Cross-border co-operation of the Russian region Kaliningrad with Poland and Lithuania : obstacles and opportunities Schielberg, Silke

Transcription

1 Cross-border co-operati the Russian regi Kaliningrad with Poland and Lithuania : obstacles and opportunities Schielberg, Silke Postprint / Postprint Zeitschriftenartikel / journal article Empfohlene Zitierung / Suggested Citati: Schielberg, Silke: Cross-border co-operati the Russian regi Kaliningrad with Poland and Lithuania : obstacles and opportunities. : Baltic Regi (2009), 2, pp URN: ssoar Nutzungsbedingungen: Dieser Text wird unter einer Basic Digital Peer Publishing-Lizenz zur Verfügung gestellt. Nähere Auskünfte zu den DiPP-Lizenzen finden Sie hier: Terms use: This document is made available under a Basic Digital Peer Publishing Licence. For more formati see:

2 Silke Schielberg CROSS-BORDER CO- OPERATION OF THE RUSSIAN REGION KALININGRAD WITH POLAND AND LITHUANIA: OBSTACLES AND OPPORTUNITIES This article analyses the cross-borderr coand operati between the Kaliningrad Regi the neighbouring Polish and Lithuanian regis. It provides, firstly, a short overview the cross-border co-operati formati and development. The author outlines the present- the day co-operati structures. Secdly, article reviews the asymmetries that hinder the cross-border co-operati. Finally, it fers some examples the cross-border proving that the co-operati under difficult cditis can be successful. The analysis is based the author's empirical research and interviews with regial experts 1 culturall and social projects Key words: Kaliningrad regi, cross- border cooperati, European Uni (EU), TACIS programme, PHARE programme, terreg programme. *1 Hisrical Background During the era the Soviet Uni, the Russian regi Kaliningrad was the main base the Baltic fleet and a military closed ze. The regi was separated from Lithuania by an administrative border with minimal cross-border interacti. ctrast the border the neighbouring country the South, Poland, was hermetically closed. There was ly central governed cross-border exchangee this border. This changed after the dissoluti the Soviet Unin when the regi Kaliningrad was opened Lithuania became independent, and Kaliningrad became a Russian exclave. It was not ly separated from mainland Russia the South by the Republic Poland, but also the North and East by its border Lithuania. On e hand the politicall and terririal changes enabled cross-border co- interacti the neighbouring regis Lithuania. An emergingg need and an opportunity set-up and operati with Poland, the other hand the new political arrangement interrupted the existing minimal establish cross-border co-operati with both neighbours arose. This co-operati would also help sustain a crucial linkage with the Russian mainland. Kaliningrad had avoid falling in political, ecomic and cultural isolati. Formati and Development Cross-border Co-operati the early 1990's the Russian Federati as successor the Soviet Uni ccluded co-operati agreements with Poland and Lithuania. These agreements were the foundati cross-border co- with the Neighbouring Countries operati between Kaliningrad and the bordering regis Poland and Lithuania. It was agreed that co- operati councils would be initiated, they had the task co-ordinate and implement the agreed cross- council ly commenced its work in 2000 as a result an additial agreement between the natial governments in Based the agreements between the natial governments, similar declaratis between the regial administratis, parliaments and the administratis the larger cities in the border regis were made. The agreements with the Polish regis were already ccluded in the early 1990's, and renewed after the border initiatives. The Russian-Polish co-operati council was established The Russian-Lithuanian reform administrati structure in Poland at the end the 1990's. The agreements with Lithuanian regis came in force ly at the end the 1990's. As part the agreements, ecomicc co-operati and the expansi the infrastructure near the borders became the highest priorities. At the same time envirment, sciences and culture were also targeted. Although specific objectives and comm projects were agreed up, there were ly a few joint activities in the first years. 1 Most projects were not realised. the 1990's cross-border relatis with the border regis Lithuania had almost come a complete halt. Simultaneously between 1996 and 1 The following findings were partially published by the author in previous articles.

3 1999 no meetings the Russian-Polish co-operati council ok place. With the opportunity European Uni funding, the cross-borderr co-operati projects achieved significant new impetus. Since 1997 Kaliningrad has had the possibility apply for support for cross-border co-operati projects from the EU-TACIS-programme. Participants from the Polish and Lithuanian border regis gether with their counterparts from Kaliningrad could apply within the EU-PHARE-programme for smaller projects from Additially Kaliningrad and the bordering regis from Poland and Lithuania had the chance apply as partners for complementary projects within EU-INTERR REG-projects for the Regi. The funding came from the PHARE-programme (Poland and Lithuania) and the TACIS-programme (Kaliningrad). Since the enlargement the EU in 2004 there is an EU-INTERREG-programme intended support cross-bordean active role in most projects that were funded by the EU before The reas for that was that co-operati between Kaliningrad, Poland and Lithuania. Kaliningrad did not play in ctrast projects funded by PHARE the requirements for funding by TACIS were higher. For instance the required financial volume was significantly higher than that for PHARE-projects, so that the Russian partners ten could not procure the requested co-financing. Until the end 2004 ly six TACIS-cross-border co-operati projects between Kaliningrad and Polish and Lithuanian border regis were implemented. This compares 138 cross-border projects that were financed through the PHARE-programme in Poland and Lithuania in the same period. Although this situati has improved with the new INTERREG-programme since 2004, there are still not enough cross- the funding from the EU has lead true cross-borderr projects in which both sides were involved, played an equally active role and benefited in the same manner. It was mainly projects in the areas culture, development local self-government, urism and border projects that are funded in parallel by INTERREG and TACIS. As a result in ly a few rare cases social welfare that were funded by the PHARE-programme until A few smaller projects in the field envirment, ecomy and educati were implemented as were larger infrastructure projects. Between 2004 and 2008 INTERREG funded mainly cultural projects and smaller local initiatives. The EU-funded projects attracted political institutis in the regis but also cultural and social NGOs. Besides the activities thatt emerged through co-operati ctracts and agreements regial level, regular ctacts between districts and municipalities both sides the border developed since the end the 1990's. ctrast the ctacts were mainly informal. The main focus this co-operati was cultural exchangee and comm sport events. order facilitate ctact theree were also comm efforts open additial border crossings. Kaliningrad also co-operates with the neighbouring regis and partially with regis from Sweden, Denmark and Latvia in the Euro-regis Baltic/Bałtyk, Neman/Niemen/Nemunas, Saulė, Šešupė and Łyna-Lava since the end the 1990's. The co-operati in the Euro-regis has many different aspects. While the Euro-regi Baltic/Bałtyk favours a large variety activities in a wide field (envirmental protecti, fostering ecomic development the regis, developing democracy in the regis and promoti youth exchange), the Euro-regi Neman/Niem men/nemunas is mainly interested in sustainable urism. Saulė ccentrates its engagement in the socio-ecomic development the European transport corridor Via Hanseatica. Šešupė focuses as much as Neman/Niemen/Nemunas sustainable urism but also supports envirmental protecti. summary, since the beginning the 1990's cross-border ctacts have emerged and were institutialised in the form co-operati councils and Euro-regis. Despite many projects that were funded by EU since the end the 1990's there is still no cross-border co-operati and implemented throughout the in the sense a comm elaborated strategy in which projects are jointly planned regis both sides the border. Mostly the ctent the projects was oriented the objectives set by the EU-programmes. This did not always align with a coherent, target-oriented strategy further develop the cross-border regi. Border Regimee as Obstacle Besides the lack a development strategy for the cross-border regi and shortage funding support cross-border projects, the situati at the border did not encouragee cross-border co-operati either. The opposite was the case: the co-operati was impeded. the early 1990's the natial governments made agreements allowing visa free travel so that people in the border regi could move freely, even commute daily. This was the case until 2003.

4 Why didn't the open border policy in the 1990's lead good cross-border co-operati? Csiderable differences in the standard living and in prices goods in Kaliningrad e hand and Poland and Lithuania the other hand encouraged a large part the populati near the border cross it several times every day trade or smuggle goods. Thus, waiting times up 30 hours occurred at the border crossings. This made ctacts between people both sides the border who were not part the trading and smuggling businesses difficult. The result was that the majority ctacts between the populati both sides the border in the 1990's weree traders and smugglers. Another obstacle for cross-border co-operati was the poorly developed borderr infrastructure. Governments and co-operati councils did not co-ordinate the recstructin the border crossings. most cases, e side the border was recstructed while the other side remained unchanged. Not until the end the 1990's were some border crossings were open for bicycle traffic. Not a single crossing is open for pedestrians up now. The situati at the borders changed in 2003, when Poland and Lithuania in csequence negotiatis for accessi EU introduced a visa formalities for border crossings and from Kaliningrad. As a result the separating functi the border was reinforced and the possibilities co- the new border regime hindered the already established cross-border ctacts. Visas had be requested and it ok time until granted. Sptaneous visits and meetings could not take place anymore. Since then Kaliningrad is not ly a Russian exclave, but also an enclave within the EU. With accessi Poland and Lithuania the Schengen ze the EU at the end 2007 the freee operate with the neighbours were furtherr limited. Although theree were multi-entry visas free charge, charge visas that were introduced in 2003 were not lger available. Since then the citizens Kaliningrad need apply for Schengenn visas if they want cross the border the neighbouring countries. A facilitati for the new stringent visa laws could come as a result recent regulatis for local border traffic that were defined by the EU in According these regulatis two neighbouring states can specify that residents who have an authorisati paper and live within 30 kilometres either side the border, would be allowed cross at any time. An additial hindering facr for cross-border co-operati is the introducti prohibited areas alg the border the Kaliningrad regi since 2007 by Russian natial authorities. Unequal Ecomical and Cstitutio al Cditis Hinder Co-operati with the border traffic, the different ecomic and Besides the previously described problems cstitutial development in the regis after the dissoluti the Soviet Uni hinders cross-border co-operati. Kaliningrad was not ly cfrted with structural problems that resulted from a military centred industry. As Russian exclave the regi also was dependent energy imports from Russia. Both facrs had wide range negative impact the development ecomy in Kaliningrad in the 1990's. The regi was highly dependent imports from Russia and the neighbouring states while the export rate was comparatively low. The standard living was low, a widespread shadow ecomy served the majority the citizens as livelihood. At the end the 1990's the ecomicc situati slowly started improve. The upward trend ctinued and since 2005 the ecomy in Kaliningrad was very healthy. Mainly Russian invesrs but also companies from foreign states have invested in the exclave. comparis, the ecomic changes required in Polish and Lithuanian regis after the dissoluti the Soviet Uni happened faster and more successfully than in Kaliningrad. A main reas for that was the funding from the EU as part the accessi. The Russian regi Kaliningrad did not benefit from these financial incentives. Thus socio-ecomic inequalities emerged and increased between the regis. It became increasingly difficult for Kaliningrad participate in cross-border projects equal terms. Another reas why cross-border co-operati is difficult in the regi may be found in the way political institutis are set-up and operate. According the Russian cstituti the Russian regis have a high levell representative participati, they take part in political decisis the central state via the Federati Council. Compared this, Polish and Lithuanian units self-government seem have less politicall influence. reality the Russian regis cannot decide as much as the regis in Poland 2 Regulati (EC) No 1931/2006 the European Parliament and the Council 20 December 2006 laying down rules local border traffic at the external land borders the Member States and amending the provisis the Schengen Cventi.

5 and Lithuania. For Kaliningrad as a Russian exclave, all relevant questis ccerning co-operati the regi and the municipalities with neighbouring regis from other states are decided in Moscow. summary, cross-border co-operati between Kaliningrad with its Polish and Lithuanian neighbours takes place despite unequal ecomic and institutial cditis. These asymmetries hinder co-operati. Opportunities for Co-operati and sustainable cross-border co-operati in cultural and social areas in Cultural and Social Areas Despite all obstacles, a diverse independent EU-funding is taking place. A variety projects are in progress such as the integrati handicapped people, the exchange knowledgee and experiences in the areas social welfare, planning the usage palliative medicine, tackling down drug addicti and integrating the unemployed in social activities. the cultural secr, people develop culture informatin systems, plan and arrange artistic workshops and exhibitis, schedule music, dance, theatre performances and finally review comm cultural hisry. Meanwhile these encounters take place regular base. The participati in social and cultural projects has led a sustainable co-operati between the involved organisatis. additi the funded projects, nn funded cross-border activities have become normal particularly local level. People crosss borders participate in city and municipality events, exhibitis and readings, music and dance events, as well as sporting events such as kayaking regattas, bicycle races, chesss competitis or footballl matches. While cross-border projects in the areas infrastructure, the ecomy and envirmental protecti ten fail bring the desired outcome both sides the border, cultural and social co-operati projects seem succeed despite the previously described asymmetries between the regis. The majority all cross-border initiatives are cultural or social nature. These projects prove be successful because the interacti between the involved parties both sides the border is very direct, mainly a pers/group pers/groupp basis. The projects are less bureaucratic, more independent natial interests and participants can act freely. The size and scope for these projects can be adjusted suit available financial resources. Cclusi and Perspectives Against the background the referred obstacles that prevent a strg cross-border co-operati between public authorities, companies, NGOs and other groups across borders, cultural and social cross co-operati projects must be ranked high. Despite socio-ecom mic and institutial asymmetries in the regis, citizens in the border regis stay in ctact and, with the help these projects, expand their relatis. People have the chance get know each other better, they can get rid anxieties and prejudices. Trust in the neighbours the other side the border and sustainability the cross-border co-operati are the results. By talking each other, people e side the border will be sensitised the cditis living the people from the other side the border. They will become aware the differences and thus respect them in co-operati. It is important maintain the communicati i, comm activities such as meetings, seminars and workshopss are helpful. The goal is remove inequalities both sides the border. The progress that was achieved co-operati in the cultural and social areas, points out that cross-border co-operati can ly be successful if the people in the regis are actively involved. It is crucial support the development the civil society when it comes cross-border co-operati.