By IPS Correspondents
BRUSSELS, Oct 25 2007 (IPS)

Encounters between Russian President Vladimir Putin and European Union leaders can be embarrassing affairs – at least for those EU politicians who fret whenever the bloc’s image as a defender of democracy is sullied.

In 2003, such politicians were swift in distancing themselves from Silvio Berlusconi, Italy’s then prime minister, when he ended an EU summit meeting with Russia by claiming to act as “President Putin’s defence lawyer, even though he hasn’t asked me to.” Berlusconi proceeded to accuse the media of distorting reports about human rights and rule of law violations in Chechnya and over the detention of Mikhail Khodorkovsky, head of the oil giant Yukos.

Portugal, then, is not taking any chances ahead of the EU-Russia summit it is hosting in Mafra, a town near Lisbon, Oct. 26.

Its government, which holds the Union’s rotating presidency, has prepared a briefing document for EU participants in the summit, stressing the importance of agreeing a common approach “and implementing it consistently.”

The document, seen by IPS, hints at the deep tensions between the two sides on a range of issues by stating that no joint EU-Russia statement will be issued after the summit.

In the economic sphere, it raises concerns about the disruption of oil supplies between Russia and EU members Latvia and Lithuania, as well as a proposed new investment law being discussed by members of the Russian parliament, the Duma. The law would set limits on foreign firms’ involvement in sectors deemed as ‘strategic’. The EU side is to tell Russia that it should not use this law or other measures to undermine existing investments or put up “hidden barriers” to new investments.

On security, it hints that Russia will be urged not to carry out a threat to withdraw from a Cold War era agreement on limiting the number of heavy weapons deployed in Europe. In July, Putin signed a decree suspending application of the 1990 Convention Forces in Europe (CFE) treaty, in protest over U.S. plans to establish parts of a missile defence system in the Czech Republic and Poland. According to the briefing paper, the CFE remains the “cornerstone of security and stability” in this continent.

On human rights, the paper notes that Russia is the only member of the 47-country Council of Europe not to have ratified a protocol abolishing the death penalty, and on giving new powers to the European Court of Human Rights. Under the latter protocol, two-thirds of the Council’s governments would be able to start legal proceedings against a country that refuses to comply with a judgment by the court.

This could prove particularly pertinent in the case of Russia, which has habitually been condemned by the Strasbourg-based body. So far this year, the court has delivered 11 verdicts relating to Russia’s activities in the breakaway republic of Chechnya.

The paper also queries preparations for the December legislative elections. The EU side is to express “serious concern”, over how Russia has not yet invited the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) to monitor the poll. The OSCE is an independent “early warning, conflict prevention” body.

A spokesman for the OSCE said that “arguably the date has already passed” for receiving an invitation in time to set up an effective observation mission. Nonetheless, the spokesman said he was “confident” that an invitation will be issued. “The organisation is known for its flexibility, and things can be worked out,” he added.

Amnesty International has called on the EU to press for progress on a number of issues.

These include the need to carry out investigations into the 52 recognised mass graves in Chechnya, the intimidation of journalists in the northern Caucasus, and the alleged reluctance of the authorities to take seriously a wave of racist crimes – which cost nearly 50 lives in the first nine months of this year. Amnesty is troubled, too, by a new extremism law, which defines hooliganism as an act of hatred against any social group. Such a vague definition could lead to an arbitrary use of the law to hinder freedom of expression, the organisation fears.

Dick Oosting, head of Amnesty’s Brussels office, said that when Putin last met his EU counterparts at a summit in the Russian city of Samara during May, the Union was “able to speak with one voice and firmly address the human rights problems in Russia.”

“It is necessary to maintain that as an important signal to ordinary Russian citizens who want to live in a society that respects their rights,” he added.

Putin’s iron grip on power – and his recent announcement that he may become prime minister after his second presidential term ends in 2008 – came in for heavy criticism from members of the European Parliament (MEPs) this week.

Graham Watson, head of a Liberal grouping in the assembly, said that “if human cloning was better developed President Putin would probably run for both president and prime minister.”

Benita Ferrero-Waldner, the European commissioner for external affairs, said that the question of press freedom is the “litmus test for democratic legitimacy in Russia.”

“It is regrettable that certain matters cast a shadow over EU-Russia relations – for our interdependence is growing rather than shrinking,” she added.

Yet despite berating Russia verbally, Parliament decided to hold off on adopting a formal resolution about the summit until after it takes place. Hélène Flautre, a French Green MEP, said that the decision would be “interpreted by Russia as a huge success.”

“It is very difficult for human rights defenders and journalists to champion their causes as they are automatically branded enemies of the regime,” she said. “There is a prevailing climate of human rights violations.”

Portuguese Socialist Ana Maria Gomes said: “There is no cure in sight for the autocratic drift of Putin’s Russia. If we turn a blind eye to that, it will continue even more.”

Excerpt: