’t that democracy? It turns out that nostalgia for an obedient Russia and Boris Yeltsin is too strong among certain politicians. By the way, Orthodox Christians, who are numerous in Europe, perceived the discriminatory statements by the Foreign Minister negatively.
Now Carl Bildt is again in the focus of social attention. At a session of the Atlantic Council, Bildt said that the Eastern Partnership had faced serious challenges. According to the diplomat, while Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine are intensively moving forward, Armenia has decided to join the Customs Union. “However, Yerevan had no choice. Moscow invited them and threw them into a dilemma. They were forced to do it.” It is a sad story about Armenia, a beautiful princess, and Russia, a monster which sentenced her to prison – the CU. The question is: does Carl Bildt think Armenia is a developed state which is able to make independent decisions? If the answer is “yes”, how can he speak about an absence of choice? If Armenia's statehood is formal, why did the Swedish minister invite Yerevan to the Eastern Partnership? Finally, Armenia had a choice: the Armenian President could sign the association agreement with the EU. Probably Armenia would have lost certain security guarantees from Russia and a discount gas price, but it would make its European choice. It seems Armenia didn’t risk facing Azerbaijan alone, which couldn’t be restrained by Moscow from a military operation on returning the occupied territories.
By the way, Azerbaijan. Obviously, the Azerbaijani government disappointed the head of the Swedish Foreign Ministry with its rather cool attitude toward the project. “Azerbaijan is a special case. They are sitting on oil and providing authoritarian political development. And this is a problem for us,” Bildt concluded. By the way, the diplomat used to “sit” on gas in “Vostok Nafta” and on oil, being a co-owner of Lundin Petroleum, which is accused of numerous crimes against human rights in Sudan. Maybe official Baku is a problem for Europe – it didn’t sign the unfavorable agreement on association with the EU, it prevents attempts at a Maidan in its country, and continues improving ties with Moscow, Ankara and Tehran.
As a result, the Eastern policy of the EU (the Eastern Partnership is its instrument) is losing momentum in the South Caucasus. Georgia which lost certain territories in 2008, weak Armenia which was forced to join the CU, and independent Azerbaijan which doesn’t want to listen to Brussels are not a company where the EU could implement its Caucasus policy. And if Brussels wants to succeed in the region, first of all it should find a common language with Baku. It is impossible without rejection of Carl Bildt’s Eurocentrist positions.
