Below you will find the executive summary of the publication. You can find the full version here.
Executive Summary
Russia’s ongoing war of aggression against Ukraine has reshaped both the neighbourhood and the European Union (EU). It has led to a new regional order, in which the EU is redefining itself as a security and geopolitical actor. The new US administration is challenging the former rules-based order and raising questions about the Western alliance and the US’ role as a security guarantor in Europe. There is a new multipolar order, and Trump is advocating for a purely transactional-based world order. This new reality, coupled with the halt of US support—both military aid to Ukraine and development assistance through USAID—empowers authoritarian regimes and signals a return to power politics.
All of this will have implications for the EU, its neighbourhood, and its role as a global and regional actor. The EU is now in a phase of transition, redefining its role, including as an actor in the Eastern Neighbourhood, which is going through turbulent times. Russia has always been present, but China, Turkey, and Iran are also playing an increasing role. The EU’s Eastern Partnership (EaP) policy is in flux. Since the launch of the post-2020 EaP agenda, the region has undergone profound transformations, shaped by geopolitical shifts, internal political crises, and Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine—which has arguably led to a multi-tiered EaP. The EU’s engagement has evolved in response; balancing support for democratic reforms with the realities of political instability, economic hardship, and growing security threats. However, implementation gaps remain, and the EaP’s relevance in its current form is increasingly being questioned.
Across the region, democratic trajectories have diverged sharply. Ukraine and Moldova, now EU candidate countries, have accelerated reforms despite external and internal pressures, while Georgia’s political autocratisation not only threatens its European aspirations, but its existence as a democratic Country. Armenia has distanced itself from Russia and has pursued stronger relations with the EU, including aspirations for EU accession. However, domestic uncertainty, coupled with the security and geopolitical situation, complicates the reform process. Following its victory in the Nagorno Karabakh conflict and Russia’s weakened presence in the region, Azerbaijan continues to consolidate its power as an authoritarian state, leveraging its energy supplies for strategic influence. Meanwhile, Belarus has deepened its ties with Russia, with ongoing repressions and civil society operating largely in exile.
Civil society remains crucial for pushing democratic reforms, ensuring accountability, and sustaining public engagement in European integration. However, shrinking civic spaces, growing state repression against activists, media and civil society, and the absence of structured participation mechanisms undermine its effectiveness. The halt of the US funding following Trump’s appointment is further impacting civil society’s capacity to operate and remain relevant.
While the EU’s current support structures are valuable, they need revisions to provide more direct, flexible, and politically responsive assistance. Key lessons from recent years highlight the need for a more differentiated and strategic EU approach. Reform conditionality has proven effective in Moldova and Ukraine but remains difficult to enforce where political will is lacking. The EU’s credibility in promoting democracy is undermined when it fails to respond decisively to democratic erosion or to play a robust role in conflict resolution—as evidenced by Azerbaijan’s forceful takeover of Nagorno Karabakh, which displaced over 120,000 people, and Georgia’s rigged elections accompanied by violence against demonstrators. The EaP, in its current form, fails to address the growing divergence between reform-oriented and authoritarian-leaning states, as well as the distinct paths and interests that each country pursues. This calls for a restructured framework that aligns more closely with the European trajectories of individual countries, balancing pragmatic and transactional engagement with normative commitments.
The EaP framework remains valuable for its civil society component and the absence of alternative regional policies. However, to retain its relevance, it must evolve. A renewed EaP 2.0 should incorporate a security dimension, deeper economic and connectivity focuses, and enhanced capacity to address hybrid threats, including during elections. In this context, the EaP could serve as a comprehensive umbrella policy. Furthermore, a revitalised EaP could create bridges between candidate countries in the Eastern neighbourhood and those in the Western Balkans, while fostering civil society links with Central Asia and Turkey. To achieve these far-reaching goals, civil society involvement should be more formal where possible, and supported by increased core funding. A robust and meaningful EaP 2.0 also requires the EU to define its engagement with backsliding states, utilising targeted sanctions, enhanced monitoring, and alternative partnership models to maintain influence without legitimising authoritarian regimes. In case of more transactional engagements, this should be acknowledged and some conditionality put in place in order for the EU to maintain its credibility as a normative actor.
The future of the EaP hinges on the EU’s ability to move beyond a one-size-fits-all approach, adapting its policy to reflect the region’s evolving geopolitical and domestic realities. A more assertive, flexible, and security-conscious strategy is essential to ensuring that democratic momentum in some states is not undermined by instability and external pressures in others.
This paper examines the main challenges faced by civil society in effectively participating in decision-making processes for national reforms aimed at democratisation in the Eastern Partnership countries. It also analyses best practices that could be employed to strengthen the role of civil society in promoting democratic transformation and rule of law reforms across all EaP countries.
