The European Commission`s Information Sheet, `EU-Russia Common Economic Area`, prepared for the EU-Russia summit in November 2006: under: ec.europa.eu/comm/external_relations/russia/summit_11_06/com_eco_space.pdf. The EU has not been totally deaf to Russia`s demands. In May 2005, following an agreement in principle reached at the St. Petersburg Summit, the EU and Russia began to create four “common spaces” to create a more detailed framework for mutual cooperation. These four spaces are located in the fields of economic relations; freedom, security and justice; External security; Research and education. The EU has granted Russia a different agreement than that offered to other Eastern European countries as part of the European Neighbourhood Policy, while recognising its special status. Nevertheless, the EU`s approach remains very marked by its normative view of relations. This was particularly evident in the field of external security, which proved to be the most problematic of the four common areas. Although there are many areas of cooperation – such as the Balkans, conflict prevention and crisis management – not all Member States were prepared to see Russia as a partner in the common neighbourhood, where large differences in approach had emerged, particularly with regard to so-called frozen conflicts.

Russia objected to the interference in its speech after EU interference in its backyard, while the EU refused to admit that Moscow had special rights in the common neighbourhood [10]. Draft bilateral agreements between the EC and Russia, as they appear in the common area roadmaps: the APC must be placed in a specific geopolitical and psychological context after the dissolution of the Soviet Union. While the EU quickly proposed the prospect of an “association” and, after the 1993 Copenhagen European Council, “joining” the central and eastern European countries (CEE countries), the European Commission proposed a different type of agreement to Russia and the new independent states of the former Soviet Union. As a result, the term “partnership” has been introduced as a label that characterizes the EC`s external relations with a number of States that are not considered potential members of the EU but are considered strategic. In this context, the practice of concluding cross-licensing agreements on the basis of two separate decisions, one on the basis of a provision of the EC Treaty and the other on the TUE, is an interesting reference point. While there are no examples of mixed agreements between the first pillar and the second pillar, the agreement between the EU, the EC and Switzerland on its association with the implementation, implementation and development of the Schengen acquis was adopted on the basis of two acts that combine the provisions of the first and third pillars. 2004/849/COUNCIL decision of 25 October 2004 (2004 L 368/26 and decision 2004/860/EC of the Council of 25 October 2004, JO L 36 of 20.12.2004, p. 1. 2004 L 368/78.