Home

Romania is Moldova’s most important partner for commercial trade and, for the first time in history, it overreached Russia in the volume of direct investments in Moldova. At least this is what the official statistics show, even though many Russian businessmen prefer to lead their businesses from more convenient tax systems like Cyprus and the Netherlands.

The report (only in Romanian) is particularly useful for Romanian and European businessman interested to invest in Moldova, as it contains information about the business environment, economic trends and legislation in the field. At the same time, the report is addressed to Romanian public institutions with economic and representation attributions and which could do more to intermediate business contracts. In order to strengthen the Strategic Partnership with the Republic of Moldova, Romania has to continue the efforts it began in the area of political and cultural activities, as well as economic activities, especially the ones which concern commercial trade and the increase of direct investments.

The Romanian version of the report can be downloaded here.

December 2011

The embassy of the Republic of Poland in Romania, in partnership with the Romanian Center of European Policies organized on the 28th of November 2011 the seminar on “Poland’s and Romania’s role in the implementation of the Conclusions of the Second Summit of the Eastern Partnership in Warsaw”.

The event represented an occasion to discuss about the beginning of the negotiations of the Deep and comprehensive Free Trade Agreement between Ukraine, the republic of Moldova and the EU, by the end of 2011; the role and the importance of the Eastern Partnership, as well as the developments of the Eastern Partnership and future perspectives. The role played by the partners in the treaty and the soft power efficiency of the European Union in influencing the outcomes of the Eastern Partnership were two other subjects discussed during the seminar.

From right to left: Ciprian Ciucu, Cristian Ghinea, Adam Eberhardt, Grzegorz Gromadzki, Iurie Renita

The event was honored by the presence of his Excellency Marek Szczygiel – the ambassador of the Republic of Poland in Romania, Bogdan Aurescu – representing the Romanian Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Arthur Michalski – Minister of external Affairs in Poland.

Important contributions about the relationship between the member states of the Eastern Partnership were made by Cristian Ghinea – Director of the Romanian Centre of European Policies, Adam Eberhardt – assistant director of the Centre for Eastern Studies in Warsaw, Grzegorz Gromadzki – independent expert and Ciprian Ciucu – programmes director at the Romanian Centre of European Policies.

December 2011

The Romanian Centre for European Policies made public in Brussels the volume “The EU Approach to Justice Reform in Southeastern and Eastern Europe”. The book was launched with the occasion of a public hearing organized at the European Parliament with the contribution of MEPs Monica Macovei (Romania), Mariya Nedelcheva (Bulgaria) and Tadeusz Zwiefka (Polonia).

“The EU Approach to Justice Reform in Southeastern and Eastern Europe” constitutes a comparative analysis of a series of indicators with regard to justice performance and the fight against corruption in Romania, Bulgaria, Croatia, Serbia, Macedonia, the Republic of Moldova and Ukraine. The indicators taken into account for each of these countries are the following: anti-corruption institutions, immunities, confiscations, declarations of wealth and interests, the independence and accountability of the judiciary.

The lessons learnt with the occasion of Romania’s and Bulgaria’s accession to the EU, the special conditionalities and the mechanism for cooperation and verification post-accession should be considered as anti-corruption instruments in countries which currently are in the process of accession to the EU. The volume launched by CRPE was edited by Cristian Ghinea and Laura Stefan, with the contribution of national experts from each country subject of the book. The volume contains a detailed chapter describing the situation for each of the analyzed countries and a comprehensive chapter highlighting the elements which are common for the region. The PDF format of the volume can be downloaded here.

The summary of the comprehensive chapter is available here.
The recording of the public hearing can be downloaded here.

The CRPE project was financed by the German Marshall Fund, Konrad Adenauer Stiftung and Soros Foundation Romania. The volume expresses strictly the opinions of the experts and authors involved.

November 2011

CRPE and Kosovo Foundation for Open Society (KFOS) organized a study visit for a delegation gathering important representatives of the media, think tanks and institutes of European affairs from Romania and Moldova. The study visit took place between 24 and 27 October, in Pristina, Kosovo.

The aims of the events organized during this visit were to create a network between the civil societies of the participant countries and, at the same time, to assure a better understanding of the socio-political situation in Kosovo. Representatives of the civil society in Kosovo, the EULEX representative, Xavier But de Marnhoc and the representative of the International Civilian Office, Peter Feith, as well as ambassadors of the member states of the European Union in Kosovo were invited to the events.

The summary of the debate with the representatives of the civil society can be downloaded here, the summary of the discussion with the members of the parliament is available here and the summary of the discussion with the vice-minister of external affairs, Petrit Selimi, can be downloaded here. Other documents of interest are available here.

October 2011

Romania only has a few months left to solve the problems which have been affecting property restitution for the last 20 years. The Romanian Center for European Policies is drawing attention on this important issue in its latest report:”Romania’s Coming Property Restitution Reform – Nine Months Left to Solve a 21 Billion Euro Problem”.  

Romania is the number one violator of the right to the protection of property among the 47 nations of the Council of Europe, with over 255 violations of the European Convention on Human Rights since 2005. In October 2010, the European Court of Human Rights exhausted its patience and filed its first pilot judgment against Romania. The pilot judgement pushes the respective state to solve its systemic problem. Thus, the ECHR has stopped ruling in individual Romanian property restitution case cases, as it awaits consistent policy change.  The deadline is 12 July 2012. We are now halfway into this 18-month period, and time is running out. The Romanian government and parliament must act now.

The author of the report, Andrei Popovici, goes into the history of property restitution in Romania, analyzes the ECHR ruling and what has been done by Romanian authorities to this day. He also gained access to the proposals the authorities prepare to bring to the forefront and provides a set of recommendations for policy makers. 

About the Author: Andrei Popovici is a graduate student at Columbia Law School and the Harvard Kennedy School of Government. He holds a BA in Economics from Yale University. The report has been written during his internship with CRPE.

This report was issued as part of the project “Romania Active in European Debates II”, coordinated by the Romanian Center for European Policies (CRPE) and financed by the Soros Foundation, part of the Foreign Affairs Initiative.

October 2011

The Government meeting which will be held this week should settle the exact details of the working principles of the Ministry of European Affairs. In this context, the Romanian Centre of European Policies releases the report: “MAE versus MAEu – how can we stop the rivalry and encourage the cooperation between the two ministries which represent us in the EU” - only in Romanian (uthors: Cristian Ghinea and Dragos Dinu)

CRPE resumes the conclusions of the previously published analysis where we lay out the deficiencies of that the mechanism of coordination of the European affairs in Romania.  The decision-centers established in January 2008 (political level, high officials’ level and civil servants’ level) are not operational in practice. The heavy responsibility stands on the shoulders of the duet MAE – Department of European Affairs. But things do not go well here either, since there exist both duality and rivalry between MAE and DAE. Until now, the problem was only de facto solved to the extent that MAE became dominant in its relation with DAE, as it possesses the Representation of Romania to the EU in Brussels, the Romanian embassies to the Member states and because it works with files which are more political sensitive. The establishment of a Ministry of European Affairs (MAEu) generates the risk of further complicating the situation instead of simplifying it. Prime Minster Emil Boc made the promise that the newly created ministry will coordinate European affairs. In reality, the new ministry only assumes DAE’s responsibilities (plus the institution which dealt with European funds), without receiving supplementary mechanisms of control.  However, the new institution won’t easily accept MAE’s primacy and this creates the risk to further increase the preexistent rivalry and frictions.

These deficiencies and risks are comprehensively analyzed in CRPE’s report. In addition, the two authors advance a few simple solutions:

A more accurate separation of the competence areas;

• The direct access and partial control of MAEu on the Representation of Romania to the EU in Brussels and, similarly, on the diplomats who deal with European affairs in the Romanian embassies from the Member states.
• The establishment of a more accurate custom between MAE and MAEu, according to which the final word regarding the country-positions belongs to MAEu. If MAE needs to change these positions in order to better negotiate with other European capitals (legitimate and highly important political attribution of MAE), then MAE should expose its arguments in advance, in a joint session and subsequently offer detailed information to MAEu about the outcomes.
• More scientifically based country-positions, through analysis and impact studies. MAEu should supervise the budgets allocated for research and analyses to the other ministries when they are related to European affairs. The money allocated remains unused even though these studies are highly necessary. The best solution is externalized research. The European Institute of Romania (institution which also deals with research in this field) should be reorganized, made more flexible and should operate as a network for employing research, a network which is highly adaptive to the requirements necessary for formulating the country-positions.

This report is released under the joint patronage of two projects: “Romania – active in the European debates II”, carried by the Romanian Centre of European Policies (CRPE) and sponsored by the Soros Foundation under the External Policy Initiative and  “The consolidation of the Romanian Parliament’s capacity of being an active European actor” sponsored by Friedrich Ebert Stiftung.

September 2011

The Embassy of Poland in Romania together with the European Comission Representation in Bucharest and The European Institute of Romania held, on September 21st, 2011, the conference called „The next EU multiannual financial framework – fostering growth and reducing disparities between EU regions”.
The event addressed the topic of the future EU budget, as an essential instrument in reducing disparities between regions, as well as the critical role of European policies in the field. The conference covered topics of great importance for all Member States, and particularly for Romania, as our country is currently undergoing institutional changes meant to improve its performance with regard to the absorption of structural funds.

The event’s guest of honor was Mr. Janusz Lewandowski, European Commissioner for Financial Planning and Budget. From the Romanian side, important contributions were made, among others, by Mr. Leonard Orban, Minister of European Affairs, former presidential adviser and European Commissioner, Ms. Elena Udrea, Minister of Regional Development and Tourism,  Gheorghe Gherghina, State Secretary within the Finance Ministry, Marian - Jean Marinescu, Member of the European Parliament.

The discussion sessions were moderated by Gabriela Drăgan, Director of the European Institute of Romania, and Cristian Ghinea, Director of the Romanian Center for European Policies.

You can watch the online conference here.

„European Perspectives” is the series of conferences on European topics which has been carried by the European Commission Representation in Bucharest since 2009. Starting 2010 CRPE, in partnership with DC Communication, has organized a series of conferences under a service contract with ECR.

September 2011

The Coalition for the European Continent Undivided by Visa Barriers (to which CRPE is member) has published an Appeal to the leaders of the European Union and Eastern Partnership (EaP) states gathered at the EU-EaP summit in Warsaw on the 29th-30th of September, 2011, calling them to reiterate their pledge to establish visa-free travel between the EU and the EaP countries and to commit to do so as soon as the technical criteria are met.

The Coalition calls upon the EU to remove the wording of “as a long-term goal” as concerns visa liberalisation from all the relevant documents to be signed soon including drafts of negotiated Association Agreements with Ukraine and Moldova, as well as Visa Facilitation Agreements with Armenia and Azerbaijan.
The EU should take steps towards full visa liberalisation as soon as individual countries meet the agreed conditions for well-managed and secure mobility set out in relevant documents.

You can read the full text of the Appeal as well as information about the Coalition here.
 
Coalition for the European Continent Undivided by Visa Barriers was launched in Warsaw on November 26, 2010 on the initiative of the Stefan Batory Foundation. Today its members include more than 30 non-governmental organizations from different parts of Europe.
The coalition takes joint actions to speed up the process of EU visa liberalization with the countries of the Eastern Partnership (Ukraine, Moldova, Belarus, Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia) and Russia. The Coalition takes a strong stand for visa-free Europe. For more details here.

Joanna Fomina from St. Batory Foundation will be happy to provide more detailed information. Please contact her by phone: +48 22 536 02 41, +48 503891265; email: jfomina@batory.org.pl.

September 2011

The Romanian Center for European Policies (CRPE) released the report „The Future EU Budget. What changes, what stays and the implications for Romania”.

The report analyzes the European Commission’s proposal on the 2014-2020 Multiannual Financial Framework. The key findings are:

1. Compared to the previous MFF, we notice a priority switch from agriculture to research and innovation. However, the magnitude of this change is moderate.

2. The cohesion policy will benefit from slightly increased allocations and will comprise a new instrument, the Connecting Europe Facility. It should help accelerate the large transport, energy and communications infrastructure projects. Another proposal states to set up a 5% reserve from each Member State’s quota, which could only be used by those states with the best performance in managing funds.

3. The EC proposed to establish an own resource based on a tax on financial transactions. This would be applied to financial institutions. It remains to be seen whether the British will accept it or not, since London is Europe’s main financial centre and therefore the tax would mainly affect UK. However, experience shows that solutions can be found in cases when a Member State is unevenly affected by the financial flows to and from the EU.

4. The current VAT-based resource would disappear, being replaced by an upgraded one. The modernized VAT resource would require the transfer to the European budget of maximum 2% from the VAT for goods and services collected in each Member State. This implies an increase in direct EU revenues and a future decrease of Member States contributions.

5. Although the budget adoption procedure only entitles the Parliament to a vote of approval or rejection, it insists on achieving the right to make amendments and change the content of the proposal. In this regard, we will most likely witness an institutional conflict between the European Parliament and the European Council.

6. Two opposing groups will inevitably appear within the Council: the first one will include the net contributors who will ask for a limited European budget, while the second will comprise of new Member States and the Parliament which will request a larger budget. In fact, the first signals in this direction have already appeared - we suspect that the group in favor of a larger budget has already emerged, opposing the contributors’ group.

7. With regard to our country, the Romanian officials will go to negotiations without two major arguments: that money was spent and it was spent properly. This has two main reasons: first, the absorption of funds in the current MFF does not exceed, by any calculation, 5% of the total, and, second, some payments were frozen because of irregularities and some Member States’ conviction that Romania is not a state of law.  However, it is expected to obtain not less than an acceptable financial package, since Romanian interests and issues are similar with those of other countries from the group in favor of an increased European budget (such as Poland).

 The author of this report is Mihai Panaite, CRPE affiliated expert. He worked as parliamentary assistant at the European Parliament, as economist at the Ministry of Finances (2002-2007) and he graduated the “European Political Economy” master program at London School of Economics.  

 This report was issued as part of the project “Romania Active in European Debates II”, coordinated by the Romanian Center for European Policies (CRPE) and financed by the Soros Foundation, part of the Foreign Affairs Initiative.

 The content of this report does not necessarily represent the official position of the Soros Foundation.

The opinions expressed in this report are not necessarily the positions of all CRPE affiliated experts or those of CRPE partner institutions and organizations.

July 2011

The Romanian Center for European Policies (CRPE) released the report "All Quiet on the Eastern Frontier. The Romanian Policy of Regaining Citizenship compared to other EU case studies"

The report ca be downloaded here.

The report seeks answers to the following questions:

 Why do some European capitals get scared when it comes to the Romanian policy of regaining citizenship? How did we get to the current policy and how have the Romanian citizenship laws evolved since 1990? Does the attempt to repair historic injustice by citizenship policy have a justification at the EU level? Have other European countries done this before?  

Briefly, the research points out that:

• The actual content of the Romanian policy does not justify the restlessness at EU level.
• The Romanian legislation has evolved shyly and sometimes inconsistently, depending on the priority given to either the Euro-Atlantic integration, either to a special relationship with Moldova.
• The fact is that Romanian citizenship can be regained on an individual basis and the principle of jus sanguinis is strictly followed (one is a Romanian citizen because one’s parents are/ were Romanian citizens). Therefore, the citizens from Moldova have to go through a long and complicated process, proving that their parents or grandparents were Romanian citizens.  In addition, gaining citizenship does not automatically mean obtaining a passport, which means further long and complex procedures. Hence one cannot talk about millions of new European citizens created overnight by Romania.
• The citizenship policy is seen in the EU as an attribute of the national state, recognized as such by both the European acquis (including the Schengen acquis) and the decisions of the European Court of Justice.
• Yes, there are some major prior  EU repairs of historic injustice regarding  citizenship, both in the old Member States and in Eastern Europe. Ironically, some of the most adamant countries regarding Bucharest’s policy are the ones which created these precedents.

The precedents discussed by the report are:

• The German policy of granting citizenship to ethnic Germans from Eastern Europe and the USSR, considering the ethnic criterion, regardless of whether there was a German citizen in the family or not;
• Spain offers milder terms regarding gaining the citizenship for those originating in certain territories with special links to the country. In addition, a 2007 law extends the right of citizenship for those who have suffered from political persecution or violence during the Civil War and the Dictatorship. These special rights, along with other compensations for the victims of the Civil War, aimed at a so-called “social reconciliation”, after which the direct descendants of those who were exiled in the ‘30s are granted the citizenship.   
• The UK has a set of very complicated citizenship policy for the former citizens of the British Empire. For those who do not live in the British Isles there are several types of nationality: “British citizen of the overseas territories”, “British national overseas”, “British citizen overseas”, “British subject” or “British protected person”. Those who have the so-called “British citizenship of the overseas territories” automatically received the British citizenship in 2002 by virtue of living in a territory dependent of Great Britain or former part of the Empire (as long as one of the parents was a citizen or legal resident).   
• Bulgaria allows granting citizenship on the basis of a simple statement of ethnicity (without the request of having a Bulgarian citizen in the family). In Macedonia, the people who hold a Bulgarian passport became the second largest minority, after Albanians. Also, the number of Moldavians holding a Bulgarian passport was around 15000 in 2010.
• The Polish Citizenship law stipulates the right of repatriation for those who “were removed from their homeland against their will but remained the <<children>> of their home country”. “The Law of Repatriation” from 2000 stipulates the repatriation, granting citizenship and financial support for the Polish who remained in the territories seized by the USSR after the war.
• The Hungarian Ethnics from territories of the former Austro – Hungarian Empire and their descendants can benefit from a simplified and shorter procedure for granting citizenship.  This happens especially after the recent amendments of the law in May 2010. It is not required to prove previous citizenship, but to prove the plausibility of being Hungarian.
• The report “EU Trivial. The Romanian Policy to Regain Citizenship compared to other EU Member States’ policy” also includes detailed statistics of each analyzed system, regarding the number of granted citizenships, the motivation and the states of origin of each applicant.

The authors of this report are Andrei Avram (graduate of the Free University of Berlin) and Andreea Valentina Dimulescu (graduate of the Central European University and of the Center for European Integration Studies in Bonn).

This report is part of the “Romania active in the European debate II” project, conducted by the Romanian Center for European Policy (CRPE) and funded by the Soros Foundation within the External Policy Initiative. 

July 2011

“EU and justice reform. Lessons learned from Romania and Bulgaria; Moldova and Ukraine; Croatia, Macedonia and Serbia’s experience” is a project implemented by the Romanian Center for European Policies (CRPE) and financed by the German Marshall Fund, Open Society Institute East East program and Konrad Adenauer Stiftung. The objective of this project is to create a framework for discussions and to propose innovative solutions to improve the EU conditionalities, in order to speed up the judiciary reform in Croatia, Macedonia, Serbia, Ukraine and Moldova. 

To this end, 7 country reports will be launched in September 2011,  which will represent the judiciary particularities in each state involved in the project (Romania, Bulgaria, Serbia, Croatia, Macedonia, Moldova and Ukraine), and in November 2011- a comprehensive report with conclusions and recommendations for the EU.

On  June 13th 2011, at the InfoEuropa headquarters in Bucharest the first meeting of the experts involved in the project took place: Laura Stefan and Cristian Ghinea, experts from Romania, Antoinette Primatarova, expert Bulgaria; Munir Podumljak, expert Croatia; Mihail Gotovski, expert Macedonia; Alexandru Cocîrță, expert Republic of Moldova, Dragana Boljevic, expert Serbia, Volodymyr Yavorskyy, expert Ukraine. The list of participants is available here. The objective of this meeting was to define the working methodology and the structure of the reports. 

The EU’s mission (im)possible? Bringing the judiciary on the right track- A theoretical perspective - Anitta Hipper.

June 2011

The Romanian Center for European Policies (CRPE) invites you Monday, 20 June 2011, at 20:00, at the Czech Center (map here) to celebrate together with us Aung San Suu Kyi’s birthday. Invitation here.

Aung San Suu Kyi, symbol of the Burmese people’s fight for democracy, will be 66 years old this year (more on Aung San Suu Kyi here).

Unlike the previous years in which she would celebrate her birthday in the Burmese prisons together with the other political prisoners, this year Aung San Suu Kyi will spend her birthday in home arrest, her punishment being over.

Aung San Suu Kyi was liberated last year shortly after the parliamentary elections in Burma. Not the same thing happened to over 2000 friends and colleagues of Aung San Suu Kyi, who remained imprisoned on the entire Burmese territory.

Thus, we wish to show our solidarity towards the Burmese political prisoners and to determine the governments and international organizations from all over the world, especially the EU and UN, to exercise maximum pressure on the new Burmese government.

Similar events to the ones in Bucharest will take place in Czech Republic, Lithuania, Poland, Estonia and Slovakia. The support statement of the NGOs implicated in this advocacy campaign can be read here.

From the program of the event:

• Into the current: Burma’s political prisoners (Thailand/Burma, 2011);Exposition of comics with a political theme, realized by the famous Burmese cartoonist Harn Lay.

June 2011

Considerations regarding the law project on European affairs coordination between the Parliament and the Government.

In 2010 CRPE, together with the Friedrich Ebert Romania Foundation (FES) evaluated the capacity of the Romanian Parliament to participate in debates regarding European policies. Following the interest and the recommendations received from the members of the Romanian Parliament and the Department for European Affairs, CRPE and FES organized on April 12, 2011 the first CRPE Forum on European affairs, which enjoyed the presence of the most important actors involved in the process of coordinating European affairs. The summary of the debates can be read here.

Today, after almost two months from this reunion, DAE and MAE made a legislative proposal for coordinating the European affairs which is now under public debate. The legislative proposal can be read here.

In this context, CRPE launches today the policy brief no.9 “We have a law project – what next? Considerations regarding the law project on cooperation between the Parliament and the Government in the European affairs domain “. The report here (only in Romanian).

To prepare this report, CRPE organized on June 9, 2011 the second CRPE Forum on coordinating European affairs, where it invited the technical staff from the Romanian Parliament.The objective of the meeting was to punctually analyze the provisions in the law project proposed by MAE and DAE and updating the policy brief draft by CRPE with the experts’ comments.

The innovative character of the report resides in the fact that it brings together apparently divergent ideas in a set of recommendations what can offer concrete solutions to facilitate the dialogue between the Executive and the Legislative in the effort of finding a compromise in the process of negotiation.

The Project, although ambiguous in certain aspects, is a document that allows reaching a consensus between the two institutions, to the extent the two parts follow this. In perfecting the legislative project, CRPE makes the following proposals:

1. Including in the project the explicit possibility for the Parliament to influence establishing Romania’s position in the Council;
2. Giving up article 9 which makes reference to protection of classified information;
3. Giving up the express mention of the Parliament’s veto lack in this domain by amending article 3 and art.18;
4. Presenting clear terms for transmitting the document both for the Parliament and the Government and avoiding vague formulations (eg. “in shortest time”;
5. Establishing the Department for Coordinating European Affairs as coordinator in the European affairs domains and thus, as main speaker of the Parliament in this domain;
6. Establishing a deadline for submitting this law project to Parliament approval, and the eventual changes can be done later, after the coordinating mechanism will grind.

The project, in its actual form, is one step closer, and both the Parliament and the Government have to promote and approve the project resulted from the consultation of both sides.

This report is part of the project ”Strenghtening the Romanian Parliament’s capacity to be an active European actor”, undergone by the Romanian Center for European Policies together with the Friedrich Ebert Romania Foundation.

June 2011

Between February-June 2011, Bogdan Manolea, CRPE affiliated expert (more details about Bogdan here) analyzed the situation of personal data protection in Moldova, and made recommendations to improve their protection in the context of visa regime liberalization with the EU.

To elaborate this study, Bogdan and Olga Demian had in the period 28 March 2011 – 8 April 2011 several meetings with officials and members of the civil society, of whom we mention: Ms. Dona Scola, vice-minister, the Ministry of Technology, Information and Communication of Moldova; Mr. Vasile Ciornîi, general vice-director, operations, State Information Resource Center, Republic of Moldova; Sorina Susana and Olga Vacarciuc, Centre for Human Rights Moldova; Stela Mocan, executive director, Electronic Governing Center, Republic of Moldova, Cristina Pereteatcu, Amnesty International Moldova; Mr. Vanu Jereghi, director, Institute for Human Rights in the Republic of Moldova.

More details on the meetings here  and here. Photo galleries here  and here.

Friday, 10 June 2011, at Chisinau, was the official launch of the book “The Protection of personal data in the context of the dialog regarding the liberalization of the visa regime and the negotiation of the future Association Agreement between the Republic of Moldova and the European Union.”
The complete study with the conclusions and the recommendations can be downloaded here (only in Romanian). The English summary of the study here.

The study was elaborated at the initiative and with the financial support of the program Good Governance of Soros Foundation – Moldova.

June 2011

The public debate about the target-term of 2015 for the euro adoption creates an interest among Romanians and divided public opinion into two camps, some claiming that Romania will not be ready until then, others saying that a firm assuming of the target would be a much welcomed stimulus to continue the structural reforms.

The European Commission Representation in Romania held today, 25th of May, at the European Union House in Bucharest, a round table attended by representatives from both trends of opinion.

During the talks, the following persons took the floor: Niculae Idu - Head of the European Commission Representation in Romania, Leonard Orban, presidential advisor, Adrian Vasilescu, adviser to the Governor of BRN, Ionut Dumitru, president of the Tax Council, Laurian Lungu, Managing Partner Macroanalitica, Mihai Ionescu, president of the National Association of Exporters and Importers in Romania, Cristian Paun, Executive Director of the Romanian Society of Economics, Ilie Serbanescu, Vice President of the Romanian Society of Economics, Florian Libocor, BNR SCG chief economist.

The debate was moderated by Cristian Ghinea, director of the Romanian Center for European Policies.

In preparation for the roundtable, CRPE developed a synthesis study (only in Romanian) of the main ideas and their chronology in the national public debate on this issue in recent years: "Adopting the Euro in 2015: how we got to this date and what chances do we have?".
The full text of the synthesis can be read here.

The event was presented LIVE TEXT on EurActiv.ro in the project “CRPE-EurActiv Debates”. The full article and the readers’ comments here.

This roundtable tool place as part of the CRPE contract to organize events with the European Commission Representation in Romania.

May 2011

A few weeks ago we launched a debate to identify the most stupid bureaucratic procedures. We were looking, with the help of the Hotnews and EurActiv readers, examples of meaningless procedures and practices, without logic and coherence, which we encountered in practice. We promise we won’t stop at just mentioning this “memories from the bureaucratic nightmare”, but we will also try to go further.

As such, we are now inviting you to vote the most stupid procedures so we can afterwards question the authorities regarding the basis of these. We propose five of the examples sent by readers:

1. Record or the assumption of guilt
2. Auto-empowerment – from me, for me
3. A certificate from an institution to herself
4. The relevance of the birth certificate
5. The road for the fine - between the CEC, the Police and the Financial District

For the detailed description of each proposal and to vote please enter here.

May 2011

Given that the Committee for juridical affairs from the European Parliament will start the hearings for lifting Adrian Severin’s immunity – implicated in the case “cash-for-laws” reported by the Sunday Times, CRPE publishes an open letter by which expresses its conviction that the rejection of this request would be a severe blow to the cause of anticorruption in Romania and would undermine the work of the EU and Romanian civil society in pushing for justice reform in Romania.

The full text of the letter can be read here.

May 2011

One of Romania’s obligations as a full member of EU is to donate money for the development of third countries. Official Development Assistance (ODA) is an area governed by good practices and recommendations at European level, while Romania is still at the stage of accumulating experience.

In 2007 Romania identified the Republic of Moldova as priority country for redirecting its development funds.

Once thawed in the political relations between the two countries, Romania has decided to give Moldova for the next four years (starting 2010) a grant of 100 million euro. These funds come in excess compared to the sums in the ODA system, already offered as part of European obligations (ODA is managed by the MAE and was about 900 000 in 2010). Romania’s lack of experience as a donor is felt, especially given that in Moldova there are currently 20 active projects with 200 donors, and Romania’s contributions (strictly reported as ODA) have been modest so far, a total of around 2.55 million EUR.

As such, CRPE’s Policy brief no. 8 (only in Romanian), written by the expert in international assistance in Moldova Valentin Lozovanu, identifies several weaknesses of Romania’s presence in this area and makes some recommendations.

Problems in the efficient giving of ODA:

1. There is still no Cooperation Agreement for development as requested by the Decision no.747 from 11/07/2007.
2. Romania still has no Agency for cooperation for specialized development, as other new member states of the EU have, such as Poland and Slovakia. As a consequence, the expertise is always lost.
3. Although at national level the authority that coordinates ODA is MAE, the fact that the 100 million EUR are managed by the Ministry of Regional Development and Tourism leads to the fragmentation of efforts and the lack of a single speaker in Bucharest.
4. Although it’s been one year since the signing of the Agreement, the data communicated by the Romanian officials reveals the fact that there were given only seven million EUR from the account of 100 million.

Recommendations:

1. Direct allocations of assistance by Romania through national authorities and/ or in agreement with the civil society.
2. Diversification of the areas of giving financial aid to projects that support the interconnection infrastructure: roads, power lines, gas pipelines and electricity, and railway infrastructure.
3. Developing a set of new normative acts and adjusting existing ones in accordance with European legislation and practice regarding quality standards.
4. Assistance for the development of the rural extension.
5. Diversification of the financing mechanisms which should be taken into account by Romania:

• Through budgetary support (for example through the National Fund for Regional Development FNDR);
• Through the Agencies for Regional Development.
• Through NGOs in agreements with the beneficiaries (APL) facilitating the knowledge transfer from NGOs who have already accumulated this expertise from practice/implementation of projects.

The report appears in the project “Monitoring the Parternship for Integration Romania-Republic of Moldova” developed by the Romanian Center for European Policies (CRPE) and financed by the Soros Foundation Romania.

May 2011

On November 18, 2010, the European Commission published the Communication "The Common Agricultural Policy in the perspective of 2020 ", the result of extensive public debate during 2010 that began at the invitation of Romanian Commissioner Dacian Ciolos. Among the issues on which the Commission ruled in that communication is the one of small farms, for which the Commission wishes to propose a simple scheme, specific only to small farms, which would replace the current regime for the granting of direct payments.

Given that in Romania this type of agricultural areas represents a high percentage of agricultural holdings, the Romanian Centre for European Policies (CRPE) has organized on May 4, 2011, with the support of EurActiv and Infoeuropa, a public debate on this issue with key stakeholders, publicly proposing a simplified model of the scheme by which small farmers can have access to without filling in the annual subsidy applications and complex forms. At the basis of discussion were the proposals made in the CRPE Policy Brief no. 7 by the expert Lucian Luca, the discussions focusing on (1) diagnosing the Romanian agricultural problems in the context of the CAP reform and (2) finding solutions (both for procedures and criteria) to increase the use of land.

The summary of the debates can be viewed here (only in Romanian).
The event was presented LIVE TEXT on EurActiv.ro within the project “CRPE-EurActiv Debates”. The complete article and the readers’ comments here.

Foto from right to left: Daniela Giurca, General Director Policy Sector in the MADR Vegetable Sector; Nina Talvar, Personal Adviser, Cabinet of State Secretary Adrian Radulescu, MARD; Willy Schuster, EcoRuralis; Tiberiu Cazacioc The Association Radu Anton Roman Initiative Group;

The full list of participants here.

This debates is the first events of its kind from the series “CRPE forums on Romanian agriculture in the CAP context” to be organized by CRPE in the near future.

The CRPE debate appears in the project “Romania active in the European debates II” developed by the Romanian Center for European Policies (CRPE) and funded by the Soros Foundation in the framework of the External Politics Initiative.

May 2011

In 2010 the Romanian Center for European Policies (CRPE) together with the Friedrich Ebert Foundation Romania (FES) assessed in a project the Romanian Parliament's ability to engage in debates on European policies. The Final Report "Romania enters the EU Parliament. The legislative’s capacity to be an active European player”, launched in December 2010 assessed the institutional structures, procedures, internal resources of the Parliament, but also the relationship with government institutions and other institutions involved in the coordination of European affairs.

After the interest and recommendations from members of the Romanian Parliament and the European Affairs Department (DAE), CRPE and FES Romania have decided to continue this project, so that on April 12, 2011 to organize the first CRPE Forum with Infoeuropa’s support on European Affairs.

The agenda of the conference can be viewed here, and the preparatory document for the meeting "Coordination of European affairs at the national level-the current status and prospects" here (only in Romanian).

Organized after the Chatham House model, the debate was attended by representatives from the Government, Parliament and the Presidential Administration. The role of the discussions was to make (1) an assessment of the current situation in the coordination of EU affairs, (2) an analysis of institutional changes and procedures in Parliament (Parliamentary Committees separated from European Affairs) and (3) the status of the normative act which establishes the relationships between Parliament and Government in the coordination of European affairs.

The summary of the debates here (only in Romanian). Respecting the Chattam House rules, the document does not attribute any statement to the participants, thus keeping the anonymity of speakers.

This debate is the first event of its kind in the series “CRPE Forums on European affairs" to be organized by the CRPE in the near future.                 

The summary of these discussions and recommendations appear in the activities of the project "Strengthening the Romanian Parliament as an active European actor " developed by the Romanian Center for European Policies (CRPE) and funded by the Friedrich Ebert Foundation Romania (FES).

May 2011

CRPE launches the report ” Multi-Annual Subsidy Decoupled from Surface Area – a Romanian proposal for the future of European small farms -”.

In November 2010, European Commissioner Dacian Cioloş released "the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) towards 2020" – a document outlining the broad strokes of the reform of the European agricultural policy. The communication will be followed in 2011 by a legislative proposal by the Commission. Thus, we are currently in the stage between general principles and concrete measures. In this context, CRPE proposes a subsidy scheme for small farms that would facilitate:

a)      giving small farmers access to funds - for those with economically viable commercial operations

b)      encouraging the sale of land to those will small holdings without commercial potential.

We propose to eliminate the annual subidy request by farmers. Farmers would submit a single request, at the beginning of the European financial programming period (not 7 years). and would subsequently receive the same subsidy for the following seven years, even if they sell the respective land (with the new owner working the land but not receiving the subsidy for it).

This lump multiannual lump sum payment that is not tied to land area would stimulate the sale of small holdings and the development of mid-sized farms. A peasant would be able to sell his land and continue receiving the subsidy for seven years. Thiswould eliminate the tendency for farmers to hold onto unworked land in order to receive the subsidy through annual requests The effect could be similar to that for the “lifelong annuities” program, but on a much larger scale, over a shorter time span, and with greater chances of helping mid-sized farms consolidate.

Our proposal would produce different effects for two different categories of farmers:

- farmers with small holdings - encouraged to sell

- for farms defined as mid-sized by Romanian standards (e.g. over 10 ha) it would create growth opportunities by bringing onto the market small pieces of land from the immediate vecinity of currently existing operations

The report can be downloaded here.

This report appears as part of the project “Romania Active in European Debates II”, coordinated by the Romanian Center for European Policies (CRPE) and financed by the Soros Foundation as part of the Foreign Affairs Initiative.

For details, contact: Alexandra Toderiță, alexandra.toderita@crpe.ro, 0741134045

May 2011

March 3, 2011 marked the expiration of the the one and half year term within which EU members states were supposed to transpose into national legislation the directives of the EU Third Energy Package for the single market in natural gas and electricity. The goal of the Package is to accelerate the construction of a competitive energy market, first at a regional level, then at the level of the entire Union, even as many member states have difficulties with or even openly oppose the liberalization of their national energy markets. Ever true to form, Romania, rather than moving forward, is rushing backward, while its laws today are somewhat worse than they were yesterday.

The liberalization begun at the end of the ’90s met with steady resistance from member states dominated by national monopolies. The state of energy market transformation varies greatly from country to country, which made necessary this third package of directives, which will push forward the reform of the electricity market and, even more so, the natural gas market.

This study explains clearly the main lines of action sought by the legislative package, such as increasing the independence of transport operators, increasing nondiscriminatory access by consumers and electric and natural gas retailers, increasing the independence of regulators, and adequately defining what constitutes a vulnerable consumer in order to avoid social distortions in the energy markets.

Within all of these categories, not only has Romania not made progresses, but it has even regressed to its pre-EU accession performance: privatizations have been abandoned in favor of creating integrated electricity winners and the continuation of price liberalization has been excluded out of social protection considerations, while the well-connected “clever kids” of various industries benefit from natural gas and electricity at below market prices.

The report can be accessed here.

A summary of the report is here. 

This report has been published as part of “Romania Active in European Debates II”, a project coordinated by the Romanian Center for European Policies and financed by the Soros Foundation as part of its Foreign Affairs Initiative. The content of this report do not necessarily represent the official position of the Soros Foundation.

March 2011

With this project CRPE aims to:

• Identify Romania’s engagements for the support of Moldova’s economic and institutional reforms on its path toward European integration.
• Systematically evaluate the implementation of these commitments.
• Identify other resources that could be used to enhance Romanian-Moldovan cooperation in fields in which Romania can offer its expertise.
• Evaluate Moldova’s achievements in the European rapprochement process. 

On March 3, 2010, CRPE initiated a session of debates in Chisinau on the topic „The window of opportunity remains open: What’s next in the strategic partnership for European integration” and simultaneously launched the policy brief „Romania as seen from Chisinau”, by Dragos Dinu.

The event was organized at the head office of the Moldovan NGO IDIS Viitorul and brought together policymakers, diplomats and civil society representatives from both Romania and Moldova. The participants engaged in a passionate discussion about the priorities for Romanian-Moldovan relations in 2011. You may download a summary of debates here.

For more details, please see the presentations given during debates:

How we used the window of opportunity – by Cristian Ghinea
The added value of the Romanian-Moldovan neighborhood - by Sorin Hadarca

The project is sponsored by SOROS Foundation Romania.

March 2011

The monitoring aimed at recoding the compliance with the official engagements undertaken by Romania in the work sheet entitled the Schengen Action Plan, developed each year by the Schengen Department, endorsed by the National Schengen Self-evaluation Commission1, operating under the coordination of the Ministry of Administration and Internal Affairs and approved by the Government of Romania. This commission is made up of all Romanian institutions with managerial prerogatives related to the Schengen acquis.

This report completes the independent monitoring of the Romanian state institutions responsible for complying with the technicalities in view of the Schengen joining process. Throughout this report, the focus shall be on the progress or stagnations (as the case may be) registered during the last part of 2010, from September to present. At the same time, lessons shall be learnt from the political lesson offered within the framework of the Schengen process.

January 2011

This report presents an independent analysis of the efforts made by  Romania in 2010 in both its bilateral relationship with Chisinau and as an advocate for Moldova's integration in the European Union.

Given these prospects, the authors analyse both the financial aid given by Romania to Moldova and the institutional cooperation between the two countries. A general conclusion of the report is that although there is political will from both sides, the actual  management of this relationship is fragmented and lethargic.

Consequently, the report recommends the creation of a coordination  office led by a "Mister Moldova" - a figure with political and  institutional authority who would make Romania's efforts more coherent. The 100 million euro financial aid which was promised to Moldova is  being delayed. The authors make several recommendations for a better  management of these funds.

The infrastructure and energy projects started by Romania and Moldova  are at the moment in various stages of feasibility studies. For some of  them, Romania began the financing process through European Union funds  (the status of each project is described in the report).

A large part of this report represents the history of the border treaty  signed by Bucharest and Chisinau, the authors having had access to  inside information from the diplomatic sphere which explain the  evolution of negotiating a basic document, later of a border treaty  between Bucharest and Chisinau. Concerning the Transnistria issue, the authors recommend that Bucharest  show maximum restraint since we do not have another stake than  supporting Chisinau.

The synthesis of the reccomendations can be downloaded here.

This report was launched in the project `Romania – Moldova partnership for European integration. The Contribution of the Civil Society` jointly sponsored by the Romanian and Moldovan Soros foundations.

20 December 2010

In respose to France's position on Romania's accesion to the Schengen area, CRPE sent an open letter. The letter and the article on France's position can be seen here.

14 December 2010

The Romanian Centre for European Policies (CRPE) has launched the report “The Romanian Parliament enters the European Union. The challenge of being an active actor in Europe” during a conference which took place at the Romanian Senate on 8 December  2010.

The report can be downloaded here.

The CRPE study analyses the manner in which the Romanian legislative becomes involved in European affairs, especially after the changes brought about by the Lisbon Treaty. The report underlines the fact that the Lisbon Treaty gives national legislatives the possibility to have a more active role in European decision-making, especially in their relationship with the executive. However, the Romanian parliament has not yet taken advantage of this role and remains marginal in the EU affairs coordination process.

At the core of this problem lies not only the lack of a legislative framework which could regulate the parliament – government relationship in the European affairs field, but also the MPs’ visible disinterest to get actively involved in European policies (the current perception is that European issues are a matter for the government). 

Considering the wide opportunities to improve the European role of the Romanian legislative, the CRPE experts recommend the following:
•    Streamlining the parliament’s activity by replacing the Common Committee on European Affairs with two separate committees for the Senate and the Chamber of Deputies;
•    Consolidating political leadership at the level of the committee responsible for European affairs;
•    Introducing an internal mechanism to improve the technical analysis – political decision connection.

The report “The Romanian Parliament enters the European Union. The challenge of being an active actor in Europe” appeared within the project “Consolidating the Parliament’s capacity to be an active European actor” ran by the Romanian Centre for European Policies together with the Friedrich Ebert Foundation in Romania.

December 2010

The European Commission Representation in Romania and the Romanian Center for European Policies (CRPE) organized the international conference "Ten years from now. European Economic Development and Governance". The event set out to discuss recent developments at the European level with respect to the European Commission initiative to strengthen European economic governance, in order  to achieve the objectives of the Europe 2020 strategy.

With the occasion of the conference, CRPE released two reports: “European economic governance reform: are we at a turning point?” and “The 2020 Strategy in Romania – are we actually implementing it or yet another shelf document?

Reports can be downloaded here and here.

More about the event here.

02.12.2010

The Romanian Center for European Policies (CRPE) and the Romanian Academic Society (SAR) have launched the report “Worth Having It - The Effectiveness of the Co-operation and Verification Mechanism on Romania” during a public hearing at the European Parliament organized by the two MEPs Monica Macovei and Maria Nedelcheva (Bulgaria).

The hearing debated the effects that the Co-operation and Verification Mechanism (CVM) had upon the justice systems in Bulgaria and Romania as well as the degree in which this mechanism could be a model for an EU-wide anti-corruption policy. The report launched in Brussels included the conclusions of a research project on the effectiveness of the CVM which was implemented by CRPE and SAR in 2009-2010. On this occasion, CRPE and SAR had the opportunity to present the results of their evaluation to decision-makers from the European Commission, EU Council and European Parliament.

The report can be downloaded from here.

More about the event here.

Playing the Cat and Mouse Game: Emergency Ordinance 50 and the European Directive


CRPE has made a comparative analysis between the provisions of the Directive 2008/48/EC on credit agreements for consumers and its transposition at national level: i.e. OUG 50/2010. The draft law, which is still being examined in Parliament, has led to numerous debates among bank representatives, members of Parliament and consumers.

CRPE welcomes the fact that the Romanian authorities did not transpose ad literam the European directive. Instead, they adapted it to the needs of the national banking market. The CRPE report highlights as well a series of inconsistencies related to the Emergency Ordinance 50. As such, our study analyses four main issues:
•    The question of mortgage credits;
•    The question of banning several types of credit costs in a credit agreement;
•    The question of  the basic calculation of the annual percentage rate for a variable interest rate;
•    The question of retroactivity;

Download the report from here (only in Romanian).

This report is part of the project “Romania as an active actor in EU debates I” and is financed by the Soros Foundation Romania under the Foreign Affairs Initiative programme.

Press conference: Are we actually ready for Schengen?

The Romanian Center for European Policies (CRPE) has monitored for a period of 6 months (April-September 2010) the activities of Romanian authorities related to the preparations for  Romania's accession to the Schengen area.

On 11 October 2010, CRPE held a press conference in which made public the results of the independent evaluation of the measures implemented by the Romanian authorities .

You can download the post-event release from here. 

October 2010

How Ready is Bulgaria for Schengen?

CRPE is releasing in Romania a study regarding the status of Bulgaria’s preparedness for its accession to the Schengen Area in March 2011. The study was prepared in Bulgaria by the Open Society Institute (OSI) – Sofia, within the programme European Policy Initiative and it evaluated the government’s performance in implementing the necessary measures for the accession to the Schengen Area. The main conclusions and recommendation of the report are available here in English. The press communiqué issued by OSI Sofia can be downloaded here.

The study prepared by our Bulgarian partners is relevant for the Romanian public opinion because, similarly to the EU pre-accession period, the two countries are actually part of a common process of accession to the Schengen Area.

We hereby publicly announce that a similar study will be published next week by CRPE, evaluating the fulfillment of the necessary measures for Romania’s accession to the Schengen Area.

Both studies used a common methodology to evaluate in an independent manner the measures included in the Schengen Self-Assessment  Plan and the efforts made by the national authorities in order to reach this strategic-declared goal within the set schedule.

October 2010

When, how and why did Romania accept the EU rules in the anti-corruption field. Overview 1999 - 2010

Read the report in pdf format (only in Romanian)

The Romanian Center for European Policies (CRPE) together with the Romanian Academic Society (SAR) have launched the report “When, how and why did Romania accept the EU rules in the anti-corruption field. Overview 1999 - 2010”. The report assesses the relation between Romania and the European Union in regard to anti-corruption policies as well as the degree in which Romania has fulfilled EU conditionalities on justice reform since 1999.

Based on the literature on Europeanization, the report shows that the EU lacked a significant acquis in the anti-corruption field. Moreover, in its relation with Romania, the European Commission founded itself in a learning process: if at first, the EC asked for new laws and institutions, later on it asked for their efficiency and functionality.

This is the fourth study that is released within the project "The Evaluation of the Efectiveness of the Mechanism for Cooperation and Verification in Justice. Recommendations for the Post-2009 period" funded by the European Union Transition Facility programme 2007/19343.01.11 - Strengthening support for civil society in fighting corruption.

September 2010

The Romanian Center for European Policies together with the German think-tank Das Progressive Zentrum and the European Commission Representation in Romania have organised on 7 September 2010 the conference entitled ”Europe’s way towards a knowledge-based society - the national implementation of the European strategy Europe 2020”.

The conference discussed in a comparative perspective the main challenges faced by the European states and especially by the Central and Eastern European countries in implementing the objectives of the EU2020 strategy. The conference brought together representatives of the academia and leading European think-tanks from Poland, Hungary, Czech Republic, Latvia, Belgium and Germany.

The summary of the seminar can be found here.

For more details see the presentations made during the conference:

• Europe 2020. Hungary and Central Europe - Zoltan POGATSA, University of West Hungary
• Searching for the Holy Grail: The Role of Innovation Capacities in CEE Economies - Mathias RAUCH, Deputy Director, Fraunhofer Center for Central and Eastern Europe MOEZ
• Europe 2020 - Romania's challenges - Dragos DINU, Public Sector Coordinator, Romanian Center for European Policies

Read more

- Moldova as an opportunity -

Read the report in pdf format

The Romanian Center for European Policies (CRPE) released today the study “Making sense of the EU’s Eastern Partnership. Moldova as an opportunity“.
It’s been more than a year since the May 2009 official launch of the Eastern Partnership (EaP), a joint Polish-Swedish initiative that tries to upgrade the framework for relations between the EU and six Eastern European neighbors (Belarus, Ukraine, Moldova, Georgia, Azerbaijan and Armenia). The main goals of the EaP are to achieve the political association and economic integration of the six EaP countries with the EU.

The study presents the programme as it stands today as well as the positions of the six EaP countries regarding the initiative, with a special emphasis on Moldova.
The report argues that, despite some accomplishments, the Eastern Partnership is far from reaching its full potential and clearly needs some visible successes.  The economies of the EaP countries were seriously affected by the global economic crisis and there were also no big improvements on the democracy front, with Moldova probably the only exception. The region also didn’t experience any improvements in the situation of the frozen conflicts.

CRPE’s study supports greater EU involvement in the eastern neighborhood. The EU should be ready to intervene and help EaP countries cope with economic and political crises such as the recent ban on Moldovan wine enforced by Russia. More attention should also be given to the individual characteristics of each country, as the six EaP countries do not represent a coherent group.  Clear distinctions between the EaP countries should be made depending on the reforms they undertake and their level of ambition in relation to the Union.

From the six EaP countries Moldova has the most favorable attitude toward the EU and also the most EU-oriented economy. It is also the only country in the Partnership that rapidly developed its relations with the EU during the last year. The study argues that Moldova could be the success story needed in order to give viability and credibility to the Eastern Partnership
However, in order to achieve this, Moldova should continue the current fast pace of reforms. The country’s European course will depend on the results of parliamentary elections taking place later this year. A new Communist government would most likely go back to the former façade Europeanization characteristic during the 2005-2009 period.

The report is launched in the project `Romania – Moldova partnership for European integration. The Contribution of the Civil Society` jointly sponsored by the Romanian and Moldovan Soros foundations.

 Media and Civil Society Perceptions -

Read the report in pdf format

The Romanian Center for European Polices (CRPE) and the Academic Society of Romania (SAR) released a study that aims to evaluate the effectiveness and performance of the Mechanism for Cooperation and Verification (MCV) in the area of justice agreed upon by the European Union and Romania, analyzing the factors that have facilitated the acceptance and implementation of EU conditions.

This report is the second in a series of four that analyze the proposed topic. To obtain an analysis as well-documented and systematic as possible, we chose to conduct a poll of the opinions of experts in the domain, using a questionnaire structured around the objectives set by the MCV and covered in the monitoring reports.

Some of the research results, as apparent from the responses:
- None of the four benchmarks of the MCV is considered to be fulfilled. The biggest failure is recorded in the objective of "Ensure[ing] a more transparent, and efficient judicial process notably by enhancing the capacity and accountability of the Superior Council of Magistracy”. 91% of respondents say that this objective was not achieved.

Read more

What is to be discussed, what could be achieved?

Read the report in pdf format

Read a summary of the report

“We recognize that giving people hope without a clear membership perspective is difficult” stated Mr. Graham Watson, Rapporteur of the EU – Moldova Association Agreement during today’s conference on key priorities of the EU – Moldova agenda.

The conference organized today in Brussels by the Romanian Center for European Policies (CRPE), the Foreign Policy Association (APE) of Moldova and Moldovan Mission to the EU enjoyed the participation of Mr. Watson, members of the negotiation team of the the Republic of Moldova, other members of the European Parliament, Commission officials and expert from Brussels based EU think-tanks.

Mr. Watson encouraged the Moldovan officials and considered that `the membership perspective for Republic of Moldova is not a taboo subject in Brussels`. On the contrary, Mr. Watson continued, we `will discuss the subject if Moldova would be prepared. There is no example of a European country willing to join the EU and prepared to do so that was refused`.

Read more

Read the report in pdf format

The Romanian Center for European Policies released today the memo “Learn to live with the Bear at your door” - Romania and European energy security.
The report examines different aspects of Europe’s energy security and presents Romania as a case study.

According to the report, Europe's energy dependence will increase until 2030. EU countries will consume by then 11% more energy compared to the reference year 2005. At the same time, Europe’s domestic production will steadily decline. EU’s import dependency will increase by 2030, mostly for oil - 95% of which will be imported, followed by gas with 84% (compared with 58% currently).

Romania
Romania’s dependence on imported energy is lower than the EU-27 average: 54% for oil compared with the European average of 83% and 42% for gas to the European average of 58%.

Alternatives
The report analyzes various European projects aimed at diversifying energy sources and transport routes. Most importantly, the Nabucco project faces an important test: 2010 will be a crucial year. The final investment decision needs to be taken until the end of this year. It is not too late for Russia to intervene decisively and reverse a decision of an EU Member State (or at least make it delay the necessary steps for the project implementation) or to make an offer that can’t be refused by Azerbaijan (which would block the start of the project).

Read more

2010: The first balance – The use of Structural Funds

Read the report in pdf format

The report is available only in Romanian

With almost 600 million Euros spent out of 5.6 billion Euros available from the European Union for the period 2007-2009, Romania didn’t perform too well in attracting structural funds.

Furthermore, the performance appears to be even lower given that the European Union has paid Romania about 2 billion Euros in advance to ensure the start-up of programs/projects. Clearly, the vast majority of this money has not yet been used, as this depends on an increase in the pace of approval, contracting and implementation of projects.

This pace is still slow, the main reasons being bureaucratic ballast, inadequate staffing of relevant authorities and a shortage of independent evaluators. Over all these, the economic crisis has also impeded the applicants and has challenged theirs and the authorities ability to adapt and find solutions.
A series of improvements and simplifications of the procedures were made and these are analyzed in this report. However, they are not enough to make a significant difference in the dynamics of project approval and reimbursement.

Read more

The priorities of the Spanish Presidency and the interests of Romania

Read the report in pdf format

We are continuing our series of reviews about European politics and policies with a new report on the short term priorities of the European Union. CRPE’s experts analyze the priorities of the Spanish Presidency in the new European institutional framework created by the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon.

The report presents the plans of the Spanish government and the ways in which Romania may relate to them. CRPE’s analysis underlines the fact that the Spanish presidency will create important precedents: because the treaty is vague on some points, a clearer division of the tasks between the new position of President of the European Council and the rotating presidency should emerge in practice in the following months. In what concerns the new structure of the European Commission, the report notes an increase in the number of Commissioners dealing with external issues that occurs simultaneously with the arrival of the new High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy.

Another change in the composition of the Commission, the merger between Enlargement and Neighborhood Policy portfolios, may be a good signal for Eastern countries, including Moldova, a country of interest to Romania. However, the report argues, it would have been preferable to make a clearer distinction between the Eastern area (“European neighbors") and north Africa and Middle East (“neighbors of Europe").

Read more

– Romania and EU`s Climate Change targets –

Read the report in pdf format

As global negotiations take place to reduce greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) and governments agree to costly commitments and seek opportunities, Romania has to become a serious, credible player. On one hand, Romania has to meet in the upcoming years its obligations as EU member, obligations which will cost both money and efforts to build consistent policies that help reduce GHG emissions in several sectors. On the other hand, depending on how we negotiate our position in the EU, we could obtain funding for investments in energy and other sectors: an opportunity which would allow us not only to reduce emissions, but also to produce more competitive energy.

This report examines Romania’s position in the global debate and reaches two main conclusions: we must be more modest and yet pragmatic abroad, and we must meet our existing obligations with the help of consistent policies at home.

Read more

How the shield protects us from what the Russians don’t have and doesn’t protect us from what they have

Read the report in pdf format

The report is available only in Romanian

CRPE launches a policy brief about the debate surrounding the planned missile shield to be installed in Romania. The report provides the relevant historical context of the development of this technology and dispels some of the myths and erroneous information present in the public debate.

The post-Cold War world has seen the proliferation of threats coming from pariah states like Iran or North Korea. Unwilling to accept a nuclear threat from these countries, the United States is trying to develop a defense system to cancel it.

Read more

See more articles