During the 2^nd day of the EaP Civil Society Conference in Riga there were attempts to resolve the task of formulating its statement to the participants of the Summit that opened in Riga last night.

Unlike the official Armenian and Belarusan authorities that rejected to sign a final statement of the EaP Summit because Russia's illegal annexation of Ukraine's Crimea was mentioned in it, all representatives of non-governmental organizations of countries-partners and the EU have univocally noted the radically negative meaning of the Russian aggression in Ukraine and of seizure of the Crimean territory for the whole region. Civil society has its say against attracting Russia as the third party in Ukraine-EU negotiations on the Free Trade Agreement and insist on the sovereign right of the EaP countries to determine their future, agenda, and relations with the international partners.

It is clear from the statement that the representatives of the civil society see meaning in additional differentiation of the level and dynamics of relations within the initiative with certain countries with regard to different tempo of relations in these countries in relations with the EU. The principle of differentiation should be applied not only in relation to the governments of certain countries, but also “bigger for bigger” is appropriate to use in relations with the civil society regardless of the quality of relations with the state representatives. At the same time the document includes the demands to preserve the EaP as a wholesome initiative.

The participants of the conference also marked the irreceivability of today’s situation in the EaP and demanded the reformation of the initiative in direction of bigger place and role of civic initiatives as an interested and the most pro-European group of interests in inter-countries’ relations. Civil society seen monitoring and assessment of the projects’ realization within the frames of the programs of cooperation with the EU, anti-corruption events, analysis of efficiency of the efforts made from the view of reforming the society, and improving the social, economic, and political sphere in the countries-partners as the main point of focus. In a number of countries-leaders of the initiative the account of views of civil society in decision-making system at the state level is also considered. However, for Belarus even the program-minimum is rather a good wish.

Civil initiatives address their message to the politicians and officials from the EU and the EaP countries, expecting that the “second breath” will open in the EaP initiative. Such second breath should help not only to find adequate answers to the new geopolitical reality in the region but also suggest certain formats of development and strengthening of Europeanization not only in the countries-leaders of the initiative, but also in the work with the societies of these countries, the governments of which have no clear wish to introduce European reforms. In this context civil society has a special role to unite the most pro-European oriented groups of citizens and suggestions of its format of the dialog re the reforms asked for in the society and getting closer with the EU.

EuroBelarus Information Service