Tag: Bulgaria

  • Eastern Europeans face Brussels backlash over Ukraine grain bans

    Eastern Europeans face Brussels backlash over Ukraine grain bans

    [ad_1]

    Press play to listen to this article

    Voiced by artificial intelligence.

    European Union politicians and officials have rounded on the front-line Eastern states of Poland, Hungary and Slovakia for imposing import bans on Ukrainian farm produce, denouncing the curbs as illegal and counterproductive.

    The three countries banned imports of Ukrainian grain and other food products over recent days, arguing the export surplus had flooded their markets and threatened the livelihoods of local farmers.

    The curbs have set the group on a collision course with Brussels while at the same time threatening the EU’s fragile solidarity in backing Ukraine’s fightback against Russia’s war of aggression.

    EU diplomats believe the import bans contravene both international and EU law — and will fail to achieve their goals.

    “Unilateral bans of individual countries won’t solve anything,” Czech Minister of Agriculture Zdeněk Nekula said.

    “We must find agreement throughout the EU on the rules under which agricultural commodities will transit from Ukraine to European ports, and that production from them goes further to countries outside the EU that are dependent on Ukrainian production.”

    The issue risks turning into a ticking time bomb.

    Ukraine’s economy heavily relies on grain exports, which before the war were enough to feed 400 million people. When Russia invaded last year and blocked much of Ukraine’s global exports, the EU quickly installed so-called “solidarity lanes,” dropping all inspections on imports.

    As a result, grain imports into surrounding countries shot up — much to the anger of local farmers who say they can’t compete. Instead of transiting through the countries to the rest of the world, the grain stays on the local markets, the countries argue.

    With the summer harvest season ahead, the situation might get even tenser. Both Poland and Slovakia are heading into national elections later this year where the rural vote will be crucial.

    “Solidarity lanes aren’t working. We have no effective tools controlling the transit,” Poland’s Ambassador to the EU Andrzej Sadoś told POLITICO. “We have in our silos some 4 million tons of Ukrainian grain and we need some time to stabilize the situation.”

    The problems had been largely ignored by the European Commission so far, he said, forcing the Polish government to act.

    GettyImages 1250853197
    Romanian farmers protest in the front of the European Commision headquarters in Bucharest | Daniel Mihailescu/AFP via Getty Images

    “Individual farmers started to block terminals and train connections. They were protesting. We were very close to an escalation,” said Sadoś. He stressed that the ban, due to expire on June 30, is only temporary.

    ‘Unacceptable’ moves

    One EU diplomat accused Warsaw of indulging in “gesture politics.”

    “The situation has come to a head, it wants to send a signal that it’s supporting its farmers,” this diplomat said. “But it’s really not the most elegant solution, especially with regards to solidarity for Ukraine.”

    Others even doubt whether the measures are legal in the first place.

    In public, the EU’s executive branch, the Commission, has taken a measured approach, telling journalists in Brussels on Monday that “at this stage, it’s too early” to give a definite answer on the legality of the move. It did, however, note: “Trade policy is of EU exclusive competence and, therefore, unilateral actions are not acceptable.”

    The private steer from Brussels appears to be more adamant about illegality. Czech Agriculture Minister Nekula, for example, said the EU’s Agriculture Commissioner Janusz Wojciechowski — who is himself Polish — had told him that such measures “are unacceptable.”

    Asked whether the bans were legal, another EU diplomat said: “I don’t think so.” That’s because, the diplomat argued, trade is an exclusive competence of the EU, meaning individual countries cannot simply unilaterally block imports from a country. Yet another EU diplomat supported that argument, pointing to World Trade Organization rules.

    The terms of EU-Ukraine commerce are also supposed to be safeguarded by the terms of a free-trade area applied since 2014.

    Poland rejects the idea that it is breaking the rules, citing national laws that allow it to do so for public safety reasons.

    It’s not just Poland, however, and each of the three countries is trying to avoid the Commission’s wrath by making different arguments in its defense.

    Slovakia, for its part, argues it was forced to act on Monday after Poland and Hungary moved at the weekend to block imports.

    “There was a risk their routes will redirect towards us and will cause even more pressure on our small domestic market,” a Slovak official said, adding that tests had also shown an excessive level of pesticides in wheat.

    Contrary to Poland and Hungary, Slovakia said it would keep transit open.

    GettyImages 1236745097
    European Commissioner for Agriculture Janusz Wojciechowski speaks during a debate on the Common Agricultural Policy | Pool photo by Christian Hartmann/AFP via Getty Images

    A way out?

    Wiesław Gryn, one of the main leaders of farmer protests in Poland, said a better way would be to focus on banning products that are made in violation of EU standards, rather than imposing a temporary blanket ban.

    “Stopping Ukrainian exports for two months won’t do much because at least six months are needed to export the 4 million tons [that is already in Poland],” he said.

    To address the issue, the EU has disbursed some €30 million to Poland, some €16.8 million to Bulgaria and €10 million to Romania.

    That isn’t nearly enough, said Sadoś, the Polish ambassador. “We need systemic solutions, not just support for the farmers,” he said. Poland wanted to keep supporting Ukraine through imports, he said, “but the price cannot be … the bankruptcy of millions of Polish farmers.”

    Such systemic solutions, in Sadoś’ view, would be to give importers a window of 24 hours, for example, for shipments to reach a transit port to ensure that the products don’t stay in Poland.

    That is legally complicated, however, and would involve more checks and paperwork — potentially holding up trade flows even more, say critics.

    Lili Bayer and Gregorio Sorgi contributed reporting.



    [ad_2]
    #Eastern #Europeans #face #Brussels #backlash #Ukraine #grain #bans
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.eu )

  • Ukraine’s bumper grain exports rile allies in eastern EU

    Ukraine’s bumper grain exports rile allies in eastern EU

    [ad_1]

    Press play to listen to this article

    Voiced by artificial intelligence.

    Ukraine’s farmers played an iconic role in the first weeks of Russia’s invasion, towing away abandoned enemy tanks with their tractors.

    Now, though, their prodigious grain output is causing some of Ukraine’s staunchest allies to waver, as disrupted shipments are redirected onto neighboring markets.

    The most striking is Poland, which has played a leading role so far in supporting Ukraine, acting as the main transit hub for Western weaponry and sending plenty of its own. But grain shipments in the other direction have irked Polish farmers who are being undercut — just months before a national election where the rural vote will be crucial.

    Diplomats are floundering. After a planned Friday meeting between the Polish and Ukrainian agriculture ministers was postponed, the Polish government on Saturday announced a ban on imports of farm products from Ukraine. Hungary late Saturday said it would do the same.

    Ukraine is among the world’s top exporters of wheat and other grains, which are ordinarily shipped to markets as distant as Egypt and Pakistan. Russia’s invasion last year disrupted the main Black Sea export route, and a United Nations-brokered deal to lift the blockade has been only partially effective. In consequence, Ukrainian produce has been diverted to bordering EU countries: Hungary, Poland, Romania and Slovakia.

    At first, those governments supported EU plans to shift the surplus grain. But instead of transiting seamlessly onto global markets, the supply glut has depressed prices in Europe. Farmers have risen up in protest, and Polish Agriculture Minister Henryk Kowalczyk was forced out earlier this month.

    Now, governments’ focus has shifted to restricting Ukrainian imports to protect their own markets. After hosting Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in Warsaw in early April, Polish President Andrzej Duda said resolving the import glut was “a matter of introducing additional restrictions.”

    The following day, Poland suspended imports of Ukrainian grain, saying the idea had come from Kyiv. On Saturday, Polish Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki, after an emergency cabinet meeting, said the import ban would cover grain and certain other farm products and would include products intended for other countries. A few hours later, the Hungarian government announced similar measures. Both countries said the bans would last until the end of June.

    The European Commission is seeking further information on the import restrictions from Warsaw and Budapest “to be able to assess the measures,” according to a statement on Sunday. “Trade policy is of EU exclusive competence and, therefore, unilateral actions are not acceptable,” it said.

    While the EU’s free-trade agreement with Ukraine prevents governments from introducing tariffs, they still have plenty of tools available to disrupt shipments.

    Neighboring countries and nearby Bulgaria have stepped up sanitary checks on Ukrainian grain, arguing they are doing so to protect the health of their own citizens. They have also requested financial support from Brussels and have already received more than €50 million from the EU’s agricultural crisis reserve, with more money on the way.

    Restrictions could do further harm to Ukraine’s battered economy, and by extension its war effort. The economy has shrunk by 29.1 percent since the invasion, according to statistics released this month, and agricultural exports are an important source of revenue.

    Cracks in the alliance

    The trade tensions sit at odds with these countries’ political position on Ukraine, which — with the exception of Hungary — has been strongly supportive. Poland has taken in millions of Ukrainian refugees, while weapons and ammunition flow in the opposite direction; Romania has helped transport millions of tons of Ukrainian corn and wheat.

    GettyImages 1480160064
    Volodymyr Zelenskyy and Poland’s Prime Minister, Mateusz Morawiecki | Omar Marques/Getty Images

    Some Western European governments, which had to be goaded by Poland and others into sending heavy weaponry to Kyiv, are quick to point out the change in direction.

    “Curious to see that some of these countries are [always] asking for more on sanctions, more on ammunition, etc. But when it affects them, they turn to Brussels begging for financial support,” said one diplomat from a Western country, speaking on condition of anonymity.

    Some EU countries also oppose the import restrictions for economic reasons. For instance, Spain and the Netherlands are some of the biggest recipients of Ukrainian grain, which they use to supply their livestock industries.

    Politically, though, the Central and Eastern European governments have limited room for maneuver. Poland and Slovakia are both heading into general elections later this year. Bulgaria has had a caretaker government since last year. Romania’s agriculture minister has faced calls to resign, including from a compatriot former EU agriculture commissioner.

    And farmers are a strong constituency. Poland’s right-wing Law & Justice (PiS) party won the last general election in 2019 thanks in large part to rural voters. The Ukrainian grain issue has already cost a Polish agriculture minister his job; the government as a whole will have to tread carefully to avoid the same fate.

    This article has been updated.



    [ad_2]
    #Ukraines #bumper #grain #exports #rile #allies #eastern
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.eu )

  • Russian nuclear fuel: The habit Europe just can’t break

    Russian nuclear fuel: The habit Europe just can’t break

    [ad_1]

    Press play to listen to this article

    Voiced by artificial intelligence.

    Europe is on track to kick its addiction to Russian fossil fuels, but can’t seem to replicate that success with nuclear energy a year into the Ukraine war.

    The EU’s economic sanctions on Russian coal and oil permanently reshaped trade and left Moscow in a “much diminished position,” according to the International Energy Agency. Coal imports have dropped to zero, and it is illegal for Russian crude to be imported by ship; only four countries still receive it by pipeline.

    That’s compared to the bloc getting 54 percent of its hard coal imports and one-quarter of its oil from Russia in 2020.

    Russian President Vladimir Putin’s decision to turn off the gas taps while the EU turned increasingly to liquefied natural gas deliveries from elsewhere caused the reliance on Moscow to tumble from 40 percent of the bloc’s gas supply before the war to less than 10 percent now.

    But nuclear energy has proved a trickier knot for EU countries to untie — for both historical and practical reasons.

    As competition in the global nuclear sector atrophied following the Cold War, Soviet-built reactors in the EU remained locked into tailor-made fuel from Russia, leaving Moscow to play an outsized role.

    In 2021, Russia’s state-owned atomic giant Rosatom supplied the bloc’s reactors with 20 percent of their natural uranium, handled a quarter of their conversion services and provided a third of their enrichment services, according to the EU’s Euratom Supply Agency (ESA).

    That same year, EU countries paid Russia €210 million for raw uranium exports, compared to the €88 billion the bloc paid Moscow for oil.

    The value of imports of Russia-related nuclear technology and fuel worldwide rose to more than $1 billion (€940 billion) last year, according to research from the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI). In the EU, the value of Russia’s nuclear exports fell in some countries like Bulgaria and the Czech Republic but rose in others, including Slovakia, Hungary and Finland, RUSI data shared with POLITICO showed.

    “While it is difficult to draw definitive conclusions from what is ultimately a time-limited and incomplete dataset, it does clearly show that there are still dependencies on, and a market for, Russian nuclear fuel,” said Darya Dolzikova, a research fellow at RUSI.

    Although uranium from Russia could be replaced by imports from elsewhere within a year — and most nuclear plants have at least one-year extra reserves, according to ESA head Agnieszka Kaźmierczak — countries with Russian-built VVER reactors rely on fuel made by Moscow.

    “There are 18 Russian-designed nuclear power plants in [the EU] and all of them would be affected by sanctions,” said Mark Hibbs, a senior fellow at Carnegie’s Nuclear Policy Program. “This remains a deeply divided issue in the European Union.”

    That’s why the bloc has struggled over the past year to target Russia’s nuclear industry — despite repeated calls from Ukraine and some EU countries to hit Rosatom for its role in overseeing the occupied Ukrainian Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant, and possibly supplying equipment to the Russian arms industry.

    “The whole question of sanctioning the nuclear sector … was basically killed before there was ever a meaningful discussion,” said a diplomat from one EU country who spoke on condition of anonymity.

    The most vocal opponent has been Hungary, one of five countries — along with Slovakia, Bulgaria, Finland and the Czech Republic — to have Russian-built reactors for which there is no alternative fuel so far.

    Bulgaria and the Czech Republic have signed contracts with U.S. firm Westinghouse to replace the Russian fuel, according to ESA chief Kaźmierczak, but the process could take “three years” as national regulators also need to analyze and license the new fuel.

    The “bigger problem” across the board is enrichment and conversion, she added, due to chronic under-capacity worldwide. It could take “seven to 10 years” to replace Rosatom — and that timeline is conditional on significant investments in the sector.

    While Finland last year scrapped a deal to build a Russian-made nuclear plant on the country’s west coast — prompting a lawsuit from Rosatom — others aren’t changing tack.

    Slovakia’s new Mochovce-3 Soviet VVER-design reactor came online earlier this month, which Russia will supply with fuel until at least 2026. 

    GettyImages 543401232
    Russia’s nuclear energy was not initially included in EU sanctions over Russian President Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine | Eric Piermont/AFP via Getty Images

    Hungary, meanwhile, deepened ties with Moscow by giving the go-ahead to the construction of two more reactors at its Paks plant last summer, underwritten by a €10 billion Russian loan.

    “Even if [they] were to come into existence, nuclear sanctions would be filled with exemptions because we are dependent on Russian nuclear fuel,” said a diplomat from a second EU country.

    This article has been updated with charts depicting Russia’s nuclear exports.



    [ad_2]
    #Russian #nuclear #fuel #habit #Europe #break
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.eu )

  • Biden wants Poland’s opinion — but he still has the power

    Biden wants Poland’s opinion — but he still has the power

    [ad_1]

    Press play to listen to this article

    Voiced by artificial intelligence.

    MUNICH — NATO’s eastern flank has found its voice — but Joe Biden’s visit is a reminder that Western capitals still have the weight. 

    After Russia bombed its way into Ukraine, the military alliance’s eastern members won praise for their prescient warnings (not to mention a few apologies). They garnered respect for quickly emptying their weapons stockpiles for Kyiv and boosting defense spending to new heights. Now, they’re driving the conversation on how to deal with Russia.

    In short, eastern countries suddenly have the ear of traditional Western powers — and they are trying to move the needle. 

    “We draw the red line, then we waste the time, then we cross this red line,” Lithuanian President Gitanas Nausėda said over the weekend at the Munich Security Conference, describing a now-familiar cycle of debates among Ukraine’s partners as eastern capitals push others to move faster.

    The region’s sudden prominence will be on full display as U.S. President Joe Biden travels to Poland this week, where he will sit down with leaders of the so-called Bucharest Nine — Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania and Slovakia. 

    The choice is both symbolic and practical. Washington is keen to show its eastern partners it wants their input — and to remind Vladimir Putin of the consequences should the Kremlin leader spread his war into NATO territory. 

    Yet when it comes to allies’ most contentious decisions, like what arms to place where, the eastern leaders ultimately still have to defer to leaders like Biden — and his colleagues in Western powers like Germany. They are the ones holding the largest quantities of modern tanks, fighter jets and long-range missiles, after all. 

    “My job,” Polish Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki said in Munich, is “to move the pendulum of imagination of my partners in western Europe.”

    “Our region has risen in relevance,” added Czech Foreign Minister Jan Lipavský in an interview. But Western countries are still “much stronger” on the economic and military front, he added. “They are still the backbone.”

    They’re listening … now

    When Latvian Defense Minister Ināra Mūrniece entered politics over a decade ago, she recalled the skepticism that greeted her and like-minded countries when they discussed Russia on the global stage.

    “They didn’t understand us,” she said in an interview earlier this month. People saw the region as “escalating the picture,” she added. 

    GettyImages 1180597703
    Latvian Defense Minister Ināra Mūrniece | Gints Ivuskans/AFP via Getty Images

    February 24, 2022, changed things. The images of Russia rolling tanks and troops into Ukraine shocked many Westerners — and started changing minds. The Russian atrocities that came shortly after in places like Bucha and Irpin were “another turning point,” Mūrniece said. 

    Now, the eastern flank plays a key role in defining the alliance’s narrative — and its understanding of Russia. 

    “Our voice is now louder and more heard,” said Romanian Foreign Minister Bogdan Aurescu. 

    The Bucharest Nine — an informal format that brings together the region for dialogue with the U.S. and occasionally other partners — is one of the vehicles regional governments are using to showcase their interests.

    “It has become an authoritative voice in terms of assessment of the security situation, in terms of assessment of needs,” Aurescu said in an interview in Munich. NATO is listening to the group for a simple reason, he noted: “The security threats are coming from this part of our neighborhood.” 

    Power shifts … slowly

    While the eastern flank has prodded its western partners to send once-unthinkable weapons to Ukraine, the power balance has not completely flipped. Far from it. 

    Washington officials retain the most sway in the Western alliance. Behind them, several western European capitals take the lead.

    “Without the Germans things don’t move — without the Americans things don’t move for sure,” said one senior western European diplomat, who spoke on condition of anonymity because they are not authorized to speak publicly. 

    And at this stage of the war, as Ukraine pushes for donations of the most modern weapons — fighter jets, advanced tanks, longer-range missile systems — it’s the alliance’s largest economies and populations that are in focus. 

    “It’s very easy for me to say that, ‘Of course, give fighter jets’ — I don’t have them,” Estonian Prime Minister Kaja Kallas told reporters earlier this month. 

    GettyImages 1432844061
    Asked if his country would supply Kyiv with F-16 fighter jets, Morawiecki conceded in Munich, “we have not too many of them.” | Omar Marques/Getty Images

    “So it’s up to those countries to say who have,” she said. “If I would have, I would give — but I don’t.”

    And even some eastern countries who have jets don’t want to move without their Western counterparts. 

    Asked if his country would supply Kyiv with F-16 fighter jets, Morawiecki conceded in Munich, “we have not too many of them.” He did say, however, that Poland could offer older jets — if the allies could pull together a coalition, that is.

    Another challenge for advocates of a powerful eastern voice within NATO is that the eastern flank itself is diverse. 

    Priorities vary even among like-minded countries based on their geographies. And, notably, there are some Russia-friendly outliers. 

    Hungary, for example, does not provide any weapons assistance to Ukraine and continues to maintain a relationship with the Kremlin. In fact, Budapest has become so isolated in Western policy circles that no Hungarian government officials attended the Munich Security Conference. 

    “I think the biggest problem in Hungary is the rhetoric of leadership, which sometimes really crosses the red line,” said the Czech Republic’s Lipavský, who was cautious to add that Budapest does fulfill NATO obligations, participating in alliance defense efforts. 

    Just for now?

    There are also questions about whether the east’s moment in the limelight is a permanent fixture or product of the moment. After all, China, not Russia, may be seizing western attention in the future.

    “It’s obvious that their voice is becoming louder, but that’s also a consequence of the geopolitical situation we’re in,” said the senior western European diplomat. “I’m not sure if it’s sustainable in the long run.” 

    A second senior western European diplomat, who also spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive internal alliance dynamics, said that the eastern flank countries sometimes take a tough tone “because of the fear of the pivot to China.”

    GettyImages 1247249546
    NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has also reiterated that western alliance members play a role in defending the eastern flank | Johannes Simon/Getty Images

    Asked if the war has changed the balance of influence within the alliance, French Foreign Minister Catherine Colonna said: “Yes and no.” 

    “We have to defend our territories, it is as simple as that,” she told POLITICO in Munich. “In order to do so we had to reinforce the eastern flank — Russia is on that part of the continent.” 

    NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has also reiterated that western alliance members play a role in defending the eastern flank. 

    Asked whether NATO’s center of gravity is shifting east, he said on a panel in Munich that “what has shifted east is NATO’s presence.”

    But, he added, “of course many of those troops come from the western part of the alliance — so this demonstrates how NATO is together and how we support each other.” 

    And in western Europe, there is a sense that the east does deserve attention at the moment. 

    “They might not have all the might,” said the second senior western European diplomat. “But they deserve solidarity.”



    [ad_2]
    #Biden #Polands #opinion #power
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.eu )