Opinions | Columnists
Ending the silent Russo-European war
Mistrust poses an obvious threat to trade. More than half of Russia's goods are sold in Europe, and two of its top three trade partners are European
- By Igor Yurgens, Project Syndicate, 2008
- Published: 00:04 August 2, 2008
There has been little mutual trust lately between the governments of Russia and the European Union. European politicians viewed Russia's recent parliamentary and presidential elections sceptically. Diplomatic relations between Britain and the Kremlin are at a low since Alexander Litvenenko, a critic of the Russian government, was murdered - allegedly by a Russian agent - in London in 2006.
Such mistrust poses an obvious threat to trade and investment between Russia and the EU. Russia's trade with the EU between January and August 2007 reached $173.3 billion (Dh636 billion), or 51.6 per cent of its foreign trade turnover. More than a half of Russia's goods are sold in Europe, and two of its top three trade partners are European: Germany, with turnover of $31.9 billion, and the Netherlands, $28.3 billion.
Similarly, European countries account for 75 per cent of direct investment in Russia. Britain ranks first, pouring in more than $15 billion in the first half of 2007, despite the Litvinenko case and the tit-for-tat expulsion of diplomats during this period.
Nevertheless, the volume of foreign investment falls short of what Russia needs, for its economy is unbalanced. More than half of its exports are oil and gas, with the rest mainly chemicals and agricultural products. Petrodollars are Russia's main resource for the development of an information-based society. EU countries will continue to demand energy, and Siberian deposits are far from exhausted.
As a result, diversification of Russia's economy seems a distant prospect - all the more so because Russia's bureaucracy, together with the state's interest in "strategic" areas of the economy, repels foreign business. Indeed, Europeans constantly reproach Russia for the increasing level of state interference.
More complex
Russia's relations with the EU are governed by an agreement signed in June 1994 concerning trade, business and investment, competition issues, protection of intellectual, industrial and business property, and financial cooperation. Over time, economic cooperation between the two sides has grown more complex, and a new legal framework is needed. But the European Commission is unable to start working on a new agreement until it has a mandate from the 27 EU member states. Such a mandate has not yet been secured.
At the same time, conditions for Russian investment in the EU are far from perfect. Investors face political discrimination and administrative and technical barriers, especially concerning the power industry. Some EU "open" tenders have turned out to be closed to Russian companies. Economic nationalism is growing. Foreign investment is limited in sectors that the EU considers to be strategically and politically important. Russian companies have had to face anti-dumping claims. European branches of Russian banks face over-regulation and expensive certification procedures.
In September 2007, a move by the European Commission to prevent foreign companies from controlling European energy transport networks was an example of a skirmish in this "silent war". The commission's order to "unbundle" energy companies into transport and distribution units is hardly likely to encourage foreign energy companies working in the EU to seek structural reforms in the Russian economy.
Business leaders in Europe and Russia are beginning to seek a bold way out of this impasse: a common economic space between Russia and the EU. But free trade and closer integration can be achieved only if supported by national governments.
Russia's new Minister for Economic Development and Commerce, Elvira Nabiullina, said recently that European business "is Russia's main partner on international markets", and that cooperation "is one of the cornerstones of Russian foreign economic policy". She points to the government's promise to create a comfortable environment for business by continuing institutional reforms and assisting in the development of financial markets.
Such statements are encouraging. But Russian business needs a comprehensive action plan, which should include cutting bureaucracy, implementing real administrative reform, freeing the economy from excessive state control, and radical measures to combat corruption.
Russia also has to become integrated into the international economic system, accepting the rules applied by the rest of the world. Russia's eventual accession to the World Trade Organisation will be crucial to this development, and its accession needs to be promoted more actively by Europe as well as by Russia. The long-delayed new trade and investment agreement will be less relevant once Russia is in the WTO, whose rules take precedence over those of regional economic organisations. The legitimacy of European laws limiting the scope of Russian business activity in Europe and contradicting WTO regulations would immediately be questioned.
Russia's business leaders are ready to work for the creation of a common economic space between Russia and the EU. For Russia, such integration would provide a real spark for economic and social modernisation. Russia's government will, of course, have the final word in this matter. But it is unlikely to balk at a policy that treats Russia fairly.
Igor Yurgens is Chairman of the Board of the Modern Development Institute.
Share this article
More from Columnists
More from Opinions
Popular in Opinions
-
Opinions
Speak Your Mind: Cyberbullying
How can we protect our children from being Cyber bullied?
Opinion Editor's choice
-
Turkey is thinking creatively
Ankara is seeking peace and reconciliation in the Middle East, but has not turned its back on the West
-
Abdullah may see crisis on horizon
Could it be that the king of Jordan dissolved parliament because he believes a regional war might be in the offing?
-
More action needed to nab murderers
Those guilty of involvement in Philippines massacre deserve the most severe penalty
