Civil Society at the Crossroads of Geopolitics: EU Civil Society Engagement under the Geopolitical Turn

Initially framed by Ursula von der Leyen’s concept of a “Geopolitical Commission,” this shift reflects the EU’s increasing prioritisation of strategic interests over a purely values-based foreign policy, driven by growing geopolitical competition and tensions with Russia and China. Since the onset of Russia’s full-scale war in Ukraine, the political and security challenges in the region have intensified, catalysing a transformation in the EU's relationships with the Associated Trio countries: Georgia, Ukraine, and Moldova. This paper explores the perspectives and experiences of civil society organisations (CSOs) in the Associated Trio regarding the European Union's geopolitical shift. It investigates how this change in EU engagement has affected its operations and whether it has observed any shifts in the EU's priorities as a result of this new direction. This paper bridges insights from Neoclassical Realism and Constructivist approaches to European Union foreign policy by investigating whether the EU's shift in rhetoric toward strategic interests yields meaningful policy changes. Challenging the prevailing belief that a stronger geopolitical focus automatically undermines normative objectives, this paper argues that heightened security and energy challenges do not diminish the EU’s commitment to promoting human rights in the Eastern Partnership region. Rather, these geopolitical pressures may reshape the methods by which the EU seeks to uphold these commitments. The paper asks two interrelated questions: (1) How do civil society organisations assess the EU’s geopolitical turn in terms of shifts in rhetoric, practice, and the instruments available for human rights advocacy? (2) how do the differences between Ukraine, Moldova, and Georgia reflect distinct “modes” of EU influence shaped by domestic political alignment and geopolitical considerations? Methodologically, the paper draws on original survey data I intend to collect from CSOs across the three countries. The surveys gather insights from CSOs regarding their views on EU policy priorities, funding practices, and engagement strategies. They also explore the trade-offs these organisations see between human rights, stability, and security. The responses are thematically analysed to spot common challenges, shifts in priorities, and resource needs. Additionally, a comparative analysis is conducted to examine how these experiences vary across countries. This helps us identify different ways in which the EU exerts its influence, ranging from partnerships focused on government collaboration to approaches that protect civil society norms, especially in contexts where democratic backsliding and political resistance are significant. This paper emphasizes the viewpoints of CSOs, highlighting their role as not just passive recipients of EU policies, but as important players who interpret and mediate the EU's changing external actions. The insights gathered from this research add to ongoing discussions about the EU's enlargement and the credibility of the EU's normative role in a neighbourhood that is becoming more contested.