Debating the Eastern Partnership: Perspectives from the European Union ROSA BALFOUR I n only two years of existence, the Eastern Partnership(EaP) has already attracted considerable attention in the world of analysts and think tanks. Much of this focuses on the weaknesses of the new initiative, questioning its added value, and on the resonance of the incentives on offer in the six countries of Eastern Europe and the Southern Caucasus. While the EaP shares the deficits of the European Neighbourhood Policy( enp ), it has been overlooked how perceptions and attitudes towards Eastern Europe have evolved within the eu . Supported by interviews with(anonymous) eu and civil society representatives, this article aims to uncover some of the views behind the conceptualization of the EaP, which in turn will help us understand some of the policy choices this entails, as well as highlighting possible areas of tension. The divergent views of member states on key themes such as relations with Russia and the debate on future eu enlargement remain a firm boundary to the scope of any policy towards Eastern Europe. However, analysis based on a longer term perspective also shows a growing convergence on raising the profile of Eastern Europe and on stepping up eu responsibility there, through incremental engagement rather than the elaboration of a strategic vision. Setting up the EaP: Multilayered Policies for Eastern Europe Launched in Prague in May 2009, pursuant to a joint Polish–Swedish idea and a Commission proposal of December 2008, the EaP aims to step up eu engagement with Eastern Europe and the Southern Caucasus, building upon the framework developed through the enp from 2004 onwards. Rather than promote a new vision or strategy for Eastern Europe, it builds an additional layer on top of existing policies and adds a multilateral framework that was missing in the enp . ipg 3/2011 Balfour, Perspectives from the European Union 29