On July 14, the Valdai Discussion Club held a panel discussion on the prospects of future cooperation between Russia and the EU.
European Leadership Network Research Director Lukasz Kulesa began the discussion by introducing the report as an alternative to the majority of reports being issued by EU think tanks, in that it does not offer a very pessimistic view of EU-Russia relations, and at the same time looks at what relations could look like in the long term.
“We don’t start with the assumption that we, Russia and the EU, need each other, but we examine whether there is a strategic case for cooperation,” Kulesa said.
Research Fellow at the European Leadership Network Joseph Dobbs presented the report, beginning with a SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats) analysis of Russia and the European Union.
Dobbs analyzed the consequences of Russia and the EU not cooperating, which he said led to accumulated weaknesses and threats, while the strengths and opportunities were lost. Because of this, the report found, cooperation would be preferential to coexistence.
“Coexistence might allow us to avoid some of the aspects of this confrontation, to muddle through. However, it won’t allow us to fully seize the potential of the 21st century and fully mitigate the threats that this century also brings,” Dobbs said.
Valdai Discussion Club Foundation Programme Director Dmitry Suslov presented his report on Russia-EU relations, focusing on points of agreement and disagreement with the ELN report.
Looking at the disagreements with the ELN report, Suslov noted Russia does not consider itself a bridge between Europe and Asia, adding that this was only a potential point of view in the 1990s, when the country’s international standing was weaker than today.
He also brought up differences between Russia and the EU over the status of Ukraine, Moldova and Georgia, saying that Russia would be interested in the collapse of the Ukrainian regime in its current state. Dobbs later countered Suslov’s statement, saying that such destabilization could lead to a new military escalation in the region, raising the chances of an accidental war.
Proceeding to the question and answer portion of the discussion, moderator Andrey Sushentsov, Programme Director of the Valdai Discussion Club Foundation noted that words of agreement prior to the disagreements “do not matter,” and that in recent years the balance has particularly shifted toward disagreements.
“Here we have what I call the symmetry of paranoia, and this reflects the intellectual reluctance to look at what the future holds,” Sushentsov said.
The question of Donald Trump possibly becoming the next US president was raised, with Suslov saying that it does not seem very possible as it would mean a revolution in US foreign policy. He added, however, that after the Brexit referendum he does not see such a “revolution” as impossible.
The discussion concluded with Kulesa’s commenting on Boris Johnson’s potential as the UK’s foreign minister, noting that Johnson is likely to have a limited portfolio.
