The unfinished truth about the EU strategy for the Black Sea. Iulian Fota: “It is possible to stay on paper. It is not that that does not happen”

“Let's not be happy because the problem is not solved,” says Security Expert Iulian Fota about the EU strategy for the Black Sea. The former presidential adviser argues that in order not to remain on paper this strategy, Romania must act.

Security expert Iulian Fota claims that Romania must have its own strategy. Photo: adv

“Security in the Black Sea is also vital for European security ”said the head of European diplomacy, Kaja Kallas, in a press conference, at the presentation of the new EU strategy for the Black Sea.

Romania and Bulgaria are the only EU member states with exit to the Black Sea, and the community block will invest in the modernization of the regional infrastructure – ports, railways and airports – to allow the transport of heavy military equipment.

These investments will ensure that “The troops can reach where they are needed, when needed“Said Kallas.

The strategy also comes in response to “geopolitical challenges” in a world in which “addictions are transformed into weapons,” said Marta Kos, European Commissioner for Extension. The Black Sea is a bridge to the South Caucasus and Central Asia, but also a vital artery for energy and food trade, she said.

The Black Sea region was destabilized by Russia's invasion in Ukraine, the massive use of mines and military actions preventing the trade flow. Eastern European countries are afraid, separate from this context, from a possible aggression from Moscow beyond the borders of Ukraine and want to strengthen their defense capabilities.

Previously, the European Commissioner for Transport, Apostolos Tzitzikostas, estimated that the modernization of the transport infrastructure in Europe for military use would cost around 75 billion euros.

“Adevărul” discussed with the expert in the field of national security, Iulia Fota, former presidential counselor and former Secretary of State in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, about the strengths and weaknesses of this strategy.

“We call him a strategy, but in fact it would be more honest to tell him a strategic approach.”

The truth: Now that we have a strategy at the Black Sea, can we sleep peaceful?

Iulian Fota: To sleep peaceful we have to do as a country. Either I would like, beyond the intentions of some or others, either the United States, the European Union, Romania to have their own strategy at the Black Sea. It is something we had to do for a long time, but in the end, we haven't succeeded.

Here it is important to clarify what kind of strategy we want. We are not talking about a necessarily development or connectivity strategy, but we are talking about a security strategy at the Black Sea. Romania could propose such an objective and I think we would have specialists needed to do this.

Let's get a little on strategy analysis. There were certain criticisms that the strategy would be too generic. How do you see it?

I share this point of view. I believe the same.

Detail a little, please.

The strategy as a political message or as a political signal is to be welcomed. So the fact that the European Union has gone on the Black Sea domain and came with all these details, has made this effort, is greeted. It's a step forward, here we have to be correct and emphasize this matter. Especially if we keep in mind that the last document that the European Union had in this area was the “Black Sea Synege”, which was written many years ago (2007) and which was, as I say, a peace document, because at the time of adoption of synergy, the regional situation was quite different. So it is good that the European Union has the Black Sea, in attention, but from here Romania has to intervene.

And one more thing I want to say. We tell him a strategy, but in fact it would be more honest to tell him a strategic approach or a strategic vision, precisely because the element is so general and so wide. This is an intermediate form. That is, that means we can tend to strategy, but we haven't got there yet.

Let's look at a bit what are the strengths and weaknesses of the strategy. Let's start with strengths.

The strength is that we have a confirmation of a documented, integrated interest, given that several important components have worked here. That is, in the end, this strategy, you see, is assumed by the General Directorate for Extension and Eastern Neighborhood. Here I am a little surprised, honest. I expected the document to be assumed at the level of the External Action Service of the European Union (SEA).

Why do you think it was not assumed at the EEA level?

They put him here because here, and a very important thing, the focus is not on the Member States, Bulgaria or Romania, the focus is on the candidates Georgia, Moldova, Turkey.

Has Romania also have a contribution to the achievement of this strategy?

He played an important role and the insistent diplomatic pressure of Romania on such a document. Because we have been asking for some time for something. I was at the ministry when we were doing suggestions and even officially raised the need for such a document. So I am absolutely convinced that he wanted to respond to Romania's insistence. And at NATO and the EU, from the first steps of accession, Romania has put the problem of the Black Sea on the table of the two organizations and easy-and NATO, and the European Union came with institutional answers to this legitimate, natural request of Romania.

“Let us not be glad that the problem is not solved. It is, in fact, the beginning of the solution.”

Does this strategy mean that the EU takes the Black Sea “under the protective wing”?

We are the EU. That means EU is right. It is an essential statement by Mrs. Kaya Callas that summarizes the significance of this strategy: “Security at the Black Sea is vital to European security. ”

By the way, this is not an end of the road, that's what I want to understand the world, so this is a start of the road. Recognizing this issue, the EU is committed to doing some things related to the Black Sea on several levels.

Tell us about the weaknesses of the strategy?

I did not see much of defense issues, these military aspects. I see that the emphasis is not put on security issues, they also appear, but the emphasis is on civilian issues, non -military, connectivity, environmental and security issues, but still.

That is why I tell you, it is a vision, it is not a strategy and based on this new vision we will have to continue the diplomatic effort and insistence and yet to obtain a strategy, if you can have an EU Security Strategy on the Black Sea, because again the Russian issue, for example, is approached through the conflict with Ukraine. But Russia is a problem for the EU too, right?

All Russian threats are a bit marginal or superficially treated. That is, on this strategic approach or strategic vision, we will have to come up with more concrete, more focused things.

For example, another weak point is that they are not the past priorities. All the elements of the strategy are equal. Priorities are missing. What order do we start in? Then who has responsibilities? Responsibilities are not drawn. We don't know much about funding, funds.

Other weaknesses?

There are also, for example, an interesting formula there, maritime Security Hub, the Maritime Security Hub … What is it there? It's a discussion platform, it's an institution, what do we have there?

So, it is an important signal, it is a step forward, which is a vision that structures the European thinking related to the Black Sea. These are important and important things. But, equally, my idea is as follows, not to be glad that the problem is not solved. It is, in fact, the beginning of the resolution.

And the US has a strategy at the Black Sea

What does Romania have to do?

We need to be more ambitious and try to get a real EU security strategy on the Black Sea. And there is a thing that is related to Romania. The more important it will be for Romania to have their own thinking, its own strategy on the Black Sea. How do we know what EU does is right, if we don't know exactly what we want? You cannot say the EU “do you” and we do nothing.

We had this discussion with the Americans when they adopted a Black Sea strategy.

What is the better strategy? That of the EU or the American one?

It's exactly the same type of philosophy. And that was so, a strategic vision with some important details, with some clear, strong statements. This should be covered by a strategy of the US government, which I honestly do not know if Donald Trump is doing. I don't know anything about this.

As an idea, it is common sense and we should have our own strategy on the Black Sea. What is the strategy? What is the Romanian vision related to the Black Sea? The French, for example, have a concept adopted for the Black Sea, which is public, a kind of doctrine. We still make efforts to determine the EU to adopt a strategy, but we do not come with ours.

The importance of the Black Sea

Why is the Black Sea so important?

Because, first of all, it represents, if you want, the connection with the outside world. The Black Sea for us is important to be a great free. It is a long history of the Romanian state related to the Black Sea. I give you an appearance. If you look at the history of the Black Sea, whenever the Black Sea, for example, was open to international trade, these territories were thriving. This is starting from the Dacians, who have prospered when they made the free trade through the Greek colonies on the Black Sea, and to this day.

Romania's security and prosperity are related to two things: freedom of navigation trade on the Black Sea/ Black Sea has an open international status; And the second, peace in the Black Sea. Whenever there was peace in the Black Sea, again, we were fine. As the war in the Black Sea appears, as we are bad and, unfortunately, in the last 30 and some years since the disappearance of the USSR, we had 6 wars in the Black Sea. No other region of the world in the last 30 years had 6 wars as we have, in the Black Sea, 4 of the Russians and two between Armenians and Azeri.

How important is a Black Sea strategy in the economy of the new president's security concerns?

I think it should be done. First of all, it is a matter of hygiene, if you want, international diplomatic. You cannot ask others to come up with strategies in your area, in your interest, as long as you do not have one. I mean, they want to see how you understand, to orient, to take into account. I mean that's what I say. Where is the Romanian strategy on the Black Sea? It's like asking others to take care of our country without beating our heads. It doesn't work that way.

This strategic vision proposed by the EU related to the Black Sea has been made to a great extent at our insistence, it is true, others have helped us, and Poland asked Bulgaria, but mostly at the institution of Romania it came.

Do you think there is the opportunity to remain only on paper this vision?

Yes, yes, yes. Only it does not happen that this happens.