Dear representatives of European Institutions and Member States,
Dear Eastern Partners,
Dear colleagues,
I am pleased to speak to you today on behalf of the Eastern Partnership Civil Society Forum. It is an honour to share civil society’s perspective on how to advance bilateral and regional cooperation under the Eastern Partnership policy.
Since its launch in 2009, the Eastern Partnership initiative has taken up the role of a safeguard, anchoring the EaP countries and their societies to the European Union and its values. After 16 years, the EaP remains a valuable tool to promote democratic reforms in all the EaP countries.
We started 2025 with a renewed commitment, by the Polish Presidency, to update and reinvigorate the Eastern Partnership. Complementarity with the enlargement process, pro-European reforms and security are main priorities. Today, civil society asks to capitalise on this commitment, and work towards a renewed policy.
Continuing investing in effective rule of law, democratic institutions and security-encompassing human, economic and energy concerns-is the only way not only to maintain the investments of the past but also, and most importantly, to secure long- term, sustainable and irreversible change. Civil society plays a key role in strengthening the ability of the EaP to boost security resilience and strengthen national authorities through rule of law reforms. It should be more actively involved in the decision-making, both multilaterally between the EU and the EaP region, and bilaterally between the EU and the EaP countries.
Since the last Senior Officials Meeting, one year ago, the EU officially opened accession negotiations with Moldova and Ukraine. This success was largely promoted by the EaP policy, setting the ground for the momentous progress towards EU accession. The official opening of accession negotiations provided impetus to both countries’ internal reform agenda. Trusting and support civil society’s expertise and involvement in the policymaking and pre-accession process through regular consultations, remains vital.
Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine just entered its fourth year. In the context of the ongoing geopolitical complexity, Ukraine’s integration into the EU constitutes a long-term security guarantee for the country and should remain central in the Union’s political agenda.
In Georgia, despite its candidate status, civil society and independent media are not able to continue operating freely in a context where the government is employing new forms of pressure by weaponised legislation. As you know, many civil society organisations have relocated and reoriented their work abroad, especially in Armenia. While the risk to end up in a Russia-like scenario is extremely high, we call on Georgian authorities to end the systematic crackdown on civil society and independent media, swiftly realign with EU values and norms and recommit to Georgia’s EU path.
The situation in Georgia has an impact on the South Caucasus region, in particular Armenia, where civil society continues be a trusted partner and agent of change, promoting sustainable democratic reforms and articulating European aspirations. We call on the EU and EaP to pave the way to the implementation of the Crossroads of Peace project and strengthen connectivity in the region.
We remain concerned about the situation in Azerbaijan, where a new wave of arrests, repression and detention of civil society representatives and human rights activists intensified over the past few months. The current situation in Georgia has also serious consequences on the several Azerbaijani civil society organisations operating via their Georgian intermediaries. This is having an impact on their daily operations and interconnection with their counterparts at regional level.
Last point is on Belarus. Although not represented in this room, we will continue to channel the voice of Belarusian civil society. The EaP policy, and the Civil Society Forum, maintains it connected regionally with their democratically minded peers.
Political repressions, persecution of civil activists, independent media, and opposition figures wages on in the country. January’s sham elections were an important occasion for the international community and media to continue to shed light about the over 1,300 political prisoners detained in the country.
We call on the EU and its Member States to continue providing staunch political support to Belarusian democratic forces and civil society. Priority should be provided to the mobilisation of resources to support civil society operating inside the country, including through maintaining connections, providing education and offering financial assistance to activists and organisations within the country.
* * *
Speaking about the workplan, we are happy to see that, as of this year, the work plan will be multi-annual, covering a three-year period to better align with the Multiannual Financial Framework. This is a clear sign of commitment to continue the EaP policy.
We believe that a robust mid-term review should be included to adjust the activities to the needs on the ground on the basis of EaP political and legislative developments. Senior Official Meetings will be the place where to address these recommendations, starting with the SOM taking place in October this year.
On the objective, we welcome the creation of synergies with the Black Sea region. Such as on economic security, energy security, transportation, and data connectivity. Mindful of the importance to not overlap the EaP policy with the upcoming Black Sea strategy, we consider that a strategic and a more active engagement with civil society from the Black Sea region can contribute to strengthen the resilience of EaP societies.
One last general point. We reiterate the importance of ownership and leadership from the EU Member States and are happy to see a good level of interaction with some of them on the work plan activities. We welcome the leading role of Polish and Lithuanian colleagues in the work plan and encourage others Member States, starting from Denmark, who takes over the next EU Council Presidency. A more involvement of those Member States that are not traditional sponsors of the Eastern Partnership region should be explored to ensure a more shared support for the continuation of the policy.
On the EaP side, more EaP countries should be in the lead in key work plan activities and a higher level of engagement could be potentially discussed.
On the priority areas, we would like to underline the following points:
- A strong focus on complementarity with the enlargement process results evident from the work plan. In continuation with the 2024 experience, the rule of law seminar is an important platform to assess implementation of rule of law reforms.
While this is relevant to Moldova and Ukraine, the promotion of the so-called ‘fundamentals’ should be reflected into the work plan in relation to all the EaP countries, regardless of their level of engagement with the EU.
- Moving on towards 2027, we are happy to see a strong commitment to support independent media and strengthen media literacy. This comes in a context where electoral campaigns ahead of last October’s elections in Moldova and Georgia were marked by active disinformation campaigns. Civil society plays an active role on media literacy, empowering citizens to assess the information they encounter online, identify sources they can trust, and make well-informed decisions. Supporting programmes on media literacy for civil society and independent media will be important in view of Moldova’s parliamentary elections.
- Continuing the successful experience of last years, we found the working group for gender equality a valuable platform for sharing best practices and recommendations on gender-based violence, pay gap and women’s access to justice. We are happy to continue representing Belarusian civil society in the working group.
- In a context where hybrid threats are on the rise, we welcome that an EaP Seminar on Security and CSDP will continue to take place. The EaP fosters stability and security in the region and promotes Common Foreign and Security Policy alignment. Strengthening the intersection between the CSDP and the EaP policy can ensure more cooperation in the framework of the CSDP, mainly on operational capability.
- Taking stock from the 2024 work plan, we recommend mainstreaming a human security approach in the work plan, including through the reintroduction of trainings. A human security approach can directly contribute to democratisation, transparency, and accountability in policymaking, facilitating a transition towards governance models that prioritise the involvement of all citizens.
We continue to advocate for the creation of a dedicated Working Group on Civic Space on questions on civil society’s participation in decision making, regulatory environment and legal frameworks, and access to funding, for a thriving civic space.
Access to funding became an urgent need for civil society following the recent USAID funding freeze. The Forum recently conducted a survey with over 120 organisations working on human rights, media, youth, and think tanks. The survey highlighted that the USAID funding freeze has had a detrimental impact on their activities, including immediate disruptions in project implementation, suspension of capacity-building programs and community engagement initiatives. Many CSOs are struggling to retain key team members or proceeding with important layoffs. In this context of financial uncertainty, it is nearly impossible to plan or implement critical activities. In this regard, a Working Group on Civic Space could explore discussions on core funding and operational grants for EaP CSOs operating in the EaP countries and in exile. This will improve their abilities to build capacity and contribute to the design, implementation and assessment of EaP national laws, raising the bar on civic engagement and support democratic reform at the same time.
Lastly, we have a practical recommendation to improve accountability of meetings. As advocated during last year’s SOM, we welcome the practise of sharing the main conclusions and recommendations of the discussion, sending informal reports to participants after the meetings. We encourage to strengthen this practice, making it standard, and to invite participants to provide comments after the meetings.
I will stop here. Thank you very much for your attention. I wish you a productive continuation of the meeting and look forward to continuing to engage with you to support our shared values.
