Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the "Northern Dimension: Action plan for the Northern Dimension in the external and cross-border policies of the European Union 2000-2003"
Date: 2001-02-28
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: EU programme, Northern Europe, action programme, cooperation policy, cross-border cooperation, economic development

C 139/42

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

11.5.2001

Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Northern Dimension: Action plan for
the Northern Dimension in the external and cross-border policies of the European Union 2000-
2003’

(2001/C 139/11)

At its plenary session of 1 and 2 March 2000, the Economic and Social Committee, acting under
Rule 23(3) of its Rules of Procedure, decided to draw up an additional opinion on the ‘Northern
Dimension: Action plan for the Northern Dimension in the external and cross-border policies of the
European Union 2000-2003’.

The Section for External Relations, which was responsible for preparing the Committee’s work on the
subject, adopted its opinion on 6 February 2001. The rapporteur was Mr Uno Westerlund.

At its 379th plenary session of 28 February and 1 March 2001 (meeting of 28 February 2001), the
Economic and Social Committee adopted the following opinion unanimously.

1.

Background

1.1. The EU’s Northern Dimension and the Baltic Sea area

1.1.1.
As a political concept, the ‘Northern Dimension’ has
been on the European Council’s agenda since 1997. The
Cologne European Council established the implementation
guidelines in June 1999.

The initiative springs from the break-up of the Soviet Union;
the fact that following German re-unification, the former GDR
became part of the EU; Finland and Sweden became new EU
Member States and have a tradition of close cooperation
with Norway and Iceland; and the forthcoming enlargement
includes Poland, Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania,
thereby
extending the EU’s common border with Russia.

The Baltic States and Poland have all made significant progress
in preparing for EU membership, and the EU has stressed the
importance of relations with Russia in various ways, inter alia
by adopting a specific Russia strategy.

The events of the last decade have thus lead the EU increasingly
to consider problems and development opportunities from a
to the
northern perspective. This is of common interest
European Union as a whole. Commissioner Chris Patten and
the Swedish Foreign Minister Anna Lindh stress this in a joint
article (1): ‘The Northern Dimension must be seen as an all-
European commitment,
just as much as the EU’s policies
towards the Mediterranean and the western Balkans’. They also
create expectations when they say ‘The Commission and the
Swedish presidency must now guide the EU to move from
words to action’.

1.1.2.
The Cologne European Council defined the EU’s
Northern Dimension as being the geographic area covered by
the Council of the Baltic Sea States (CBSS). These are the

(1) Financial Times, 20 December 2000.

Nordic countries (Finland, Sweden, Denmark, Norway and
Iceland), Russia, the three Baltic States (Estonia, Lithuania and
Latvia), Poland, Germany. The Northern Dimension initiative
has therefore contributed towards the historically important
Baltic Sea area’s re-emergence as a regional entity in Europe. It
has also drawn attention to the Barents Sea area and to the
cooperation efforts in the most northerly part of Europe.

1.1.3.
The Council of the Baltic Sea States is the Baltic Sea
area’s political cooperation body. It was established in 1992
and comprises the Foreign Ministers of the member countries
plus a member of the Commission. Since 1995 Heads of
Government-level meetings have been attended by the EU
presidency. The latest summit was held in April 2000 in
Kolding, Denmark. Cooperation is being built up step by step.
Ministerial meetings have been held in ever more areas. There
has been a permanent secretariat since autumn 1998, with its
headquarters in Stockholm. A Business Advisory Council is
attached to the Council.

1.1.4.
There are also other Baltic Sea area and Barents Sea
region forums for governmental cooperation in specialist
areas:

— the Barents Euro-Arctic Council (BEAC), established in
1993, focusing chiefly on cooperation in the economic,
social and environmental spheres,
including nuclear
safety in the Barents region. Member countries are
Iceland, Norway, Sweden, Finland, Denmark and Russia.
The European Commission also participates. The Nether-
lands, the United Kingdom, Italy, Japan, Canada, Poland,
France, Germany and the United States have observer
status.

— the Arctic Council, dealing chiefly with the analysis and
research aspects of environmental
issues. Canada, the
United States, Russia, Sweden, Denmark, Finland, Norway
and Iceland are Council members. The Council has
also begun work on sustainable development in Arctic
regions.

11.5.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 139/43

1.1.5.
set up:

Other permanent cooperation structures have been

1.2. Frameworks and instruments

— parliaments, have been cooperating since 1991. The
ninth parliamentary conference on cooperation in the
Baltic Sea area was held in Malmö in the summer of
2000, and most of the region’s parliamentary bodies took
part;

1.2.1.
The legal frameworks for the Northern Dimension
are the Europe Agreements with the relevant applicant
countries (entry into force in 1994 and 1995), the partnership
and cooperation agreement with Russia (entry into force
1997), and the EEA agreement with Norway and Iceland (entry
into force 1994).

— the regions are cooperating in a comprehensive network
(Baltic Sea States Subregional Cooperation — BSSSC) The
thirteen counties and indigenous peoples of the Barents
region have joined forces in the Barents Regional Council;

— some 100 towns and cities have been working together
in a more formal organisation (the Union of Baltic Cities
(UBC));

— chambers of commerce: as early as 1992, 52 Chambers
of Commerce from the Baltic Sea area came together to
form the Baltic Sea Chambers of Commerce Association
(BCCA), with the aim of safeguarding their common
business interests;

— trade unions: the area’s main trade union organisations
(21 in all, with 20 million members) set up the ‘Baltic Sea
Trade Union Network’ in 1999, in conjunction with the
European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC)’s confer-
ence in Helsinki. These organisations dialogue directly
with the CBSS. In addition, there is a range of organis-
ations — notably economic and social — which have
built up cooperation on the basis of the Baltic Sea/Barents
Sea geographic area.

1.1.6.
Regional cross-border cooperation in the area
covered by the Northern Dimension has been visibly boosted
by the EU’s Interreg programmes. A new generation of Interreg
programmes (Interreg III) is being implemented during the
financial period 2000-2006.

1.1.7.
Although the focus tends to be on what is happening
in the political structures, the steadily increasing direct contacts
between people are the most important way of boosting a
feeling of community and helping to ensure conflicts can be
dealt with in a civilised manner. Contacts take place through
trade, enterprise, tourism, exchanges between universities and,
not least, cooperation between various types of organisation.
English and Russian are the most useful languages here.

1.1.8
The ESC is particularly pleased to see that cross-
border organisations for employers, trades unions and various
economic and social interests are being set up within the
region. The ESC too has played a part in this development.

The Community budget currently makes no specific
1.2.2.
provision for the Northern Dimension initiative. Activities are
expected to be funded through coordinated use of Community
funding, particularly under the Tacis programme (including
Russia), and the Phare (democratic institutions), ISPA (environ-
ment and transport), Sapard (agriculture), and Interreg (border
regions) pre-accession programmes.
In addition, there are
comprehensive national programmes, funded notably by the
Scandinavian countries and Germany. International financial
institutions, particularly the European Bank for Reconstruction
and Development (EBRD), the European Investment Bank
(EIB), the World Bank and the Nordic Investment Bank (NIB),
give substantial loans on easy terms. However, the EIB has not
yet been involved in Russia. These different forms of public
funding play an important part in smoothing the way for and
boosting private investment throughout the region.

1.3. Broad political backing

At a common conference of foreign ministers in
1.3.1.
Helsinki in November 1999, the EU and its partner countries
stated their conviction that the Northern Dimension will help
to foster strong, positive, mutual inter-dependence between
the EU and its Member States, other Baltic Sea Region countries
and north-west Russia, thus enhancing safety, stability, demo-
cratic reforms and sustainable development in the region. The
US ‘Northern European Initiative’ (NEI), started in 1998, also
aims to promote cooperation in the area covered by the
Northern Dimension. Both the EU and the US, and the EU and
Canada have made common declarations of their intention to
promote the EU’s Northern Dimension within the framework
of the new trans-Atlantic agenda.

2.

Previous ESC opinions

2.1.
The ESC has addressed issues within the geographical
scope of the Baltic Sea area and the concept of the Northern
Dimension in a number of opinions, starting with the
groundbreaking January 1997 Information Report on
‘Relations between the European Union and the countries
bordering the Baltic Sea’ (Filip Hamro-Drotz). The October
1999 opinion on the ‘EU’s Northern Dimension and relations
with Russia’ (Filip Hamro-Drotz) highlighted the need for the
EU, in accordance with the Cologne conclusions, to develop
the Northern Dimension into an action programme for

C 139/44

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

11.5.2001

Northern Europe. The ESC also made a number of recommen-
dations on how such a programme could be carried forward
and what the content should be. The ESC particularly stressed
that ‘within the context of the action programme, it must be
ensured that civil society organisations can participate in
development work’.

2.2.
The ESC is therefore pleased to note that the ‘Action
plan for the Northern Dimension in external and cross-border
policies of the European Union 2000-2003’ was adopted at
the Feira Summit on 19-20 June 2000. The rapid preparation
of this action plan bears out the priority the Commission and
the Member States give to further development of the Northern
Dimension initiative. However, as can be seen below, that does
not mean that the ESC is happy about all aspects of the action
plan and the manner in which it took shape.

3.3.2.
The operational part sets out aims and prospects for
action during the period 2000-2003 in eight sectors in which
most added value is expected.

3.4.
The Feira European Council called on the Commission
to play a leading role in implementing the action plan and
proposing suitable follow-up measures in three areas: the
environment (including nuclear safety), the fight against crime
and the Kaliningrad situation. The Committee will comment
on all these below.

3.5.
The Heads of State and Government concluded by
welcoming the future Swedish Presidency’s intention to join
forces with the Commission to prepare a full report to the
Council on the Northern Dimension’s political remit
in
preparation for the Gothenburg Summit in June 2001.

3. Action plan

4.

The ESC position

4.1. Development in the region

3.1.
In the introduction to the action plan it is stated that
this plan will be a reference document for actions planned or
implemented in the Northern Dimension during 2000-2003.
It therefore serves as a political recommendation to be taken
into account by relevant actors whenever appropriate. The aim
is to achieve maximum added value from Community and
national projects through coordination.

3.2.
As the Northern Dimension is an ongoing process
without a specific budgetary appropriation, it is pointed out
that the action plan will require regular review as regards its
frameworks and programmes and their respective priorities, as
they are developed.

The actual action plan is in two parts: a horizontal part

3.3.
and an operational part.

Under the horizontal part, attention is drawn to the
3.3.1.
challenges facing Northern Europe — an area of particular
significance to the EU. This region has great natural resources,
with considerable human and economic potential. But it also
faces big challenges in overcoming long distances, sparsely
populated areas and a harsh climate, all of which require cross-
border cooperation.

4.1.1.
The ESC would first draw attention to positive trends
in the region. These tend to be obscured since, for natural
reasons, the region’s problems tend to dominate both the
political agenda and the image portrayed in the media.

4.1.2.
The region’s inhabitants, with their skills and determi-
nation to build a new and better future are the most important
resource. The economy too is clearly thriving. The Baltic Sea
area is indeed one of the fastest growing regions in the world.
The knowledge-intensive sector, in particular, is flourishing.
Finland and Sweden are amongst the world’s top IT nations.
Estonia is one of the countries in the region which are
resolutely and successfully striving to speedily build up
expertise and industrial activity in the IT sector. St. Petersburg
university is considered to lead the world in training program-
mers. Scandinavian and German telecommunications com-
panies are helping to rapidly expand modern telecommuni-
cations systems in the area. Facts such as these show its future
potential.

4.1.3.
In Russia GNP fell during most of the 1990’s, but
statistics are starting to show signs of improvement, especially
in the industrial sector. In the St. Petersburg area and in north
western Russia, the figures are 20 %-30 % for this sector. A
6.5 % growth rate is now forecast for 2000 and 3.5 % for
2001, with inflation being capped at 20 % and 17 %
respectively (1).

(1) Emerging Europe Monitor No. 8, November 2000.

11.5.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 139/45

4.1.4.
The applicant countries — Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania
and Poland — have come far in their negotiations to join the
EU. This means they have long complied with the Copenhagen
political criteria on inter alia, human rights and respect for and
protection of minorities. Estonia and Latvia have complied
with OSCE recommendations on citizenship and naturalisation
for their large Russian minorities. The 2000 Commission
report emphasises, however, the need for further measures to
integrate the Russian population in these countries, and the
ESC would also stress this. The Commission is of the opinion
that all four countries can be regarded as effective market
economies. Estonia and Poland are expected to be able to cope
with EU competitive pressure and market forces ‘shortly’.
Latvia and Lithuania are expected to reach the same level ‘in
the medium term’. The legal and practical pre-conditions for
investment have been stabilised. There has been substantial
investment in the Baltic States — not least in the banking
sector — largely from countries on the other side of the Baltic.
The banking sector is now operative in all the applicant
countries of the region. Foreign banks are increasing their
share of the banking sector in Russia. Twelve of the biggest
fifty banks are now foreign-controlled.

4.1.5.
Transparency is improving and civil society is
expanding. One good example of the progress made by
Russian civil society is the fact that some 30 million Russians
are members of
trade union organisations which are so
democratic and independent that they were granted member-
ship of the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions
(ICFTU) in December 2000.

4.1.6.
Economic growth and the beginnings of an effective
market economy do not mean that problems have vanished.
There is still a great gap between living standards in the
transition economies of
the region and in the Western
countries. The gaps are also increasing within these countries.
The EU’s future eastern flank is threatening to be one of the
poorest borders in the world. Unemployment and under-
employment are still high. Corruption is a major problem and
social scourge. Russia still lacks a legal framework for worker
protection comparable to ILO standards (1).

nuclear safety, the fight against organised crime and the
Kaliningrad situation, action plan activities could be constricted
and social issues pushed further into the background.

4.2.2.
The ESC believes that the sectoral and functional
aspects of the action plan can be effective in getting activities
off the ground quickly. However, a territorial, cross-border
perspective will be needed to coordinate activities and to create
synergies. The ESC would point to the positive experiences of
the Interreg programme in the area, and recommend that the
territorial
highlighted when
should
implementing the action plan.

perspective

be

4.2.3.
In the ESC’s view, far greater priority should be given
to reducing divergencies both between countries and internally
than was done in the action plan. That would be in line with
the new emphasis of the Phare and Tacis programme.

In the current Draft Communication on Phare (2),
4.2.4.
emphasis is placed on Phare’s role in beginning to address the
wide development disparities that exist between the applicant
countries and the existing Member States. One of the main
messages is the Phare can begin to help the countries develop
the structures, procedures and programmes they will need
to use the Structural Funds efficiently and effectively after
accession.

4.2.5.
Similarly, the Tacis programme is being reshaped.
The new Regulation (1999/2000) focuses on problems instead
of on sectors such as energy, environment, etc. The new
indicative programme 2000-2003 for Russia will prioritise
three areas of economic and social relevance:
‘support for
institutional, legal and administrative reform’, ‘support to the
private sector and assistance for economic development’ and
‘support in addressing the social consequences of transition’.

4.2. The action plan’s perspective

4.2.1.
The ESC is not casting doubts on any of the areas of
action listed in the plan, all of which are priorities. However, it
does criticise the plan’s limited perspective. The ESC has
previously stressed that the ‘objective of the northern dimen-
sion must be to reduce the political, economic and social
divergencies between these societies’ in the northern part of
Europe. The ESC fears that because the Feira Summit’s call to
suitable follow-up
the Commission to propose further
measures is confined to the spheres of environmental and

4.2.6.
Both Phare and Tacis attach importance to involving
civil society organisations. These actors’ contribution in bring-
ing about change is highlighted in a number of contexts. The
Northern Dimension action plan makes no mention of them
at all. That is regrettable and gives a totally distorted idea of
the potential vested in the Northern Dimension initiative. The
ESC would draw attention to the conclusions of the EU Foreign
Ministers’ meeting in Helsinki in November 1999, when the
Council recommended that civil society organisations in the
relevant countries should step up cooperation within the
framework of the Northern Dimension.

(1) This is mentioned in the Tacis Regulation, 14199/99 Annex 3,

(2) Communication from the Commission, Phare 2000 review,

point 5.

27.10.2000, C(2000) 3103/2.

C 139/46

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

11.5.2001

4.2.7.
In this connection it is also important to point out
that, following on from an initiative from the Baltic Sea
summit in Kolding, the June 2000 CBSS meeting in Bergen
called on the Baltic Sea States’ employment ministers and on
the social partners to launch a dialogue on labour market and
related issues.

4.2.8.
In this light, the ESC urges that the importance of
involving civil society organisations, at both national and
cross-border level, be highlighted in the implementation of the
Northern Dimension and in future information and planning
relating to its action. In the ESC’s view, the close association of
the Baltic Sea area organisations with the Northern Dimension
initiative will ultimately generate the greatest added value.

4.3. Specific sections of the action plan

4.3.1. I n f r a s t r u c t u r e ( e n e r g y s y s t e m s , t r a n s -
t e l e c o m m u n i c a t i o n s / i n f o r -

p o r t
a n d
m a t i o n s o c i e t y )

This section of the action plan appears to be the
4.3.1.1.
best thought out. As regards energy, on 2 December 1999 the
Council
(energy ministers) endorsed a number of priority
proposals (Strengthening the Northern Dimension of Energy
Policy in Europe, Conclusions). The proposals were based on
a proposal adopted by the area’s energy ministers at a meeting
in Helsinki on 25 October 1999.

transport,

Expansion of energy,

telecommuni-
4.3.1.2.
cations and IT infrastructure is crucial to connecting up the
north and north-eastern parts of Europe to the rest of
the continent,
including by expanding the trans-European
networks eastwards, so that the region’s economic potential
can be exploited to the full. Reinforced cooperation between
the EU and Russia in the field of energy was agreed at the Paris
Summit on 30 October 2000, demonstrating that cooperation
with Russia is important for the EU as a whole.

The ESC would emphasise that

4.3.1.3.
in
infrastructure should also include expanding ‘missing links’ —
including in trans-European networks — such as technical
harmonisation, in order to facilitate economic integration in
the region.

investment

4.3.2. E n v i r o n m e n t

a n d n a t u r a l

r e s o u r c e s ,

i n c l u d i n g n u c l e a r s a f e t y

4.3.2.1.
The action plan commendably highlights environ-
mental issues and lists a large number of measures that should
be taken. The ESC would particularly stress the need for
immediate measures to update and expand the sewerage
system in the St. Petersburg region. This is crucial to the whole
Baltic region.

The emphasis on environmental issues has, how-
4.3.2.2.
ever, meant that forestry has only been addressed from a
conservation standpoint. The ESC regrets the lack of debate on
how growth in the huge forest areas, particularly in north west
Russia, could be exploited more fully to boost investment and
trade, and consequently economic growth and employment in
the area. The ESC would highlight the collective industrial,
technical and scientific expertise which has been garnered in
the regions as a result of the fact that most of Europe’s natural
forestry is to be found in northern Scandinavia, applicant
country areas and Russia. Continued planning efforts should
pay greater attention to this.

4.3.2.3.
As regards nuclear power stations, nuclear vessels
and nuclear waste in the area, not just the EU and the countries
in the area, but also a number of other countries are involved
technically, financially and personally in working out timely,
sustainable solutions. Even so, this is not enough. Further
efforts are needed,
inter alia to deal with the enormous
quantities of nuclear waste in north-west Russia. This will
require closer cooperation with the Russian authorities.

4.3.2.4.
The fact that the issue of closing certain power
stations is dealt with separately from energy questions makes
implementation discussions more difficult. As the action plan
progresses, safety issues should be included in the substantive
debate on measures to update the energy systems. This would
make it possible to focus on future-oriented investment and
employment issues.

The region has a very high profile IT sector. The
4.3.1.4.
potential
for further advances should be taken on board
through reinforced cooperation. It is in this respect that the
ESC welcomes a CBSS initiative from countries such as Finland
and Estonia to frame specific proposals for inclusion in the
Northern Dimension action plan.

4.3.2.5.
The ESC would again point out that the European
Council meeting in Helsinki called on the Commission to draw
up a proposal for a long term strategy to dovetail programmes
for economically, socially and ecologically sustainable develop-
ment. It is to be submitted to the Stockholm Council in June
2001. The ESC believes that the strategy should address the
need for sustainable modernisation of energy and production
systems, including in the ecologically sensitive Baltic Sea area.

11.5.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 139/47

4.3.3. P u b l i c h e a l t h

4.3.3.1.
Health problems in the region are largely a result
of social inequality and environmental impact. In both Russia
and the applicant countries, infectious diseases such as tubercu-
jaundice and diphtheria have started to re-
losis, syphilis,
emerge. Alcohol- and drug abuse cause great problems in
many areas, and high death rates, particularly for men.
HIV/AIDS have grown to epidemic proportions. Women are
reluctant to have children because they feel socially vulnerable.
Healthcare standards and capacity vary considerably, particu-
larly as regards preventive care. This also holds true for social
services.

The action plan is rooted in the Treaty chapters on
4.3.3.2.
public health, and in Article 152 which states that
the
Community and the Member States must promote cooperation
in this sphere with third countries and stakeholder inter-
national organisations. The proposed cooperation is therefore
somewhat narrow. However, the bilateral initiatives are quite
wide-ranging.

The ESC believes that

4.3.3.3.
there should be closer
cooperation with the general aim of improving healthcare and
welfare services, in order to narrow the gaps in social standards
between different parts of the region. Accordingly, the ESC
welcomes the fact that the programme provides for measures
to support Russia in implementing health and welfare reforms.
As with other transition economies, an overhaul of the legal
and administrative systems is needed as a result of
the
privatisation of
formerly state-owned companies. These
measures must, however, be developed and put into practice.
The ESC feels that civil society organisations in the region
should be involved in this work.

4.3.4. T r a d e ,

b u s i n e s s

c o o p e r a t i o n

a n d

i n v e s t m e n t p r o m o t i o n

4.3.4.1.
Trade and investment flows between the EU and
the applicant countries of Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland
are increasing rapidly, while economic ties with Russia are
becoming relatively less important. All except Lithuania are
WTO members, although Lithuania does have an agreement
with the WTO which is expected to be ratified in May 2001.

4.3.4.3.
Efforts to assist Russia in preparing for WTO
membership and in removing barriers to trade, e.g. as regards
customs procedures and goods certification, should therefore
be intensified, as a first step towards, in the longer term, a free
trade agreement, in accordance with the objectives set out in
the EU-Russia Partnership and Cooperation Agreement.

4.3.4.4.
Furthermore, closer cooperation is needed to create
a better legal and administrative climate for both domestic and
foreign investment. This is essential if market players are to
invest more proactively in, inter alia, industry and services,
and agriculture and forestry.

4.3.4.5.
It is essential to harness the investment arm of
Phare’s ‘social and economic cohesion’ priority area, and its
Tacis and Interreg counterparts, so that small and medium-
sized enterprises have better access to funding and quality
development support.

4.3.5. H u m a n

r e s o u r c e s

d e v e l o p m e n t

a n d

r e s e a r c h

4.3.5.1.
The human resources and scientific know-how
available in the region covered by the Northern Dimension
must be taken on board and developed. Cooperation between
the region’s universities and other higher education institutions
must be stepped up. Far too little use is made of student/re-
searcher exchange programmes and research institute net-
working. The Committee believes that
this area is very
important to the democratic, economic and social develop-
ment of the region.

4.3.5.2.
The ESC welcomes the fact that the new Tempus
programme for Russia addresses the development of non-
academic public and private institutions,
including those
directly linked to the development of civil society.

Priority should be given to cooperation projects in
4.3.5.3.
the form of targeted educational initiatives which address how
democracy and the market economy work. Such initiatives are
best implemented through coordination between civil society
organisations.

4.3.4.2.
Trade and investment flows between the EU and
Russia have not yet reached the proportions warranted by the
economic strength, degree of development and proximity of
the two areas. Dismantling barriers in this area would make
for increased production and better standards of living, and
speed up industrial modernisation and restructuring.

4.3.5.4.
Foreign language instruction should be a priority,
not least in order to facilitate cross-border contacts of various
types. The ESC finds it natural to emphasise this point in 2001
— European Year of Languages.

C 139/48

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

11.5.2001

4.3.6. A c t i o n t o c o m b a t c r o s s - b o r d e r c r i m e

4.3.6.1.
Since 1996, the Council of the Baltic Sea States has
had a special working group on the fight against organised
crime. This means that all the Northern Dimension’s partners
take part. The group cooperates on questions relating to police,
customs, coastguard and prosecution services. It is especially
active in illegal immigration, money-laundering, stolen cars,
smuggling, prostitution, drugs and corruption. Its mandate has
been extended until the end of 2004.

4.3.6.2.
The EU recently adopted a plan for common
initiatives to combat organised crime together with Russia,
which endorsed the plan.

4.3.6.3.
The ESC takes a very positive view of current
cooperation efforts, and believes the above-mentioned working
group should be given permanent status. The Committee
would highlight in particular the need for support to develop
common investigation and reporting systems in the region,
and for a review of the remit of the authorities concerned.
it is important to
However, when framing any measures,
ensure that they cause the least possible disruption to legal
trade,
‘Green
investment and mobility within the region.
channels’ could be introduced, for example, whereby firms
which have passed quality assurance checks would benefit
from simplified customs formalities.

4.3.7. R e g i o n a l
a t i o n

a n d

c r o s s - b o r d e r

c o o p e r -

4.3.7.1.
Cooperation in cross-border regions is of vital
importance to the successful enlargement of the EU, and to
the development of EU-Russia relations which can be beneficial
to the whole region. The action plan lists a number of measures
which aim to achieve this. At the Paris summit, the EU and
Russia expressed their desire to step up regional and cross-
border cooperation, particularly as part of
the Northern
Dimension.

The ESC would particularly stress that any concrete
4.3.7.2.
projects which are planned must focus on improving people-
to-people contacts and facilitating mobility in cross-border
regions. They should also help narrow the economic gaps in
those regions and raise living standards in areas which lag
behind.
In this context, cooperation between civil society
organisations is of crucial importance.

4.3.8. K a l i n i n g r a d

— half the size of Belgium — will become a Russian enclave
within the EU, 300 kilometres from its motherland. The
economic and social situation in this Russian region is
currently cause for some considerable concern. Development
in Kaliningrad is of vital importance to the whole region, and
to EU-Russia relations.

4.3.8.2.
Special efforts should be made to facilitate econ-
omic cooperation and reduce the economic, social and
environmental disparities between the Kaliningrad region and
surrounding areas in Lithuania and Poland.

4.3.8.3.
The ESC welcomes the fact that Russia and Lithuan-
ia have together applied for EU aid under the Tacis and
Phare programmes, within the framework of the Northern
Dimension, inter alia for modernisation of the road link via
the Lithuanian capital Vilnius, gas pipes through Lithuania to
Kaliningrad, environmental action and a ‘Euro Faculty’ at
Kaliningrad University.

4.3.8.4.
The ESC welcomes the Commission’s special study
of 17 January 2001 (1) on Kaliningrad, whose purpose is
to stimulate debate between the EU and Russia (including
Kaliningrad) and the two neighbour countries which are to
join the EU — Poland and Lithuania — on matters with an
impact on their common future. It is intended to discuss the
Kaliningrad issue at the EU-Russia Summit in Moscow in May
2001.

4.3.8.5.
The study mentions that a local office to provide
support for the Tacis programme was set up in December
2000. This office will encourage participation by local actors
(e.g. education and training bodies, non-governmental organis-
ations, trade unions, the media, sectoral organisations, enter-
prises, municipalities and the courts) in joint programmes with
EU organisations. The ESC naturally welcomes this positive
contribution to the practical application of the action plan for
the EU’s Northern Dimension.

4.4.

Implementation

4.4.1.
The ESC welcomes the Summit’s call for the Com-
mission to play a leading role in implementing the action plan.
That is necessary to keep up momentum. The ESC understands
that an inter-departmental group comprising representatives
of all DGs affected by the action plan met in September 2000,
and that there are ongoing bilateral contacts between the DGs
affected by the three priority areas. The Commission also
points out that there are many up-and-running projects with
a Northern Dimension slant, and that common Northern
Dimension measures are planned with the US and Canada,
within the framework of the new Trans-Atlantic Agenda.

The ESC welcomes the fact that Kaliningrad Oblast
4.3.8.1.
has been given a specific heading. When the neighbouring
countries of Lithuania and Poland have joined the EU, this area

(1) Communication from the Commission to the Council on the EU

and Kaliningrad, COM(2001) 26 final.

11.5.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 139/49

4.4.2.
The fact that the Commission has a central role
should not, however, lead to a reduced commitment from
other parties. The ESC would strongly underline that a basic
premise for a positive outcome is that Russia and other non-
EU countries, i.e. applicant countries and EEA countries, can
engage fully and work for the continued development of the
Northern Dimension. The commitment of
individual EU
Member States is, of course, equally important.

4.5.2.
In the ESC’s view, the necessary development would
be facilitated by involving civil society organisations in North-
ern Europe much more closely than hitherto. Here the
responsibility lies with the organisations themselves but also
with all relevant authorities: at European, Baltic, Barents Sea,
national and local level.

4.4.3. With this in mind the ESC would draw attention to
the CBSS’s stated willingness to play an active role in the future
development and implementation of key areas in the action
plan. In the press release issued at its meeting in Bergen on
21-22 June 2000 the CBSS stated as follows:
‘The CBSS is
actively involved in regional co-operation in a number of areas
covered by the action plan. The Council stands ready to come
up with concrete proposals for inclusion in the evolving action
plan. The Council
furthermore stands ready to offer the
resources of its working bodies for co-ordination and as
possible instruments for implementation and concretisation of
elements of the action plan in areas such as health, information
technology, energy, trade and investment, environment and
the combat against organised crime. The CBSS can also act as
a channel of co-operation with sub-regional actors (1).’

4.4.4.
The Council of the Baltic Sea States, the Barents Sea
Council and the Arctic Council can play a decisive role by
determining their common priorities and arranging for pro-
jects to be co-funded by regional and international financial
institutions and by the private sector.
It is of course an
advantage that
the Commission is involved in the work
of these regional bodies, and also in their specialist sub-
committees.

The ESC feels that it is important for the Nordic
4.4.5.
countries too to prioritise the practical achievement of the
Northern Dimension in their cooperation efforts within the
Nordic Council and the Nordic Council of Ministers.

4.5.3.
EU efforts under the Tacis programme need to be
integrated with Phare, ISPA, Sapard and Interreg, in order to
rapidly set up effective cross-border projects in northern
Europe. However, there are currently significant bureaucratic
obstacles to this. Tacis, for example,
is highly centralised
and focuses on large-scale projects, whilst Interreg is being
increasingly devolved to the Member States. The ESC therefore
feels that a separate budget heading for the implementation of
the Northern Dimension action plan should be created as soon
as possible. There would be no need for new funds: specific
cooperation funds for the Northern Dimension could be set
aside from the above programmes. The funds could be used to
find a way through existing red tape, and also act as a catalyst
to attract other forms of public and private funding. This is
particularly important to make things easier for small and
medium-sized enterprises, and to involve civil society to a
greater degree.

The ESC would particularly stress the need for
4.5.4.
businesses and international financial institutions to work with
governments on the continued planning arrangements. This is
especially important to get planned large-scale infrastructure
projects off the ground quickly.

4.6. The ESC calls for further multilateral cooperation in the area

4.5.

Implementation and continued development of the action plan

4.5.1.
Implementation of the action plan is an ongoing
process which requires regular review. As will be clear from
the above, the ESC feels that the plan needs to be reshaped in
a number of major respects.

4.6.1.
The ESC has tried to mobilise representatives of
employers, workers and other economic and social interests
throughout the Baltic Sea area during the preparation of this
opinion. For example, in liaison with the Swedish Presidency,
it organised a conference in Umeå on 5-6 February 2001,
where the ESC’s REX section debated with invited representa-
tives from relevant organisations in Russia, Estonia, Latvia,
Lithuania, Poland, Norway and Iceland. The discussions were
based largely on the replies received to the written questions
sent to the relevant organisations in the Baltic Sea area.

(1) On taking up the Presidencyof the CBSS, in July 2000, Germany
In a letter (dated
made immediate moves in this direction.
27.7.2000)
to various organisations in the Baltic Sea area,
Ambassador Hans-Jürgen Heimsoeth requested them to list exist-
ing and future projects in their respective areas and to reply by
mid-November. The aim is to present the list to the Commission
and the Swedish Presidency in March 2001.

4.6.2.
The ESC’s purpose in these contacts is also to
help foster awareness of the Northern Dimension among
organisations in the countries concerned and, in accordance
with the Helsinki Foreign Ministers’ Council recommendation,
to explore the openings for closer cooperation in a multilateral
forum.

C 139/50

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

11.5.2001

5. Conclusions for the future

The EU’s Northern Dimension is an effective instru-
5.1.
ment on which all Northern Europe can draw for the purpose
of finding solutions to problems and stepping up positive
development. The initiative will
facilitate the successful
accession of the applicant countries of Estonia, Latvia, Lithuan-
ia and Poland. It also helps to forge closer ties between the EU
and Russia, underpinned by the EU-Russia partnership and
cooperation agreement;
the EU’s strategy for Russia and
Russia’s corresponding programme for stepping up relations
with the EU.

5.2.
Despite its scope, the approach of the action plan for
2000-2003 is far too one-sided. Priority must be focused on
bridging gaps between and within countries in the area. A sine
qua non for narrowing these gaps is that business and labour
relations must develop in accordance with European social
market economy principles.

It is of fundamental importance that, in its cooperation
5.3.
with partner countries, the EU should be resolute in putting
the action plan into practice and determine specific goals with
set deadlines for the various components. A common Northern
European strategy is needed for the successful implementation
of the action plan. This will also require a common planning
and follow-up forum for all stakeholders.

The ESC welcomes the willingness of the Council of
5.4.
the Baltic Sea States (CBSS) to cooperate in carrying through
the action plan and to act as intermediary within the region.
This will be a major asset in future efforts.

The ESC is keen that funding management should
5.5.
allow the action plan’s individual projects to be implemented
speedily and without unnecessary red tape. Such arrangements
must also be framed so as to enable coordination between the
various funders, including international financial institutions,
to generate synergies. The ESC recommends creating a specific
budget heading for the Northern Dimension.

The economic and social players of civil society
5.6.
organisations must be involved throughout the launching,
implementation, monitoring and continued development of
Northern Dimension-related activities. Authorities at all levels
should cooperate to this end.

Brussels, 28 February 2001.

5.7.
The ESC, for its part, intends to pursue dialogue in
appropriate forms with the economic and social representa-
tives of civil society organisations in the Baltic Sea area,
including Russia. The experience of
the first multilateral
meeting in Umeå has shown that there is every reason to
pursue this kind of dialogue.

The ESC suggests that the EU, as an institutional
5.8.
cooperation partner, should decide to establish regular multi-
lateral contacts between the economic and social actors of civil
society in the countries concerned. This is to promote a better
understanding of the major issues relevant to the Northern
Dimension and to improve mutual understanding of economic
and social realities.

The ESC notes that, unlike the Europe Agreements and
5.9.
the EEA Agreement, the EU-Russia Cooperation Agreement
contains no article referring to the possibility of establishing a
forum to develop contacts between the economic and social
partners. The ESC believes that EU-Russia relations have now
progressed to a stage where a cooperation forum for the
partner country players should be set up. Such a forum could
be designed as a mixed committee, to which the ESC offers to
contribute. This would help to develop the mutual contacts
sought by both the EU and Russia. The ESC intends to draft a
special opinion on EU-Russia relations.

5.10.
The ESC intends to monitor continually develop-
ments in the Northern Dimension, and to produce a new
opinion when the time is appropriate.

6.

Follow-up

6.1.
The ESC is pleased to note that EU foreign ministers
are to hold a conference on the Northern Dimension on
9 April 2001 in Luxembourg. The ESC proposes that the
present opinion be taken on board in the conference prep-
arations.

6.2.
The ESC welcomes the Swedish Presidency’s intention
of preparing, in liaison with the Commission, a detailed report
to the Council on the Northern Dimension’s political remit in
preparation for the Gothenburg Summit in June 2001. The
ESC would suggest that this opinion be borne in mind when
that report is compiled.

The President

of the Economic and Social Committee

Göke FRERICHS