Dieser Internet-Auftritt kann nach dem Tod des Webmasters, Peter Strutynski, bis auf Weiteres nicht aktualisiert werden. Er steht jedoch weiterhin als Archiv mit Beiträgen aus den Jahren 1996 – 2015 zur Verfügung.

Schluss mit Ping-Pong?

Nach dem EU-Russland-Gipfel in Nizza

Von Kai Ehlers *

EU-Ratspräsident Sarkozy schlug auf dem EU-Russland-Gipfel in Nizza vor, demnächst Gespräche über einen Gesamteuropäischen Sicherheitsvertrag mit Russland zu führen, statt sich weiter über Raketenstationierungen zu zerstreiten. Damit griff er, wie die FAZ korrekt berichtet, eine Idee des russischen Präsidenten Medwedew auf, der im Juni des Jahres angeregt hatte, einen neuen Vertrag über kollektive Sicherheit in Europa zu entwickeln. Sarkozy möchte diesen Plan nunmehr im Juni oder Juli 2009 beim nächsten Gipfeltreffen der OSZE beraten. Allerdings, schränkte Sarkozy ein, müssten auch die Amerikaner mit einbezogen werden. Das könne auf dem nächsten NATO-Gipfel im April 2009 geschehen.

Widerspruch zu diesem Vorschlag wurde nicht laut; die – bis auf die Stimme Litauens – geschlossene Zustimmung der EU-Mitglieder, ab sofort Sanktionsabsichten gegen Russland fallen zu lassen und in die Diskussion um die Entwicklung eines neuen Grundlagenvertrages zwischen EU und Russland einzusteigen, signalisiert eher allgemeine Bereitschaft auch diesen Plan gutzuheißen. Medwedew erklärte, er sei unter solchen Umständen in der Raketenfrage bereit zu einer „Null-Lösung“. Wäre nun in der Tat also nur noch Obama zu fragen?

Schön wär´s – zumindest als Ausgangspunkt. Außerhalb der Nizza-Diplomatie hört man jedoch Signale, die das schöne Bild stören: Die EU-Energiekommission legte soeben ein Strategiepapier vor, in dem sie die zukünftige Richtung der EU-Energiepolitik skizziert: Georgien sei als Transportkorridor nach dem Vier-Tage-Krieg keineswegs abzuschreiben, vielmehr müsse der Ausbau der Nabucco-Pipeline nun mit Volldampf vorangebracht werden; EU-Energiekommissar Andris Piebalgs reiste in dieser Angelegenheit in der letzten Woche nach Aserbeidschan und durch die Türkei. Aktive Diplomatie soll auch die Versorgung mit Gas aus Ägypten, Libyen, Algerien so in Gang bringen, dass Lieferungen von dort spätestens 2020 mit denen aus Russland gleichziehen können.

Der georgische Präsident Saakaschwili assistierte solchen Bemühungen im Funksender France Inter mit Bemerkungen wie: Seit Russland wieder begonnen habe „andere Länder zu erobern“, könne „das nicht einfach so wieder eingestellt werden, das wird fortgesetzt." Ein anderes Problem seien die Energielieferungen für Europa: „Sollte Aserbaidschan dem starken Druck Russlands nachgeben und einer Stationierung von 16 000 Soldaten zustimmen, wird man dem Alternativ-Korridor für die Öllieferungen ‚Adieu' sagen müssen. Von diesem Zeitpunkt an wird Russland 60 Prozent mehr Energie, Öl und Gas kontrollieren als heute." Mit wenigen Änderungen wiederholte er diese Argumentation am Donnerstagabend, nach seinem Treffen mit dem französischen Präsidenten Nicolas Sarkozy, im Fernsehsender Canal Plus und wenig später im Satellitensender France 24. Dabei verglich Saakaschwili die heutige Politik Russlands mit der Politik Hitlers und Stalins in der Tschechoslowakei, Polen und Finnland.

Die deutsche Kanzlerin Merkel empfing parallel zum Nizza-Gipfel den turkmenischen Staatspräsidenten Berdymuchammedow zu einem Staatsbesuch in Berlin. Neben Menschenrechten, wie immer bei solchen Treffen, ging es vor allem um turkmenisches Gas und Öl. Dazu ist daran zu erinnern, dass Turkmenistan erst vor wenigen Wochen einen langfristigen Liefervertrag mit Gasprom abgeschlossen hat. Das Gas soll nach Fertigstellung in die „South Stream“ eingespeist werden, die Gasprom zusammen mit italienischen, bulgarischen, griechischen, serbischen ungarischen und österreichischen Betreibern gegenwärtig in Konkurrenz zur Nabucco-Planung der EU selbst betreibt. Salopp gesagt: Der Kampf ist nicht vorbei. Er beginnt erst.

Als Russlands Ministerpräsident Putin ebenfalls dieser Tage erklärte, wenn die EU die Nordsee-Pipeline nicht haben wolle, „dann werden wir sie eben nicht bauen“, wurde dies in der westlichen Presse sogleich zur „Drohung“. Dem steht eine andere Meldung direkt entgegen, die besagt, das Gasprom und BASF einen langfristigen Vertrag zur gemeinsamen Erschließung neuer sibirischer Gasfelder abgeschlossen haben.

Hinter all diesen und weiteren ähnlichen Meldungen, die nur findet, wer die Medien aufmerksam studieren kann, wird eine weitere Zuspitzung der internationalen Konflikte auf die Frage der globalen „Energiesicherheit“ sichtbar. Zwei strategische Konzepte stehen sich gegenüber. Auf der einen Seite die von den USA forcierte Entwicklung der NATO zur Energie-NATO, erstmalig auf dem NATO-Gipfel in Riga 2007 von US-Senator Ludger öffentlich vorgetragen. Seitdem läuft innerhalb der NATO eine intensive Debatte um diese Frage. Die Entwicklung einer Energie-NATO wäre gleichbedeutend mit einer aktiven Isolierung Russlands.

Dem steht die Variante einer Energie-KSZE gegenüber, die vom deutschen Außenminister Steinmeier auf der Müncher NATO-Tagung 2007 ins Gespräch gebracht wurde. Die Grundidee darin ist, die Kooperation von Rohstofflieferant und Rohstoffverbraucher, konkret Russland und EU so weit zu steigern, dass eine untrennbare gegenseitige Abhängigkeit entsteht. Dieses Konzept zielt auf aktive Einbeziehung Russlands. Wofür wird die EU sich entscheiden? Zurzeit werden in der EU beide Strategien gleichzeitig verfolgt. So forderte der Generalsekretär der NATO soeben wieder die schnelle Einbeziehung der Ukraine in die NATO. Frau Merkel hält die Einbeziehung Georgiens und der Ukraine zwar für tendenziell richtig, erklärt sie aber nach wie für verfrüht. Es sieht alles so aus, als ob man in der EU auf ein Machtwort Obamas warte.

Vermutlich gibt es aber kein Entweder-Oder, sondern nur die weit größere Variante: Energiesicherheit nicht „atlantisch“ oder „eurasisch“ zu lösen, sondern, ganz abgesehen von der Notwendigkeit der Entwicklung alternativer Energien, als wahrhaft globales kooperatives Verteilungssystem.

Kai Ehlers, Hamburg, freier Journalist und Schriftsteller; www.kai-ehlers.de


Statements and Answers to Journalists’ Questions after the 22 Russia–EU Summit

November 14, 2008, Nice

PRESIDENT OF RUSSIA DMITRY MEDVEDEV:

Ladies and gentlemen,

As a guest here today, I first of all want to thank the President of France for the warm reception, the excellent organization of today’s meeting in this beautiful venue, and the informal and friendly atmosphere in which the meeting took place. Our talks were frank and open as always. We discussed all the problems of concern to us, and I think this is precisely the guarantee that we are able to come to agreements even on the most difficult questions.

The President of France has already said what we spoke about and outlined the agenda. But I would nevertheless like to add a few comments of my own, and I will start with an issue that is of concern to all of us. The biggest problem we face right now is how to neutralise the negative impact of the global economic crisis. As soon as this press conference ends, though of course we will be treated to dinner first, we will leave for America and will examine precisely this very difficult matter. On this issue, I share practically exactly the same position as my colleague Nicholas and other colleagues. What we need is a full-scale appropriate response to the problems that have arisen, not declarations, handshakes and photographs, but an action plan.

In this respect, I think that we really must insist on a full agenda and serious decisions, all the more so as practically all of the big economies share the same views on the main issues. Especially the European Union, France, and the Russian Federation all share very close views on what we need to do to overcome the global crisis. The question of reforming the international financial system is therefore probably the main issue that we should focus on. We discussed it in quite some detail, and we also discussed what will come next after the Washington summit.

Clearly, we will not be able to sign new agreements, decide on which institutions will remain and which institutions need to be reformed straight away. We will not establish a new Bretton Woods in Washington, but we do need to take a real step in this direction.

I therefore fully support the idea of holding another summit within a relatively short time to follow up on the Washington summit.

We are ready to stay in close contact with Europe on these matters. I held preliminary consultations and spoke on the telephone with Nicholas and other European colleagues. In this sense our position is very close or practically identical. We have a common agenda that is usual for the kind of summit we held today, that is to say, an agenda that covers trade and economic relations, humanitarian ties and foreign policy contacts.

I met yesterday with business community leaders. Even over this year we have achieved some good results. Trade between the European Union and the Russian Federation is growing. The figures are very large now and the European Union accounts for more than 50 percent of our country’s trade – this represents hundreds of billions of euros. I think that we need to keep this in mind when making decisions on the main areas of our cooperation. The four common spaces we have been working on remain in place, namely, freedom, security and justice, the economic space, external security, and scientific research and education. True, progress has not been even in all of these areas, and in some areas things have come to a standstill, but we do have the opportunity to get things fully moving again now. I think this is important for the Russian Federation and for the European Union.

As my colleague Mr Sarkozy just said, there are some problems that we still need to resolve. We are discussing them and looking for solutions. One of these issues, not a dominant matter but one of the subjects we did discuss was the consequences of Georgia’s aggression in South Ossetia. I would like once again to thank our European colleagues and the President of France personally for taking part in helping to get through the difficulties during the tensest period and helping to reach peace agreements. The coordination that took place at that time showed, first of all, that there is no alternative to open and direct talks of the kind that we held then.

The second thing that these talks showed was that the security mechanisms in Europe today are imperfect. This is why we came back to the idea of a global treaty in our discussions today. I am pleased to see that this idea is gaining supporters among the European Union leaders. A new treaty on European security or a treaty on all countries joining a pan-European security space could lay down the principles and rules for work in the future. In this context, we looked at the possibility of holding an OSCE summit. I did at one point put forward this idea and I would like to thank the President of France for giving it his support. We discussed today the possibility of holding this summit not necessarily at the end of next year, we can do it even earlier, perhaps, in the middle of next year. The main thing is that we be prepared to meet and discuss these issues under the aegis of the OSCE and with the participation of all European institutions, including NATO, the European Union, the CSTO (Collective Security Treaty Organisation) and the CIS.

In this context, I fully agree that until we sign a special global agreement on ensuring European security, we should all refrain from taking any unilateral steps that would affect security. Russia has never taken any such steps on a unilateral basis. All of the decisions that we were preparing, including the measures I announced just recently, were but responses to the actions of particular European countries that, without even consulting with anyone, decided on the deployment of new defence means on their territories. But if we all share a common home, we need to meet and come to agreements, and this is the objective of the new treaty. We are ready to work and I am sure that the European Union can play a coordinating and very constructive part in this.

We also discussed other issues that are typically on our agenda. Fortunately, there are not so many of them, but there are questions we need to work on in all of the four common spaces. I am sure that this discussion could get a working continuation in Moscow very soon, and I think that our colleague Jose Manuel Barroso will probably say a few words about this now.

Thank you.

QUESTION (Russian television station NTV): Was there something specific at today’s summit about the new agreement between Russia and the European Union? Was this agreement given the green light, and if so when should we expect it to be signed?

DMITRY MEDVEDEV: It's true that there was a delay in the preparation of this document. We did not want a delay but it happened. Happily we’re back on track. I hope that very soon negotiations will begin on all the vital points in this document. In our view, it should be comprehensive, on the one hand, but have a structure substantial enough to last for years to come, on the other. Just when this work will be completed I do not know. We would like it to happen in the foreseeable future. In any case, we have a valid document that we can use as a basis, but the sooner we get a new document the better. Russia is ready to get to work –- we are ready to beaver away non-stop on this.

QUESTION: A question for President Medvedev, on behalf of the journalists from the European Union. The break in the negotiations on the Treaty on Partnership and Cooperation was in anticipation of the normalisation of relations in the Caucasus. Are you ready to recognise Georgia's territorial integrity or is that a meaningless question for you?

DMITRY MEDVEDEV: Let me say three things.

Russia fully recognises the territorial integrity of Georgia, taking into account the earlier recognition of South Ossetia and Abkhazia as independent entities under international law. That is the first thing.

Second: I believe that the Medvedev-Sarkozy plan has been competently executed, as lawyers say. For this I would like to individually thank our European colleagues.

And, finally, we are ready to continue in an absolutely constructive way to discuss all issues related to the settlement in the Caucasus. And we will continue: we are ready to discuss matters directly during any sort of meeting that can be arranged, face to face, even if one of the consequences is a bunch of talk about non-existent details. Russia will work with its partners.

QUESTION (TV channel Rossiya): The more time goes by since the events in August the more details become available. There appeared a version that Russian troops were preparing to enter Tbilisi, a version that is replete with naturalistic details. OSCE [Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe] monitors have claimed in the past week that they had warned about the forthcoming Georgian aggression, but that the OSCE didn’t take them seriously. Now not even the Russian but the American and British press are reporting that in private briefings the OSCE is telling Western diplomats that Georgia struck the first blow.
So in what frame of reference are you discussing the events in August and how do you understand them today?


DMITRY MEDVEDEV: We are sticking with the old frame of reference. We absolutely believe the same accounts that we had in August of this year, and prior to that. We have always wanted the problems that exist in the Caucasus, including the relations between Georgia on the one hand and South Ossetia and Abkhazia on the other, to be resolved peacefully. Unfortunately, on 8 August that frame of reference was destroyed unilaterally by the Tbilisi regime. Russia’s reaction followed: we had to intervene to protect people, to defend their right to exist simply as ethnic groups, and to prevent a humanitarian catastrophe. Our intervention was limited and absolutely necessary given the situation. We acted in accordance with international law, including the UN Charter and the right of self-defence. After these events took place, we were forced to recognise two new nations under international law and our position on this remains unchanged to this day. As I had occasion to say quite recently, our recognising them is final and irreversible. This is not an occasion for games, it is a carefully considered state decision. We will develop full-fledged relations with these states created according to international law.

As for our relations with the EU on this matter and my personal relationship with the French President, I believe that the EU has played a very constructive role during the conflict. It intervened at the right time, performed peacekeeping functions, and helped restore law and order. Although in fact if you go back to the events of August, you know that even before my first meeting with the President of France, with my colleague Nicolas Sarkozy, I had already decided to suspend the operation designed to force Georgia to accept peace. But with that as a background, our negotiations were certainly far more successful and culminated in the settlement that still obtains. Once again, I would like to repeat –- and repeat it here in this room –- that we are satisfied with the course of these negotiations. And I believe that all the points of the Medvedev-Sarkozy plan have been fully implemented.

*** Quelle: Website des Russischen Präsidenten, 14. November 2008; www.kremlin.ru




Zurück zur EU-Europa-Seite

Zur Russland-Seite

Zurück zur Homepage