2024-03-28T10:15:03Zhttp://aei.pitt.edu/cgi/oai2
oai:aei.pitt.edu:10816
2011-02-15T23:10:45Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324561737465726E506172746E657273686970
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:4430303268726469
7375626A656374733D46:46303335
7375626A656374733D46:46303430
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324575726F7065616E4E65696768626F7572686F6F64506F6C696379
7375626A656374733D44:44303033:44303033303032
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:44303032303032
7375626A656374733D46:46303337
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:636F6E726573
74797065733D706F6C6963797061706572
Moldova’s 'wannabe democracy' is worth rescuing. CEPS Policy Brief No. 185, 23 April 2009
Dura, George
Gnedina, Elena.
common foreign & security policy 1993--European Global Strategy
human rights & democracy initiatives
enlargement
European Neighbourhood Policy
Moldova
Ukraine
EU-Eastern Partnership
Belarus
conflict resolution/crisis management
The consequences of the post-electoral impasse in which Moldova finds itself after the parliamentary elections on 5 April 2009 are immense for the EU’s relations with Moldova and for the success of its European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) and Eastern Partnership (EaP). Despite many problems, Moldova is considered one of the ‘frontrunners’ as regards ENP implementation and is poised to negotiate an Association Agreement and a deep and comprehensive free trade agreement in the coming months. Yet the violent protests that rocked the Moldovan capital, Chisinau, on 7 April 2009, and the authorities’ subsequent violent arrests and beatings of protesters, journalists and opposition figures, may have negative repercussions on Moldova’s European integration efforts. The reversal in Moldova’s transition to a Western-style democracy may accelerate, failing a resolute response by the EU. This policy brief argues that first, the EU should put pressure on Moldova to stop its crackdown and investigate human rights violations, and second, the EU should make an attractive offer of increased cooperation and assistance if Moldovan authorities seek an agreement with the opposition and show progress in implementing democratic reforms. Failing this, the EU may witness yet another undoing of democratic reforms by one of its Eastern neighbours.
2009-04
Policy Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/10816/1/1832.pdf
Dura, George and Gnedina, Elena. (2009) Moldova’s 'wannabe democracy' is worth rescuing. CEPS Policy Brief No. 185, 23 April 2009. [Policy Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/10816/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:11112
2011-02-15T23:12:45Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324561737465726E506172746E657273686970
7375626A656374733D46:46303335
7375626A656374733D46:46303334
7375626A656374733D46:46303430
7375626A656374733D46:46303337
74797065733D706F6C6963797061706572
spotlight europe 2009/06: EU Eastern Partnership: Fine, but what about Russia?
Ochmann, Cornelius.
Moldova
Russia
Ukraine
EU-Eastern Partnership
Belarus
Despite its undeniable "birth pangs," the Eastern Partnership symbolizes a change of paradigms in the foreign policy of the EU, which, after the inception of the Union for the Mediterranean in the summer of 2008, is now venturing on a new and qualitatively different approach to its eastern neighbourhood. Furthermore, five years after the enlargement of the EU this strategy creates a new situation in eastern Europe, and places its own approach to Russia on a firmer footing.
2009-05
Policy Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/11112/1/xcms_bst_dms_28487_28488_2.pdf
Ochmann, Cornelius. (2009) spotlight europe 2009/06: EU Eastern Partnership: Fine, but what about Russia? [Policy Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/11112/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:11115
2011-02-15T23:12:46Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324561737465726E506172746E657273686970
7375626A656374733D46:46303335
7375626A656374733D46:46303430
7375626A656374733D46:46303334
7375626A656374733D46:46303337
74797065733D706F6C6963797061706572
spotlight europe 2009/06: Im Osten was Neues. = In the East, something new (EU Eastern Partnership: Fine, but what about Russia?)
Ochmann, Cornelius.
Russia
Ukraine
EU-Eastern Partnership
Belarus
Moldova
Trotz der erheblichen Geburtsprobleme bedeutet die Östliche Partnerschaft einen symbolischen Paradigmenwechsel in der Außenpolitik der EU. Nach Etablierung der "Union für das Mittelmeer" im Sommer 2008 wagt sie nun einen neuen Ansatz in ihrer östlichen Nachbarschaft. Mit dieser Strategie stellt die EU ihren Auftritt gegenüber Russland auf eine festere Grundlage.
2009-05
Policy Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/11115/1/Deutsch_spotlight_Im%20Osten%20was%20Neues_09%2D05%2D28.pdf
Ochmann, Cornelius. (2009) spotlight europe 2009/06: Im Osten was Neues. = In the East, something new (EU Eastern Partnership: Fine, but what about Russia?). [Policy Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/11115/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:11274
2011-02-15T23:13:40Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324561737465726E506172746E657273686970
7375626A656374733D46:46303334
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:44303032303032
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:6575726F7065616E69736174696F6E6575726F7065616E697A6174696F6E6E6174696F6E616C6964656E74697479
74797065733D706F6C6963797061706572
Do we detect some neo-Finlandisation in the Eastern neighbourhood? CEPS Commentary, 28 May 2009
Emerson, Michael.
Russia
europeanisation/europeanization & European identity
common foreign & security policy 1993--European Global Strategy
EU-Eastern Partnership
In this Commentary, CEPS Senior Research Fellow Michael Emerson surveys the overall strategic landscape of the six Eastern Neighbourhood partners of the EU and finds that none has a credible membership prospect for either the EU or NATO, that the Russian strategic presence is sustained or growing throughout the region, and that all of the countries seek political and economic ‘Europeanisation’ in varying degrees. Against this background, he asks whether this a recipe for the stability of the wider Europe, or a recipe for a remake of the notorious instability of the buffer zones of European history?
2009-05
Policy Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/11274/1/1848%2D1.pdf
Emerson, Michael. (2009) Do we detect some neo-Finlandisation in the Eastern neighbourhood? CEPS Commentary, 28 May 2009. [Policy Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/11274/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:11514
2011-02-15T23:15:07Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324561737465726E506172746E657273686970
7375626A656374733D46:46303335
74797065733D64697363757373696F6E7061706572
The Eastern Partnership and Ukraine. New Label – Old Products? ZEI Discussion Paper C194, 2009
Drescher, Wiebke.
Ukraine
EU-Eastern Partnership
[From the Introduction]. On 7 May 2009 the heads of state or government and representatives from Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine, EU member states as well as EU officials met in Prague and jointly declared to intensify their relationships in the future under the umbrella of the Eastern Partnership (EaP). Its main goal is “[…] to create the necessary conditions to accelerate political accession and further economic integration between the European Union and interested partner countries.”1....This paper attempts to give an answer to the question if the EaP can give fresh impetus to the relations between the EU and Ukraine.
2009
Discussion Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/11514/1/dp_c194_Drescher.pdf
Drescher, Wiebke. (2009) The Eastern Partnership and Ukraine. New Label – Old Products? ZEI Discussion Paper C194, 2009. [Discussion Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/11514/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:14555
2011-02-15T23:34:32Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324561737465726E506172746E657273686970
7375626A656374733D46:46303430
74797065733D706F6C6963797061706572
Re-setting the Eastern Partnership in Moldova. CEPS Policy Brief No. 199, 4 November 2009
Popescu, Nicu.
EU-Eastern Partnership
Moldova
If EU leaders are looking for ways to make the Eastern Partnership successful, there are worse places to start than Moldova. Recent elections brought to power a four-party Alliance for European Integration, making the country the only post-Soviet state (aside from the Baltics) in the last ten years where the transfer of power took place via elections. Moreover, in terms of trade, its dependence on the EU is also greater than that of any other post-Soviet state and its support for European integration is the highest in the region. It also shares a language and a history with Romania (an EU member state), and due to migration flows and geography, it has the highest intensity of people-to-people interaction with the EU compared to the other former Soviet states. The country could serve as a laboratory for a different sort of European neighbourhood policy – a partnership that is more effective, more attuned to local needs and that gives palpable benefits for both the EU and its partners. Certainly, a successful EU policy on Moldova will not on its own transform the entire neighbourhood, but it could be a template for a more effective EU policy towards other post-Soviet states like Georgia, Armenia or Ukraine.
2009-11
Policy Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/14555/1/re%2Dsetting%2Deastern%2Dpartnership%2Dmoldova.pdf
Popescu, Nicu. (2009) Re-setting the Eastern Partnership in Moldova. CEPS Policy Brief No. 199, 4 November 2009. [Policy Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/14555/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:15129
2011-02-15T23:38:33Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324561737465726E506172746E657273686970
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:696E7465726E6174696F6E616C7472616465
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324575726F7065616E4E65696768626F7572686F6F64506F6C696379
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D696D6D6967726174696F6E706F6C696379
74797065733D706F6C6963797061706572
Rendez-vous with eastern Europe. CEPS Commentaries, 2 November 2010
Emerson, Michael.
immigration policy
EU-Eastern Partnership
international trade
European Neighbourhood Policy
With multiple top-level political meetings scheduled in the near future to review progress of the European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) and the Eastern Partnership (EaP), Michael Emerson examines the EU’s posture in two key areas – free trade and visa liberalisation – where something could be done promptly and which would mean something tangible for the states in the region. Instead, he is disappointed to report that the EU has devised long, long processes of conditionality for the partner countries to meet and has deferred concrete benefits to the distant future.
2010-11
Policy Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/15129/1/ME_Rendez%2Dvous_with_Eastern_Europe.pdf
Emerson, Michael. (2010) Rendez-vous with eastern Europe. CEPS Commentaries, 2 November 2010. [Policy Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/15129/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:32325
2011-09-13T14:55:42Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324561737465726E506172746E657273686970
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:443030316C61776C6567616C61666661697273
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:44303032303137
7375626A656374733D45:45303130
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:44303032303136:4430303230313643656E7472616C41736961
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:65636F6E6F6D696366696E616E6369616C61666661697273:6566617472616465706F6C696379
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303139
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:44303032303032
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:64303032627372
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
74797065733D706F6C6963797061706572
Europe deploys towards a civil-military strategy for CSDP. Egmont Paper No. 49, June 2011
Biscop, Sven.
Coelmont, Jo.
energy policy (Including international arena)
law & legal affairs-general (includes international law)
common foreign & security policy 1993--European Global Strategy
Central Asia
EU-ACP
EU-Eastern Partnership
UN
EU-Black Sea region
trade policy
free movement/border control
Executive summary. CSDP: Strategy Needed.
Why does Europe develop the military and civilian capabilities that it does? Why does it undertake the military and civilian operations that it does? And why in other cases does it refrain from action?
The answers to these questions would amount to a civilian-military strategy for the Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP). Starting from the EU’s vital interests, an analysis of the threats and challenges to these interests, and the EU’s foreign policy priorities, a CSDP strategy would outline the priority regions and issues for CSDP and, in function of the long-term political objectives and the appropriate political roadmap for those regions and issues, scenarios in which launching an operation could be appropriate.
Without strategy, we can never be sure that the operations that we do are actually the most relevant and important that we could undertake. We cannot direct the operations that we do undertake to achieve the desired strategic effect. And we cannot focus capability development if we do not know our strategic priorities.
Many of the building-blocks of a CSDP strategy already exist. What remains to be done is to connect the dots and render explicit: (1) for which priority regions and issues we must plan and prepare, (2) for which possible scenarios that may require a CSDP operation, and (3) identify the implications for our capabilities
and a roadmap to meet those requirements.
Priority Regions and Issues.
The regions and issues on which CSDP ought to focus are those where our vital interests are most directly at stake:
• Defence against any military threat to the territory of the Union.
• Open lines of communication and trade (in physical as well as in cyber
space).
• A secure supply of energy and other vital natural resources.
• A sustainable environment.
• Manageable migration flows.
• The maintenance of international law (including the UN Charter and the treaties and regulations of the key international organizations) and of universally agreed rights.
• Preserving the autonomy of the decision-making of the EU and its Member States.
That does not mean that the EU will disregard other regions and issues, but it does provide the focus for early warning and prevention, and for permanent contingency planning for:
• The Eastern Neighbourhood (the Baltic to the Black Sea).
• The Southern Neighbourhood (the Dardanelles to Gibraltar).
• The Gulf.
• Central Asia.
• Sub-Sahara Africa.
• Maritime security.
• Collective security under the UN, notably the Responsibility to Protect.
If the main focus of CSDP is on the external security of the Union, it does have a complementary role to play in our internal security as well, notably in the implementation of the Solidarity Clause, and including perhaps, in the future, in our collective defence.
Scenarios for Operations.
For the purpose of military planning, as well as to guide military capability
development, the EU military bodies have elaborated five illustrative scenarios.
These no longer cover all operations that the EU already is undertaking. Five
new scenarios ought to be added:
• A Maritime Security Scenario.
• A Cyber Security Scenario.
• A Support Operations Scenario.
• A Counter-Terrorism Scenario.
• An Internal Security Scenario.
Capability Implications.
In order to stay in tune with today’s higher level of crisis management activity, the existing military Headline Goal has to be interpreted broadly. The aim to be able to sustain a corps level deployment (50 to 60,000 troops) for at least one year should be understood as a deployment which EU Member States must be able to undertake at any one time over and above ongoing operations. Then the EU would be able to deal with every eventuality.
Generating the necessary capabilities requires an ambitious approach to pooling & sharing, but also to go beyond it and create a Permanent Capability Conference as a durable strategic-level platform for harmonization of national defence planning as such, rather than project-by-project coordination only.
With regard to civilian capabilities, achieving the original civilian Headline Goal would already constitute a significant improvement, but there is a lack of implementation and follow-through by the Member States. If decentralised civilian capacity-building does not work, the EU should have recourse to sizeable standby
pools of civilian personnel which are pre-identified, trained, and ready for deployment.
There is scope for combining military and civilian capability development in at least five areas: communications, information, transport, protection and logistics.
The EU could be the first to create a permanent civilian-military Operational Headquarters (OHQ), in Brussels, which could plan for and conduct both civilian and military operations and, allowing for close interaction with all relevant EU actors, could implement a truly comprehensive approach to crisis management.
Information gathering, analysis and dissemination are strategic enablers for any military or civilian operation or mission. A real Intelligence Fusion and Analysis Centre should replace the scattered poles of intelligence within the EU institutions.
From Strategy to Action.
Adopting a strategy for CSDP will not in itself guarantee resolute action in each and every crisis. But forging a consensus on priority regions and issues and drawing the conclusions from that for our capabilities, including planning and conduct, will focus our preventive, long-term efforts, and will certainly make us better prepared for action in any contingency.
Being more prepared and knowing in advance what our priority regions and issues are, and why, will then hopefully also strengthen the political will to generate action under the EU flag by the able and willing Member States, and will thus make for an EU that carries its weight on the global stage.
Biscop, Sven.
Coelmont, Jo.
2011-06
Policy Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/32325/1/ep49.pdf
http://www.egmontinstitute.be/paperegm/ep49.pdf
Biscop, Sven. and Coelmont, Jo. (2011) Europe deploys towards a civil-military strategy for CSDP. Egmont Paper No. 49, June 2011. [Policy Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/32325/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:32334
2011-09-16T18:28:50Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324561737465726E506172746E657273686970
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324575726F7065616E4E65696768626F7572686F6F64506F6C696379
7375626A656374733D46:4647656F72676961
74797065733D706F6C6963797061706572
Of neighbours, partners and EU aspirants: the case of EU-Georgia relations since the 2003 Rose Revolution. EU Centre Background Brief No. 5, September 2011
Loke, Hoe-Yeong
EU-Eastern Partnership
European Neighbourhood Policy
Georgia
Summary. This background brief examines the relations between
the EU and its eastern neighbours through a case study
of Georgia. What are the underpinnings and factors
driving EU policies such as the European Neighbourhood
Policy (ENP) and the Eastern Partnership (EaP)? Is EU
membership for these eastern countries the end goal?
Georgia, a small country in the South Caucasus, has
been thrust into the limelight in the wake of its 2003
Rose Revolution and its 2008 war with Russia, with
implications for EU-Georgia relations. This relationship
is fraught with asymmetric expectations – Georgia has
been more than won over as part of the EU’s ‘ring of
friends’, evident in how its leaders and people have
expressed a desire to join the EU. However there is
currently little if any reciprocal desire on the EU’s part,
and understandably so, given the persistence of
Georgia’s territorial conflicts.
Hwee, Yeo Lay
2011-09
Policy Paper
NonPeerReviewed
other
http://aei.pitt.edu/32334/1/BB05.Of%20neighbours%2C%20partners%20and%20EU%20aspirants.pdf
http://www.eucentre.sg/articles/312/downloads/BB05.Of%20neighbours,%20partners%20and%20EU%20aspirants.pdf
Loke, Hoe-Yeong (2011) Of neighbours, partners and EU aspirants: the case of EU-Georgia relations since the 2003 Rose Revolution. EU Centre Background Brief No. 5, September 2011. [Policy Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/32334/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:32619
2011-10-22T18:20:36Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324561737465726E506172746E657273686970
7375626A656374733D46:46303334
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:44303032303136:4430303230313643656E7472616C41736961
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:65636F6E6F6D696366696E616E6369616C61666661697273:6663723230303839
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324575726F7065616E4E65696768626F7572686F6F64506F6C696379
74797065733D626F6F6B
Synergies vs. Spheres of Influence in the Pan-European Space. Report prepared for the Policy Planning Staff of the Federal Foreign Office of Germany. CEPS Paperbacks. April 2009
Emerson, Michael
Checci, Arianna
Fujiwara, Noriko
Gajdosova, Ludmila
Gavrilis, George
Gnedina, Elena
Central Asia
EU-Eastern Partnership
European Neighbourhood Policy
Russia
financial crisis 2008-on/reforms/economic governance
This report investigates whether and how the European Union, in its policies towards Russia, the Eastern partner countries and Central Asia, might build stronger common programmes and projects across these three political ‘spaces’. The aim would be to secure synergies between actions that are presently segmented between these three regions, and especially to induce Russia to become a genuinely cooperative positive-sum game player in the wider European neighbourhood, rather than to continue its efforts to rebuild the former Soviet Union space as its sphere of influence. With this aim in mind, this report examines various policy sectors for the opportunities they present for cooperative action between the EU, Russia, Eastern Europe and Central Asia. The tantalising idea is that the current global financial and economic crisis might become the tipping point to set in motion a change of strategic attitudes and thence a cascade of cooperative actions of the kinds outlined in this report.
Centre for European Policy Studies
2009-04
Book
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/32619/1/58._Synergies_vs._Spheres_of_Influence_in_Pan%2DEuropean_Space.pdf
http://www.ceps.eu/book/synergies-vs-spheres-influence-pan-european-space
Emerson, Michael and Checci, Arianna and Fujiwara, Noriko and Gajdosova, Ludmila and Gavrilis, George and Gnedina, Elena (2009) Synergies vs. Spheres of Influence in the Pan-European Space. Report prepared for the Policy Planning Staff of the Federal Foreign Office of Germany. CEPS Paperbacks. April 2009. Series > Centre for European Policy Studies (Brussels) > CEPS Paperbacks <http://aei.pitt.edu/view/series/SMCEPSPaperbacks.html> . Centre for European Policy Studies. ISBN 9789290798712
http://aei.pitt.edu/32619/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:33335
2012-01-16T19:00:00Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324561737465726E506172746E657273686970
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324575726F7065616E4E65696768626F7572686F6F64506F6C696379
74797065733D706F6C6963797061706572
Eastern Partnership: still a missing link in EU strategy? CEPS Commentary, 13 January 2012
Makarychev, Andrei
Deviatkov, Andrey
EU-Eastern Partnership
European Neighbourhood Policy
In their assessment of the state of the Eastern Partnership, as the Polish Presidency of the EU Council drew to a close at the end of 2011, two Russian policy specialists describe the initiative as an experimental EU project that, as demonstrated by other similar initiatives launched by the EU (Northern Dimension and the Barcelona Process), will most likely undergo serious institutional transmutation. For a variety of reasons, however, they found that none of the major actors was either willing or capable of making radical moves at this time.
2012-01
Policy Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/33335/1/Makarychev_%26_Deviatkov_on_Eastern_Partnership.pdf
http://shop.ceps.eu/book/eastern-partnership-still-missing-link-eu-strategy
Makarychev, Andrei and Deviatkov, Andrey (2012) Eastern Partnership: still a missing link in EU strategy? CEPS Commentary, 13 January 2012. [Policy Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/33335/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:33494
2012-05-09T20:55:11Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324561737465726E506172746E657273686970
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:4430303245554361756361737573
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:44303032303136:4430303230313643656E7472616C41736961
74797065733D776F726B696E677061706572
The European Union's Policy towards Central Asia and South Caucasus: a Coherent Strategy? Bruges Regional Integration & Global Governance Papers 1/2012
Aubert, Laurène
Central Asia
EU-Caucasus
EU-Eastern Partnership
In 2007 the European Union (EU) launched the Eastern Partnership, including the South Caucasus, while simultaneously addressing Central Asia through a “Strategy for a New Partnership”. As the EU strategy towards Central Asia and South Caucasus (CASC) is being implemented and the Lisbon Treaty has given more tools for the EU to achieve greater coherence in its foreign policy, the question arises to what extent the EU’s strategy in the region is indeed coherent. Until now, the EU has not introduced any hierarchy between its objectives, but implements programmes and initiatives at various levels, thus making its strategy neither fully coherent nor sufficiently visible. If the EU wants its growing involvement to be translated into a bigger impact in CASC it has to achieve more coherence in its policy for and in that region. This paper provides both an analysis of the (in)coherence of the EU’s policy in the region and some recommendations on how coherence could be further improved.
2012-01
Working Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/33494/1/BRIGG_1%2D2012_Aubert.pdf
Aubert, Laurène (2012) The European Union's Policy towards Central Asia and South Caucasus: a Coherent Strategy? Bruges Regional Integration & Global Governance Papers 1/2012. [Working Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/33494/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:36440
2012-09-06T18:03:23Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324561737465726E506172746E657273686970
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:44303032303032
74797065733D706F6C6963797061706572
The EEAS and the Eastern Partnership: let the blame game stop. CEPS Commentary, 4 September 2012
Kostanyan, Hrant.
common foreign & security policy 1993--European Global Strategy
EU-Eastern Partnership
In the first year and a half of its existence, the EEAS and its head have become the target of extensive criticism for the shortcomings of EU foreign policy; shortcomings that in fact date back to the creation of the European Union. The EU’s diplomatic service has been blamed variously for ‘lacking clarity,’ ‘acting too slowly’ and ‘being unable to bridge the institutional divide’.
In this Commentary author Hrant Kostanyan argues that the EEAS’ discretionary power in the Eastern Partnership multilateral framework is restricted by the decision-making procedures between a wide range of stakeholders: the member states and the partner countries, as well as by the EU institutions, international organisations and the Civil Society Forum.
Since this decision-making process places a substantial number of brakes on the discretionary power of the EEAS, any responsible analysis or critique of the service should take these constraints into consideration. Ultimately, the EEAS is only able to craft EU foreign policy insofar as it is allowed to do so.
2012-09
Policy Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/36440/1/Kostanyan_%2D_EEAS_%26_EaP.pdf
http://www.ceps.be/book/eeas-and-eastern-partnership-let-blame-game-stop
Kostanyan, Hrant. (2012) The EEAS and the Eastern Partnership: let the blame game stop. CEPS Commentary, 4 September 2012. [Policy Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/36440/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:44131
2013-09-21T22:53:12Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324561737465726E506172746E657273686970
7375626A656374733D46:46303334
74797065733D706F6C6963797061706572
Putin’s grand design to destroy the EU’s Eastern Partnership and replace it with a disastrous neighbourhood policy of his own. CEPS Commentary, 17 September 2013
Emerson, Michael
Kostanyan, Hrant.
EU-Eastern Partnership
Russia
This new Commentary by Michael Emerson and Hrant Kostanyan shows how the pressure exerted by President Putin on Armenia to withdraw from the Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Agreement it had negotiated with the EU and to join the Belarus, Kazakhstan and Russia customs union is but the most recent in a long series of ongoing moves by Russia to destroy the Eastern Partnership. In their view, the message to be hammered home to those unsure of the economic arguments is that you do not have to have an exclusive customs union to enjoy deep integration for goods, services, people and capital, and of course even less for hard security relationships. High-quality free trade agreements are the logical instrument for those who want excellent relations with more than one big neighbour.
2013-09
Policy Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/44131/1/ME_%26_HK_EU_and_the_Eastern_Partnership.pdf
http://www.ceps.eu/book/putin%E2%80%99s-grand-design-destroy-eu%E2%80%99s-eastern-partnership-and-replace-it-disastrous-neighbourhood-p
Emerson, Michael and Kostanyan, Hrant. (2013) Putin’s grand design to destroy the EU’s Eastern Partnership and replace it with a disastrous neighbourhood policy of his own. CEPS Commentary, 17 September 2013. [Policy Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/44131/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:44228
2019-12-10T21:45:05Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324561737465726E506172746E657273686970
7375626A656374733D44:44303035:44303035303135
74797065733D776F726B696E677061706572
The EuroNest Parliamentary Assembly: The European Parliament as a Socializer of its Counterparts in the EU’s Eastern Neighbourhood? EU Diplomacy Paper 05/2013
Kostanyan, Hrant.
Vandecasteele, Bruno
EU-Eastern Partnership
European Parliament
This paper examines the EU-Neighbourhood East Parliamentary Assembly (EuroNest PA), an inter-parliamentary forum consisting of representatives from the European Parliament (EP) and from all Eastern Partnership (EaP) countries except Belarus, aiming at political and economic association between the EU and the EaP. More specifically, it analyzes the extent to which the EP tries and manages to socialize the national parliaments of the EaP countries. After introducing the theoretical framework, the paper outlines the structure and working methods of the EuroNest PA, clarifies the absence of Belarus in the framework, and examines the results of the first three plenary sessions. The paper concludes that, although the establishment of the EuroNest PA as such provides a framework to advance the EP’s goals of transmitting its norms and values to the EU’s Eastern neighbouring countries, in practice socialization has taken place only to a limited extent thus far.
2013-08
Working Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/44228/1/edp_5_2013_%2D_kostanyan_vandecasteele.pdf
https://www.coleurope.eu/website/study/eu-international-relations-and-diplomacy-studies/research-activities/eu-diplomacy
Kostanyan, Hrant. and Vandecasteele, Bruno (2013) The EuroNest Parliamentary Assembly: The European Parliament as a Socializer of its Counterparts in the EU’s Eastern Neighbourhood? EU Diplomacy Paper 05/2013. [Working Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/44228/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:44509
2014-04-11T17:01:27Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324561737465726E506172746E657273686970
7375626A656374733D44:44303035:44303035303135
74797065733D706F6C6963797061706572
Towards ‘EuroNest 2.0’: What should the next European Parliament learn from its predecessor? CEPS Policy Brief No. 300, 1 October 2013
Kostanyan, Hrant.
Vandecasteele, Bruno
EU-Eastern Partnership
European Parliament
The development and functioning of the EU-Eastern Partnership Parliamentary Assembly (EuroNest PA) is the focus of this Policy Brief, in which the authors argue that despite organising a number of meetings and adopting several resolutions in the past two years, the Assembly is failing to reach its objectives of promoting economic and political integration between the EU and the Eastern Partners. Three main problems are considered in this paper: i) the criticism of the European Parliament for being inconsistent about the conditions under which countries can send delegates ii) the fact that the parliamentary meetings are too short and infrequent, and iii) the observation that the Eastern Partners focus too much on national and bilateral issues, thus failing to engage in multilateral dialogue. A number of recommendations are put forward to enhance the effectiveness of the Assembly.
2013-10
Policy Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/44509/1/PB300_HK_%26_Vandecasteele_Euronest_Final.pdf
http://www.ceps.be/book/towards-%E2%80%98euronest-20%E2%80%99-what-should-next-european-parliament-learn-its-predecessor
Kostanyan, Hrant. and Vandecasteele, Bruno (2013) Towards ‘EuroNest 2.0’: What should the next European Parliament learn from its predecessor? CEPS Policy Brief No. 300, 1 October 2013. [Policy Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/44509/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:46166
2013-12-09T16:50:01Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324561737465726E506172746E657273686970
7375626A656374733D46:46303430
7375626A656374733D44:44303033:44303033303032
7375626A656374733D46:46303337
7375626A656374733D46:46303335
7375626A656374733D46:4641726D656E6961
7375626A656374733D46:46417A65726261696A616E
7375626A656374733D46:4647656F72676961
74797065733D706F6C6963797061706572
A post-mortem of the Vilnius Summit: Not yet a ‘Thessaloniki moment’ for the Eastern Partnership. CEPS Commentary, 3 December 2013
Blockmans, Steven.
Kostanyan, Hrant.
EU-Eastern Partnership
enlargement
Ukraine
Belarus
Moldova
Armenia
Azerbaijan
Georgia
In assessing the third Eastern Partnership (EaP) Summit at Vilnius on November 28-29th, this CEPS Commentary concludes that the event fell far short of its initial ambition to define the geopolitical finalité of EU-EaP relations by projecting a path towards future accession to the EU for Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine.
2013-12
Policy Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/46166/1/HK_%26_SB_Vilnius_Summit.pdf
http://ceps.eu/book/post-mortem-vilnius-summit-not-yet-%E2%80%98thessaloniki-moment%E2%80%99-eastern-partnership
Blockmans, Steven. and Kostanyan, Hrant. (2013) A post-mortem of the Vilnius Summit: Not yet a ‘Thessaloniki moment’ for the Eastern Partnership. CEPS Commentary, 3 December 2013. [Policy Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/46166/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:47317
2020-01-08T01:23:34Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324561737465726E506172746E657273686970
7375626A656374733D46:46303430
7375626A656374733D46:46303337
7375626A656374733D46:46303335
7375626A656374733D46:4641726D656E6961
7375626A656374733D46:46417A65726261696A616E
7375626A656374733D46:4647656F72676961
74797065733D6F74686572
The Civil Society Forum of the Eastern Partnership four years on: Progress, challenges and prospects. CEPS Special Report, January 2014
Kostanyan, Hrant.
EU-Eastern Partnership
Ukraine
Belarus
Moldova
Armenia
Azerbaijan
Georgia
Established in 2009, during the Eastern Partnership Summit in Prague, the Eastern Partnership Civil Society Forum supports the development of civil society organisations from the EU-28 and the six Partnership countries, namely Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine. After four years of operation, the Secretariat of the Forum’s Steering Committee commissioned CEPS to conduct a comprehensive evaluation of its programme. This report singles out the institutionalisation and socialisation inculcated among its members as the Forum’s greatest accomplishment. In contrast to its internal developments, it argues that the external policy successes of the Forum remain modest. This report is the first attempt to conduct an in-depth assessment of the Forum's Annual Assembly, the Steering Committee and its Secretariat, the Working Groups and National Platforms. Ten actionable recommendations are put forward aimed at improving the Civil Society Forum’s standing and performance.
2014-01
Other
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/47317/1/HK_EaP_Civil_Society_Forum_(1).pdf
http://www.ceps.be/book/civil-society-forum-eastern-partnership-four-years-progress-challenges-and-prospects
Kostanyan, Hrant. (2014) The Civil Society Forum of the Eastern Partnership four years on: Progress, challenges and prospects. CEPS Special Report, January 2014. UNSPECIFIED.
http://aei.pitt.edu/47317/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:50257
2014-07-10T15:07:46Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324561737465726E506172746E657273686970
7375626A656374733D46:46303332
7375626A656374733D46:46303334
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D536368656E67656E
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
74797065733D706F6C6963797061706572
The Impact of Visa Liberalisation in Eastern Partnership Countries, Russia and Turkey on Trans-Border Mobility. CEPS Liberty and Security in Europe No. 63, March 2014
i Sagrera, Raül Hernández
EU-Eastern Partnership
Turkey
Russia
Schengen/Prum/border control/freedom to travel
free movement/border control
Schengen Visa liberalisation in the Eastern Partnership countries, Russia and Turkey has proven to have a huge transformative potential across the justice, liberty and security policies of the countries where it has been deployed. Far-reaching technical reforms in the fields of document security, irregular migration and border management, public order security and fundamental rights have to be implemented so that visa-free travel can be allowed. Evidence provided by visa applications data reveals that visa liberalisation is a logical step, provided that the technical reforms are adopted and implemented. This study analyses the current state of play of the implementation of the EU visa policy instruments and assesses the positive impact of visa-free travel on trans-border mobility according to current visa application statistics.
2014-03
Policy Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/50257/1/No_63_EU_Visa_Liberalisation.pdf
http://www.ceps.be/book/impact-visa-liberalisation-eastern-partnership-countries-russia-and-turkey-trans-border-mobilit
i Sagrera, Raül Hernández (2014) The Impact of Visa Liberalisation in Eastern Partnership Countries, Russia and Turkey on Trans-Border Mobility. CEPS Liberty and Security in Europe No. 63, March 2014. [Policy Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/50257/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:57927
2014-12-06T21:53:31Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324561737465726E506172746E657273686970
7375626A656374733D46:46303334
74797065733D706F6C6963797061706572
Russia goes on the offensive ahead of the Eastern Partnership summit in Vilnius. OSW Commentary No. 115, 30.09.2013
Wierzbowska-Miazga, Agata
EU-Eastern Partnership
Russia
In recent weeks, Russia has stepped up its efforts to prevent a group of former Soviet republics
from tightening their relations with the European Union. The intensification of these efforts
comes ahead of the upcoming Eastern Partnership summit, scheduled to take place in Vilnius
on 28-29 November. It is expected that during the summit Kiev will sign the EU-Ukraine Association
Agreement (AA) initialled in March 2012, including an agreement for a Deep and Comprehensive
Free Trade Area (DCFTA). Meanwhile, Moldova, Armenia and Georgia are expected to
initial similar documents, effectively accepting their terms and conditions, and paving the way
for their official signing in the near future. Moscow has always viewed the relations between
the EU and the post-Soviet states as a threat to its own influence in the region. Consequently,
any attempts to tighten these relations have been actively opposed by Russia. The EU’s Eastern
Partnership programme, launched in 2009, has posed a particular challenge to Moscow’s policies
in the region.. Russia responded by rolling out a Eurasian integration project, which began
in 2010 with the establishment of the Customs Union of Russia, Kazakhstan and Belarus, and is
expected to culminate in the establishment of the Eurasian Economic Union by 2015. Moscow’s
overarching objective has been to persuade the countries in the region, especially Ukraine, to
adopt an unambiguously pro-Russian geopolitical stance and to join the integration project proposed
by the Kremlin. The Russian government hopes that this would permanently place these
states in Moscow’s sphere of influence and at the same time prevent them from developing
closer relations with Brussels. Russia has regularly taken actions aimed at showcasing the benefits
of integration with the Customs Union (particularly, by promising preferential pricing of
Russian energy resources) and at the same time it has adopted measures highlighting the pitfalls
of retaining a pro-European orientation (mainly by imposing occasional trade sanctions). The
upcoming summit in Vilnius, during which Ukraine, Moldova, Armenia and Georgia could lock
themselves on to a pro-European course, has spurred Moscow to intensify its efforts to torpedo
a successful outcome of the Vilnius meeting, with a view to slowing down or even blocking the
possibility of closer cooperation between the EU and the former Soviet republics.
2013-09
Policy Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/57927/1/commentary_115.pdf
http://www.osw.waw.pl/en/publikacje/osw-commentary/2013-10-01/russia-goes-offensive-ahead-eastern-partnership-summit-vilnius
Wierzbowska-Miazga, Agata (2013) Russia goes on the offensive ahead of the Eastern Partnership summit in Vilnius. OSW Commentary No. 115, 30.09.2013. [Policy Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/57927/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:57973
2014-12-06T22:29:29Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324561737465726E506172746E657273686970
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303339:74706A6861706A63636D667265656D6F76656D656E74
74797065733D6F74686572
Making the impossible possible: the prospects for visa-free movement between the EU and its eastern partners. OSW Point of View Number 27, May 2012
Jaroszewicz, Marta
EU-Eastern Partnership
free movement/border control
To make the abolition of visas in relations between the EU and the Eastern European countries possible, the ”spell cast” must be broken on this issue. With the present levels of mobility and people-to-people, business and political contacts the introduction of a visa-free regime will be a natural consequence of the liberalisation processes which have been at work for years.Moreover, the decision to lift the visa requirement is unlikely to significantly stimulate an increase in migration pressure from Eastern European countries but could reduce the operating costs of expanded Schengen consular network. Lifting the visa requirement for Eastern European citizens can be temporary and conditional and allow for actual implementation of an increased conditionality rule. In political terms, making visa liberalisation a key issue would fundamentally change the partners’ approach to the Eastern Partnership and would provide a link to the Partnership for Modernisation targeted at Russia.
Labuszewska, Anna
2012-05
Other
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/57973/1/pw_27_en_0.pdf
http://www.osw.waw.pl/en/publikacje/policy-briefs/2012-06-06/making-impossible-possible-prospects-visa-free-movement-between
Jaroszewicz, Marta (2012) Making the impossible possible: the prospects for visa-free movement between the EU and its eastern partners. OSW Point of View Number 27, May 2012. UNSPECIFIED.
http://aei.pitt.edu/57973/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:57977
2014-12-06T22:34:02Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324561737465726E506172746E657273686970
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:706F6C69746963616C6166666169727331323334:70616666707569657075
74797065733D6F74686572
Partnership in times of crisis: challenges for the Eastern European countries' integration with Europe. OSW Point of View Number 36, July 2013
Sadowski, Rafat
EU-Eastern Partnership
political union & integration/European Political Union
Over the four years since its launch, the Eastern Partnership initiative has created frameworks and mechanisms for the integration of Eastern Partnership countries with the European Union. Despite this, the partner countries have so far made little meaningful progress in modernisation, implementation of reforms or integration with the EU.Since the European Neighbourhood Policy was launched in 2004, the situation in areas of key importance for the EU, such as democratisation, free-market transformations, European integration, political stability and regional security, has not improved significantly.
In this context, it is legitimate to ask questions about the extent to which the European Neighbourhood Policy and the Eastern Partnership have brought the Union closer to achieving its declared objectives in the relations with eastern neighbours. What is the underlying cause of the dwindling involvement and declining interest in achieving real progress in integration? How may the events that have been dominating the political agenda – i.e. the EU’s financial crisis, the debate on the future of the Union, but also the political processes taking place within the partner countries – affect the future of mutual relations?
Labuszewska, Anna
2013-07
Other
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/57977/1/pw_36_en_partnership_net.pdf
http://www.osw.waw.pl/en/publikacje/policy-briefs/2013-07-18/partnership-times-crisis-challenges-eastern-european-countries
Sadowski, Rafat (2013) Partnership in times of crisis: challenges for the Eastern European countries' integration with Europe. OSW Point of View Number 36, July 2013. UNSPECIFIED.
http://aei.pitt.edu/57977/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:57978
2014-12-03T13:51:19Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324561737465726E506172746E657273686970
7375626A656374733D46:46303430
7375626A656374733D46:46303334
7375626A656374733D46:46303335
7375626A656374733D46:4647656F72676961
74797065733D706F6C6963797061706572
Triangular Geopolitics in Europe’s Eastern Neighbourhood. CEPS Commentary, 2 December 2014
Merabishvili, Gela
EU-Eastern Partnership
Russia
Ukraine
Moldova
Georgia
Over the last few months, Russia has employed a number of economic and security measures to derail the Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Agreement (DCFTA) between the EU and Ukraine. Russia’s opposition to the Agreement was based on the argument that it would damage its economy and weaken its trade ties with Ukraine. Russia’s actions ultimately led to war in Ukraine, but did not succeed in reversing Ukraine’s EU integration policies; instead there are now trilateral negotiations between the EU, Ukraine and Russia on mere technical trade aspects of the DCFTA.
The Kremlin is using similar rhetoric and, to some extent, similar coercive measures against the DCFTAs with Moldova and Georgia. But the small scale of Moldovan and Georgian trade with Russia is not a legitimate reason for the EU to replicate the Ukraine ‘trialogue’ on the DCFTAs in these countries. Instead, Moldova’s heavy dependence on Russia’s energy and the former’s transit role for the EU offers a greater possibility to set up trilateral negotiations, similar to the recently finalised gas trialogue between the EU, Ukraine and Russia.
2014-12
Policy Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/57978/1/CEPS_Commentary_GM_Triangular_Geopolitics.pdf
http://www.ceps.eu/node/9863
Merabishvili, Gela (2014) Triangular Geopolitics in Europe’s Eastern Neighbourhood. CEPS Commentary, 2 December 2014. [Policy Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/57978/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:58015
2014-12-06T23:37:44Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324561737465726E506172746E657273686970
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:44303032303132
7375626A656374733D46:46303239
7375626A656374733D46:46303137
7375626A656374733D46:46303231
7375626A656374733D46:46303039
74797065733D6F74686572
Visegrad development aid in the Eastern Partnership Region. OSW Report, February 2014
Vegh, Zsuzsanna
development
EU-Eastern Partnership
Hungary
Poland
Slovak Republic
Czech Republic
The international development cooperation systems of the Visegrad countries are all rather new, in most cases only about a decade old. They are still undergoing reforms and the countries are striving to strengthen their own profiles as development donors in the world by gradually increasing their bilateral ODA. Although their resources are limited and were further cut due to the financial and economic crisis, the bilateral ODA ratio of the Visegrad countries as a group spent in the EaP region gradually increased after 2009.
Given that the individual systems are still developing and the countries are focusing on creating their own brand, it is highly unlikely that in the near future it would be in their interest to set up a common development fund – either for the EaP region or in general. Instead of creating new institutions, however, a rationalization of the current cooperation systems and a consolidation of existing resources is feasible and should be considered.
Gnlazdowski, Mateusz
Sadecki, Andrzej
Kazimierska, Katarzyna
Labuszewska, Anna
2014-02
Other
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/58015/1/raport_visegrad_international_net.pdf
http://www.osw.waw.pl/en/publikacje/osw-report/2014-02-24/visegrad-development-aid-eastern-partnership-region
Vegh, Zsuzsanna (2014) Visegrad development aid in the Eastern Partnership Region. OSW Report, February 2014. UNSPECIFIED.
http://aei.pitt.edu/58015/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:58074
2014-12-06T20:14:36Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324561737465726E506172746E657273686970
7375626A656374733D46:46303430
7375626A656374733D46:46303334
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324575726F7065616E4E65696768626F7572686F6F64506F6C696379
74797065733D6F74686572
Od demokracji "wirtualnej" ku europejskiej: Geneze i konsekwencje przelomu politycznego w Moldawii. Prace OSW 32/2009. = From "virtual" to European democracy - the origins and consequences of the political breakthrough in Moldova. OSW Study 32/2009
Rodkiewicz, Witold
EU-Eastern Partnership
European Neighbourhood Policy
Russia
Moldova
2009 may become a turning point in the history of post-Soviet Moldova. The country’s political class and society are faced with a fundamental choice. On the one hand, if the Party of Communists of the Republic of Moldova, which has governed the country since 2001, remains in power, this would mean a consolidation of the authoritarian rule of the party leader Vladimir Voronin, perpetuation of the superficial nature of democratic institutions and a continuation of the manoeuvring between the European Union and Russia (with the increasing risk of falling into the latter’s exclusive zone of influence). On the other hand, the take over of political power by the opposition parties creates an opportunity for Moldova to resume building a democratic, pluralistic political system based on the rule of law and to develop closer links with the European Union within the framework of the European Neighbourhood Policy, including the Eastern Partnership.
Labuszewska, Anna
Kazimierska, Katarzyna
2009-12
Other
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/58074/1/prace_32_1.pdf
Rodkiewicz, Witold (2009) Od demokracji "wirtualnej" ku europejskiej: Geneze i konsekwencje przelomu politycznego w Moldawii. Prace OSW 32/2009. = From "virtual" to European democracy - the origins and consequences of the political breakthrough in Moldova. OSW Study 32/2009. UNSPECIFIED.
http://aei.pitt.edu/58074/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:58294
2014-12-11T17:27:31Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324561737465726E506172746E657273686970
7375626A656374733D46:46303037
74797065733D706F6C6963797061706572
Germany and the Eastern Partnership. OSW Commentary No. 37, 2010-06-17
Gotkowska, Justyna
EU-Eastern Partnership
Germany
Germany perceives the Eastern Partnership as an initiative that is conducive to German interests, but at the same time as one that could undermine them. Berlin would like the Eastern Partnership to be an instrument that brings the partner countries closer to the EU economically but not politically. Germany has opted for a tightening of the economic cooperation with the partner countries, by signing deals on deep free trade areas and harmonising part of the legislation of these countries with the acquis communautaire. On the other hand, Germany does not want the Eastern Partnership to evolve and turn into an initiative that offers the partner countries prospects of membership and antagonises Russia. Therefore Germany is trying to counteract any elements of the Eastern Partnership that would help it develop in the aforementioned direction. Moreover, Germany has set its own bilateral cooperation with partner countries in the east above the joint projects of the Eastern Partnership. In doing so, Berlin’s guiding principle is that German money allocated for the projects on development cooperation in the east should bring political and economic benefits first of all to Germany.
2010-06
Policy Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/58294/1/commentary_37_0.pdf
http://www.osw.waw.pl/en/publikacje/osw-commentary/2010-06-18/germany-and-eastern-partnership
Gotkowska, Justyna (2010) Germany and the Eastern Partnership. OSW Commentary No. 37, 2010-06-17. [Policy Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/58294/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:58366
2014-12-12T19:55:41Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324561737465726E506172746E657273686970
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:44303032303130
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324575726F7065616E4E65696768626F7572686F6F64506F6C696379
74797065733D706F6C6963797061706572
European Neighbourhood Policy Package - Conclusions for the Eastern Partners. OSW Commentary No. 78, 2012-05-25
Sadowski, Rafal
EU-South-Eastern Europe (Balkans)
EU-Eastern Partnership
European Neighbourhood Policy
In 2011 the European Union began a process aimed at reforming its policy
on the Eastern and Southern Neighbourhood. The change in circumstances
in neighbouring countries following the Arab Spring, along with the lack of
significant progress regarding Eastern Europe’s integration with the EU,
formed the main driving force behind this process. The prime objective of
the changes to the European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) was the need to
introduce new incentives for partner countries to modernise and integrate
more closely with the EU Another aim was to increase the flexibility of
EU instruments (by adapting them to the specific context of each partner
state). One year later, on 15 May 2012, the European Commission and the
EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy published
the European Neighbourhood Policy Package which reported on the progress
made in the implementation of the ENP over the preceding year and
set out the aims and Action Plans for 20131.
An analysis of the outcomes of changes made to the EU policy towards
Eastern Europe and the South Caucasus suggests that the aim of the revision
was aimed more at addressing the changing political landscape in
the region rather than at the implementation of a substantial reform of
the neighbourhood policy. The ENP is largely based on bureaucratic procedures
(the negotiation of bilateral agreements, the implementation of
support programmes). These have only a limited capacity to bring about
lasting change in the region, as has been exemplified by the deterioration
of democratic standards in a number of countries; this was highlighted in
EU’s own reports. This problem is particularly clear in the case of Ukraine;
until recently it was seen as the leader of European integration but is now
raising much concern due to a deterioration in the state of democracy there.
EU instruments have a limited influence on the situation in Eastern Partnership
countries and the region’s significance on the EU’s agenda is falling
(the priority is now given to counteracting the economic crisis, and
prominence in the neighbourhood policy has been given to the Southern
Mediterranean). In response to this EU policy on Eastern Europe will focus
to a larger extent on technical and sectoral cooperation.
2012-05
Policy Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/58366/1/commentary_78.pdf
http://www.osw.waw.pl/en/publikacje/osw-commentary/2012-05-25/european-neighbourhood-policy-package-conclusions-eastern
Sadowski, Rafal (2012) European Neighbourhood Policy Package - Conclusions for the Eastern Partners. OSW Commentary No. 78, 2012-05-25. [Policy Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/58366/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:58634
2015-04-02T15:59:33Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324561737465726E506172746E657273686970
7375626A656374733D46:46303430
7375626A656374733D46:46303337
7375626A656374733D46:46303335
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324575726F7065616E4E65696768626F7572686F6F64506F6C696379
74797065733D6F74686572
Derisory Results or Reasons to be Cheerful? Evaluating the Implantation of the European Neighbourhood Policy in Ukraine, Moldova and Belarus. Natolin Research Paper 01/January 2011
Longhurst, Kerry
EU-Eastern Partnership
European Neighbourhood Policy
Ukraine
Belarus
Moldova
This paper considers the implementation of the European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) in Ukraine, Moldova and Belarus. The paper presents a portrait of the three neighbours in terms of their current political and socio-economic profiles, as well as the status of their relations with the European Union. Subsequently, it provides an overview of the development of ENP. A general set of conclusions are offered in relation to the key issue of good governance, where, the paper argues, ENP has delivered derisory results, with patchy effects across the region. Moreover, the paper identifies the democratic back-sliding in Ukraine and entenched authoritarianism in Belarus, which ENP has done very little to address. The EU’s willingness to provide better mobility options for ENP citizens to visit and work in the EU is a key test for the Eastern Partnership (EaP) in the coming year. This paper sees that whilst there are reasons to be cheerful here, with the EU’s recent offer of greater Visa Liberalisation for Ukraine and Moldova, there remains much to be done and in the meantime the EU remains a ‘Fortress Europe’. The paper concludes with a set of recommendations for ENP, which include the need to finally tackle corruption in the region, bring more differentiation into ENP, soften the EU’s borders through more generous Visa regimes, develop a more robust Belarus strategy and to think more creatively about the use of ENP funds for regional and cross- border activities.
2011-01
Other
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/58634/1/1.2011.pdf
Longhurst, Kerry (2011) Derisory Results or Reasons to be Cheerful? Evaluating the Implantation of the European Neighbourhood Policy in Ukraine, Moldova and Belarus. Natolin Research Paper 01/January 2011. UNSPECIFIED.
http://aei.pitt.edu/58634/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:58635
2015-04-02T15:59:51Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324561737465726E506172746E657273686970
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:4430303245554361756361737573
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324575726F7065616E4E65696768626F7572686F6F64506F6C696379
74797065733D6F74686572
Bringing South Caucasus Closer to Europe: Achievements and Challenges in ENP Implantation. Natolin Research Paper 03/March 2011
Delcour, Laure
Duhot, Hubert
EU-Caucasus
EU-Eastern Partnership
European Neighbourhood Policy
While the initial Commission Communication on Wider Europe (March 2003) did not include Armenia, Georgia and Azerbaijan in the forthcoming policy for the EU’s new neighbourhood, the Southern Caucasus region has now gained considerable attention in the framework of the ENP and beyond, not least because of security considerations. The ENP undoubtedly represents a step forward in the EU’s policy towards Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia, yet its implementation highlights major differences between the three countries and important weaknesses in all three of them. The Eastern Partnership addresses some of these weaknesses and it also significantly strengthens the EU’s offer to South Caucasus countries, which is now fully in line with the perspectives proposed to the Western NIS. The paper highlights five main conclusions and recommendations:
• Political, economic, social and diplomatic developments in the South Caucasus in the 2000's highlight both diverging trends and the persistence of tensions between the three countries. They also have different aspirations vis-à-vis the EU and different records in ENP implementation. The EU should therefore mainly rely upon an individual approach towards each country.
• While bilateral relations should form the basis of the EU's approach, most of the challenges faced by Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan are not confined to national borders and require regional solutions. This applies primarily, but not exclusively, to the unresolved conflicts. The EU should promote targeted regional cooperation including, inter alia, confidence-building measures to address indirectly the protracted conflicts and measures supporting drivers of change, which play a critical role in the confidence-building process;
• Under the ENP, especially since the opening of negotiations for association agreements and with the perspective of DCFTA, trade-related issues, market and regulatory reform have become prominent in the EU's relations with all three Caucasus countries. At the same time, the priorities identified when the ENP was launched, i.e. good governance and the rule of law, still correspond to major challenges in the South Caucasus. The EU should more clearly prioritise good governance and the rule of law as the basis of both the ENP and successful reforms;
• In all partner countries (but even more so in the South Caucasus), ENP implementation has been adversely affected by poor administrative capacities and weak institutional coordination. The EU should increasingly focus on institutional reform/capacity building in its support to partner countries and ensure that the link between the ENP and domestic reform processes is strengthened;
• In the South Caucasus the EU has recently concentrated on a few assistance tools such as budget support, Twinning and TAIEX. While these instruments undoubtedly bring an added value, they should be better combined with tools allowing for greater flexibility and targeting non-governmental actors, e.g. EIDHR/NSA.
2011-03
Other
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/58635/1/3.2011.pdf
Delcour, Laure and Duhot, Hubert (2011) Bringing South Caucasus Closer to Europe: Achievements and Challenges in ENP Implantation. Natolin Research Paper 03/March 2011. UNSPECIFIED.
http://aei.pitt.edu/58635/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:58636
2015-04-02T16:00:11Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324561737465726E506172746E657273686970
7375626A656374733D46:46303334
74797065733D6F74686572
Russia and its Near Neighborhood: Competition and Conflict within the EU. Natolin Research Paper 04/May 2011
Adomeit, Hannes
EU-Eastern Partnership
Russia
Russia in 2004 politely rejected the offer to become a participant in the European Neighbourhood Policy, preferring instead to pursue bilateral relations with the EU under the heading of ‘strategic partnership’. Five years later, its officials first reacted with concern to the ENP’s eastern dimension, the Eastern Partnership initiative. Quickly, however, having become convinced that the project would not amount to much, their concern gave way to indifference and derision. Furthermore, Russian representatives have failed to support idealistic or romantic notions of commonality in the area between Russia and the EU, shunned the terminology of ‘common European neighbourhood’ and replaced it in EU-Russian documents with the bland reference to ‘regions adjacent to the EU and Russian borders’. Internally, the term of the ‘near abroad’ was the official designation of the area in the Yeltsin era, and unofficially it is still in use today. As the terminological contortions suggest, Moscow officials consider the EU’s eastern neighbours as part of a Russian sphere of influence and interest. Assurances to the contrary notwithstanding, they look at the EU-Russia relationship as a ‘zero-sum game’ in which the gain of one party is the loss of the other. EU attempts to persuade the Russian power elite to regard cooperation in the common neighbourhood not as a competitive game but providing ‘win-win’ opportunities have been to no avail. In fact, conceptual approaches and practical policies conducted vis-à-vis the three Western CIS countries (Belarus, Ukraine and Moldova) and the southern Caucasus (Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan) confirm that, from Moscow’s perspective, processes of democratisation, liberalisation and integration with Western institutions in that region are contrary to Russian interests. In each and every case, therefore, the area’s ‘frozen conflicts’ have not been regarded by the Kremlin as an opportunity to promote stability and prosperity in the countries concerned but as an instrument to prevent European choices in their domestic and foreign policy. The current ‘reset’ in Russia’s relations with the United States and the ‘modernisation partnership’ with the EU have as yet failed to produce an impact on Russia’s policies in ‘its’ neighbourhood. The EU is nevertheless well advised to maintain its course of attempting to engage that country constructively, including in the common neighbourhood. However, its leverage is small. For any reorientation to occur in Moscow towards perceptions and policies of mutual benefit in the region, much would depend on Russia’s internal development.
2011-05
Other
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/58636/1/4.2011.pdf
Adomeit, Hannes (2011) Russia and its Near Neighborhood: Competition and Conflict within the EU. Natolin Research Paper 04/May 2011. UNSPECIFIED.
http://aei.pitt.edu/58636/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:58682
2020-01-08T01:13:13Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324561737465726E506172746E657273686970
7375626A656374733D46:46303430
7375626A656374733D46:46303334
7375626A656374733D46:4641726D656E6961
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324555436F6D6D6F6E7765616C7468496E646570656E64656E74537461746573434953
74797065733D776F726B696E677061706572
A Black Knight in the Eastern Neighbourhood? Russia and EU Democracy Promotion in Armenia and Moldova. EU Diplomacy Paper No. 7, October 2014
Del Medico, Nicola
EU-Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS)
EU-Eastern Partnership
Russia
Moldova
Armenia
Europe’s peace and security are challenged by the events taking place in the
Eastern Partnership region. Amid growing tensions between the European Union
(EU) and Russia, the fate of countries in the common neighbourhood and their
progress towards democracy are increasingly at stake. This paper tries to
understand to what extent Russia is undermining EU democracy promotion in the
Union’s eastern neighbourhood. By focusing on the cases of Armenia and Moldova,
EU democracy promotion is analysed in light of the triangular relationship between
the countries under scrutiny, the EU and Russia. It argues that domestic conditions
and external pressures, linked through the filter of problems of ‘stateness’, are both
crucial and mutually reinforcing for democratisation. The paper shows that Russia
can undermine EU democracy promotion to the extent that it strengthens the
aversion of domestic political forces to democracy-oriented reforms.
2014-10
Working Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/58682/2/edp_7_2014_del_medico.pdf
https://www.coleurope.eu/system/files_force/research-paper/edp_7_2014_del_medico.pdf?download=1
Del Medico, Nicola (2014) A Black Knight in the Eastern Neighbourhood? Russia and EU Democracy Promotion in Armenia and Moldova. EU Diplomacy Paper No. 7, October 2014. [Working Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/58682/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:64188
2015-05-20T13:04:18Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324561737465726E506172746E657273686970
74797065733D706F6C6963797061706572
The Eastern Partnership Riga Summit should not be a non-event. EPC Commentary, 20 May 2015
Paul, Amanda
EU-Eastern Partnership
The upcoming 21-22 May Eastern Partnership (EaP) Riga Summit will take place against the backdrop of the new geopolitical reality in the EU’s Eastern neighbourhood, in the aftermath of Russia’s annexation of Crimea and ongoing war in Eastern Ukraine. Given the extremely complex geopolitical context, the importance of the Summit and the message it delivers to the partner countries – particularly to Ukraine, Georgia and Moldova, which have made European integration their foreign policy goal – cannot be underestimated. The Summit needs to send a strong, unambiguous signal reconfirming the EU’s commitment to the EaP, and offer a clear roadmap for the future. If the Summit turns out to be a non-event, with an empty declaration, it risks being perceived as rewarding the bullying policies of Russia.
2015-05
Policy Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/64188/1/pub_5599_the_eastern_partnership_riga_summit_should_not_be_a_non%2Devent.pdf
http://www.epc.eu/pub_details.php?cat_id=4&pub_id=5599
Paul, Amanda (2015) The Eastern Partnership Riga Summit should not be a non-event. EPC Commentary, 20 May 2015. [Policy Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/64188/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:64324
2015-05-29T18:04:47Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324561737465726E506172746E657273686970
74797065733D706F6C6963797061706572
The Eastern Partnership after Riga: Review and Reconfirm. CEPS Commentary, 29 May 2015
Kostanyan , Hrant
EU-Eastern Partnership
The Riga Summit of 21-22 May reaffirmed the EU’s commitment to the Eastern Partnership, underlined further differentiation between the neighbours and reiterated the importance of people-to-people contacts, finds Hrant Kostanyan in this CEPS Commentary. All in all, however, the Summit was more of a stocktaking exercise than a momentous redefinition of relations with the EU at a time of precarious geopolitics in the east. Politically, it is important now for the EU to defend what it already offered to the eastern neighbours and reconfirm the Eastern Partnership as a defining feature of its foreign policy and fundamental to the EU’s larger Security Strategy review.
2015-05
Policy Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/64324/1/HK_Riga_summit_0.pdf
http://www.ceps.be/publications/eastern-partnership-after-riga-review-and-reconfirm
Kostanyan , Hrant (2015) The Eastern Partnership after Riga: Review and Reconfirm. CEPS Commentary, 29 May 2015. [Policy Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/64324/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:65632
2015-07-12T20:06:06Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324561737465726E506172746E657273686970
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:65636F6E6F6D696366696E616E6369616C61666661697273:6566617472616465706F6C696379
74797065733D706F6C6963797061706572
Enhancing the Prospects of the EU’s Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Areas in the Mediterranean: Lessons from the Eastern Partnership. CEPS Commentary, 24 June 2015
Van der Loo, Guillaume
EU-Eastern Partnership
trade policy
In their March 2015 Consultation paper on the review of the European Neighbourhood Policy
(ENP), the European Commission and the High Representative raised the question whether the
Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Areas (DCFTAs) “are the right objective for all or should
more tailor-made alternatives be developed, to reflect differing interests and ambitions of some
partners?” Such ambitious but complex trade agreements have now finally been signed with
Ukraine, Moldova and Georgia, but they are still on the table for several Mediterranean ENP
countries. Although these Mediterranean partners have a completely different political,
economic and legal relationship with the EU, some important lessons can be drawn from the
‘Eastern DCFTA experience’. In particular, the DCFTA negotiators should avoid overly ambitious
and ill-defined legislative approximation commitments and develop a comprehensive
implementation strategy.
2015-06
Policy Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/65632/1/GVdL_MedDCFTAs_0.pdf
http://www.ceps.eu/publications/enhancing-prospects-eu%E2%80%99s-deep-and-comprehensive-free-trade-areas-mediterranean-lessons
Van der Loo, Guillaume (2015) Enhancing the Prospects of the EU’s Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Areas in the Mediterranean: Lessons from the Eastern Partnership. CEPS Commentary, 24 June 2015. [Policy Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/65632/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:73648
2016-03-22T15:18:35Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324561737465726E506172746E657273686970
7375626A656374733D46:46303430
7375626A656374733D46:46303334
7375626A656374733D46:4647656F72676961
74797065733D706F6C6963797061706572
EU democratization policies in the Neighbourhood countries
and Russia’s reaction as a destabilizing factor. A comparative case study of Georgia and Moldova. Bruges Political Research Papers 45/2015.
Pinzari, Doina
EU-Eastern Partnership
Russia
Moldova
Georgia
The EU democratization policies have not achieved the expected results in Eastern Partnership
(EaP) countries. On the contrary, they have led to the outbreak of the most important crisis in
Europe after the end of the cold war. A new vision of cooperation in the field of democracy is
necessary in the East, as long as even Georgia and Moldova, countries considered to be the most
advanced among the EaP states, have not registered essential progress in the democratization of
their societies. Assuming that democratization, as part of EU’s neighbourhood policies, can be
considered a threat to Russia and hence a ‘destabilizing factor’ for the EU partners, this thesis
tried to understand what changes can be made to EU policies and to what extent cooperation
between EU and Russia is possible in the process developing democratization policies in Georgia
and Moldova. While arguing for the revitalization of the instruments used for the implementation
of the democratization policies, this thesis finds that cooperation between the EU and Russia in
the field of democracy is excluded as long as the two geo-political actors have different values
and different views on the notion of democracy. The most likely cooperation that might occur
between EU and Russia is the establishment of a Common Economic Space ‘from Lisbon to
Vladivostok’. Even though such a scenario would have the potential to reduce confrontation
between the two actors in the common neighbourhood, this cooperation would, however, have a
negative impact on the on-going democratic reforms in Georgia and Moldova.
2015-11
Policy Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/73648/1/wp45_pinzari.pdf
https://www.coleurope.eu/study/european-political-and-administrative-studies/research-activities/bruges-political-research
Pinzari, Doina (2015) EU democratization policies in the Neighbourhood countries and Russia’s reaction as a destabilizing factor. A comparative case study of Georgia and Moldova. Bruges Political Research Papers 45/2015. [Policy Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/73648/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:79419
2018-03-06T21:30:24Z
7374617475733D7375626D6974746564
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324561737465726E506172746E657273686970
74797065733D70726F63656564696E6773
Of Wealth and Weakness: The EU and its Eastern Neighborhood
MacFarlane, S. Neil
Menon, Anand
EU-Eastern Partnership
Introduction: In the following, we argue that, the theoretical and conceptual claims made by much of the literature on the EU’s dealings with its neighbourhood have been undermined by events in Ukraine and the rest of the Eastern Partnership states. Rather than the Union managing to ‘domesticate’ international politics by extending its governance system to its neighbours, the EU’s approach to Ukraine was significantly flawed, because it failed to take proper account of the realities of power politics and of the Russian quest for influence over what Moscow perceives to be its neighbourhood. EU policy makers overlooked the possibility that EU actions in the region might provoke a Russian response, deploying the tools that had proven so effective with the enlargements of 2003 and 2007 in a contested geographic territory with scant regard for the potential for consequent geopolitical rivalry.
In making these claims, we deploy a neoclassical realist framework that, we argue, is most suitable to a rigorous assessment and explanation of EU foreign policy. Unlike many extant theoretical explanations of EU external relations, neoclassical realism provides tools not only for assessing their appropriateness given the nature of the international system and, particularly, of relative power relations within Europe (assessments all but absent from much of the extant literature on EU policies towards its eastern neighbourhood) but also for explaining their emergence. Realist approaches to international relations emphasise the way in which states respond to external stimuli. When states do not respond effectively to these stimuli, some analyses suggest that ‘we should find evidence of domestic politics…distorting the decision-making process’ (Rathbun, 2008 296). Neoclassical Realism emerged as a way of plugging this gap between neorealist expectations of foreign policy behaviour and the actual policies pursued by states. It is interested, in other words, in the responses of particular states to specific constraints and opportunities rather than in explaining systemic outcomes.
2015
Conference Proceedings
NonPeerReviewed
application/msword
http://aei.pitt.edu/79419/1/MacFarlane.Menon.docx
MacFarlane, S. Neil and Menon, Anand (2015) Of Wealth and Weakness: The EU and its Eastern Neighborhood. [Conference Proceedings] (Submitted)
http://aei.pitt.edu/79419/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:79667
2018-03-06T20:07:41Z
7374617475733D7375626D6974746564
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324561737465726E506172746E657273686970
74797065733D70726F63656564696E6773
The Eastern Partnership’s contribution to security in Europe: bringing the political back in?
Simao, Licinia
EU-Eastern Partnership
The analysis of European security has evolved considerably over the last decades, reflecting the dynamic shifts in security studies but also the continuous reshaping of the institutional setting in the European continent. One of the most relevant features of this process is the increased prominence of the European Union as a security provider, resulting from its enlargement process and the establishment of security and defence structures. The Eastern Partnership (EaP), however, has suffered from the very beginning from the lack of a clear vision within EU structures, regarding the type of contribution it would give to this changing security context. This paper puts forward new approaches to the study of European security, informed by post-structuralist perspectives on international politics and international security. The argument for using such approaches rests with the desire to understand the formative processes that shape the current European security order and to place the EaP in this framework. It is our contention that by doing this, we will be better prepared to identify the fundamental contradictions of this policy and its flaws. Building on an eclectic combination of authors from social theory and political sociology, the paper uses the concepts of politics and political to understand how security is being defined in Europe. From the analysis, it becomes clear that the EU’s promotion of a depolicised form of politics resonates more with the maintenance of hegemonic and hierarchical forms of stability and order, than with partnerships and emancipating forms of security. This is problematic in many ways, not least due to the subjectivities it creates, but also because of the lack of objective results in providing security.
2015
Conference Proceedings
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/79667/1/Simao.pdf
Simao, Licinia (2015) The Eastern Partnership’s contribution to security in Europe: bringing the political back in? [Conference Proceedings] (Submitted)
http://aei.pitt.edu/79667/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:85955
2019-12-10T21:54:33Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324561737465726E506172746E657273686970
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:4430303245554361756361737573
74797065733D776F726B696E677061706572
EU Region-Building in the Neighbourhood. The Eastern Partnership’s Contribution in the South Caucasus. EU Diplomacy Paper 04/2017
van den Boom, Benedikt
EU-Caucasus
EU-Eastern Partnership
The promotion of regionalisation is part of the foreign policy of the European Union
(EU). However, a closer understanding of the mechanisms by which its policies work
towards this goal is lacking. Taking the South Caucasus as a case, this paper asks how
the Eastern Partnership contributes to region-building. Based on policy analysis,
discourse analysis and interviews, the study adopts a four-layered understanding of
region-building as the promotion of closer cross-border contacts: Regarding
economic linkages, the analysis underlines Georgia’s gateway function. On political
linkages, the analysis assigns importance to regulatory harmonisation as a bottom-up
tool against divisive regional discourses. Cross-border management fulfils a similar
technical role for the promotion of security linkages. Concerning cultural linkages,
Georgia is analysed as a hub for common socialisation and people-to-people
contacts. Derived from these findings, the paper induces three general hypotheses
about the mechanisms of EU contributions to region-building: while combining
bilateral with multilateral approaches and functional spill-over effects contribute to
region-building, the inclusion of non-state actors does not advance region-building.
2017-03
Working Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/85955/1/edp_4_2017_vandenboom.pdf
https://www.coleurope.eu/study/eu-international-relations-and-diplomacy-studies/research-activities/eu-diplomacy-papers
van den Boom, Benedikt (2017) EU Region-Building in the Neighbourhood. The Eastern Partnership’s Contribution in the South Caucasus. EU Diplomacy Paper 04/2017. [Working Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/85955/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:92728
2017-11-28T15:12:42Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324561737465726E506172746E657273686970
74797065733D706F6C6963797061706572
From Riga to Brussels: Georgia’s hopes for Eastern Partnership. EPC Policy Brief 20 November 2017
Andguladze, Ana
EU-Eastern Partnership
The Eastern Partnership’s fifth summit will take place this Friday in Brussels, bringing together the six EaP states (Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine) and EU institutions and member states. As one of the biggest success stories of the Eastern Partnership, and with EU membership still being its main foreign policy goal, Georgia wants the summit to deliver an ambitious declaration that sets out long-term objectives and reaffirms the EU’s strong commitment to the region. However, given the EU’s current inward-looking nature and the lack of appetite for further enlargement, such a long-term vision seems unlikely to materialise at the summit. Therefore Georgia will need to adopt a pragmatic approach, focusing on deepening EU integration in all possible areas, while at the same time addressing its own democratic shortcomings.
2017-11
Policy Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/92728/1/pub_8074_fromrigatobrussels.pdf
http://www.epc.eu/pub_details.php?cat_id=3&pub_id=8074
Andguladze, Ana (2017) From Riga to Brussels: Georgia’s hopes for Eastern Partnership. EPC Policy Brief 20 November 2017. [Policy Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/92728/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:92730
2017-11-28T15:29:25Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324561737465726E506172746E657273686970
7375626A656374733D46:46303335
74797065733D706F6C6963797061706572
Eastern Partnership summit and Ukraine’s ‘return to Europe’ at times of uncertainty. EPC Policy Brief 23 November 2017
Kobzar, Svitlana
Paul, Amanda
EU-Eastern Partnership
Ukraine
Ukraine would like the upcoming Eastern Partnership summit in Brussels to deliver a long-term strategy, including a clear European perspective for the country. But given the EU’s uncertainty about its own future, the political climate in the Union is not conducive for such bold steps at this time. In this Policy Brief, Svitlana Kobzar and Amanda Paul call for the EU to send a strong and positive message, reaffirming its commitment to the EaP, and argue that both Ukraine and the EU can do more to put Ukraine on a path to becoming a successful European state.
2017-11
Policy Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/92730/1/pub_8086_eapsummitandukraine.pdf
http://www.epc.eu/pub_details.php?cat_id=3&pub_id=8086
Kobzar, Svitlana and Paul, Amanda (2017) Eastern Partnership summit and Ukraine’s ‘return to Europe’ at times of uncertainty. EPC Policy Brief 23 November 2017. [Policy Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/92730/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:93442
2019-12-10T20:39:49Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324561737465726E506172746E657273686970
74797065733D776F726B696E677061706572
Incomplete Hegemonies, Hybrid Neighbours: Identity games and policy tools in Eastern Partnership countries. CEPS Working Document No 2018/02, February 2018
Makarychev, Andrey
EU-Eastern Partnership
This paper applies the concepts of hegemony and hybridity as analytical tools to help understand the
structural changes taking place within the Eastern Partnership (EaP) countries and beyond. The author points
to the split identities of many post-Soviet societies and the growing appeal of solutions aimed at balancing
Russia’s or the EU’s dominance as important factors shaping EaP dynamics. Against this background, he
explores how the post-Soviet borderlands can find their place in a still hypothetical pan-European space, and
free themselves from the tensions of their competing hegemons. The EaP is divided into those countries that
signed Association Agreements with the EU and those preferring to maintain their loyalty to Eurasian
integration. Bringing the two groups closer together, however, is not beyond policy imagination.
The policy-oriented part of this analysis focuses on a set of ideas and schemes aimed at enhancing interaction
and blurring divisions between these countries. The author proposes five scenarios that might shape the
future of EaP countries’ relations with the EU and with Russia: 1) the conflictual status quo in which both
hegemonic powers will seek to weaken the position of the other; 2) trilateralism (EU, Russia plus an EaP
country), which has been tried and failed, but still is considered as a possible option by some policy analysts;
3) the Kazakhstan-Armenia model of diplomatic advancement towards the EU, with some potential leverage
on Russia; 4) deeper engagement by the EU with the Eurasian Economic Union, which has some competences
for tariffs and technical standards; and 5) the decoupling of security policies from economic projects, which
is so far the most difficult option to foresee and implement in practice.
2018-02
Working Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/93442/1/WD2018%2D02_AM_IncompleteHegemonies_final.pdf
Makarychev, Andrey (2018) Incomplete Hegemonies, Hybrid Neighbours: Identity games and policy tools in Eastern Partnership countries. CEPS Working Document No 2018/02, February 2018. [Working Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/93442/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:97334
2019-05-17T21:29:22Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324561737465726E506172746E657273686970
74797065733D706F6C6963797061706572
Between a rock and a hard place: the EU and the Eastern
Partnership after the 2017 Brussels Summit. College of European Policy Brief #5.18, April 2018
Corman, Mihai-Răzvan
Băluțel, Adrian
EU-Eastern Partnership
> The November 2017 Eastern Partnership (EaP)
summit in Brussels underscored the EU’s recent
shift towards focusing mainly on politically nonsensitive sector-specific cooperation in its Eastern
neighbourhood. This new approach results from
the absence of political and economic reforms and
unfavourable geopolitical conditions in the region.
> Sobering and unambitious as it may seem, the EU’s
new EaP policy might offer unsuspected
potentialities, achieve stronger sectoral links and
have an actual impact on people’s daily lives while
maintaining a geopolitical balance.
> At the same time, the focus on sector-specific
cooperation might slow down the EU-inspired
transformation process and diminish the EU’s role
as a key player in EaP countries.
> Taking into consideration the limitations of
functional cooperation and its inability to confront
the considerably disruptive challenges on the
ground, this new approach cannot be but
temporary in nature.
> Currently stuck between a rock and a hard place,
the EU will eventually have to take a clearer stance
regarding the future of the EaP. Only relying on
horizontal technical ‘network governance’ as a tool
for rule transfer will not substantially advance the
situation in the Eastern neighbourhood. In the long
run, the challenges EaP countries are faced with
require a well-structured and politically
sustainable strategy.
2018-04
Policy Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/97334/1/corman_balutel_cepob_5%2D18.pdf
https://www.coleurope.eu/page-ref/cepob-college-europe-policy-brief-series-2
Corman, Mihai-Răzvan and Băluțel, Adrian (2018) Between a rock and a hard place: the EU and the Eastern Partnership after the 2017 Brussels Summit. College of European Policy Brief #5.18, April 2018. [Policy Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/97334/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:97349
2019-06-11T20:52:06Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324561737465726E506172746E657273686970
74797065733D706F6C6963797061706572
Novel Solutions to Resolve the Conflicts in the EU’s
Eastern Neighbourhood. College of Europe Policy Brief #2.18, February 2018
Vasilyan, Syuzanna
EU-Eastern Partnership
> The insecurity caused by the unresolved conflicts in
the EU’s Eastern neighbourhood requires
immediate solutions.
> To date, the schemes designed for resolving the
Abkhazian, South Ossetian, Nagorno-Karabakh and
Transnistrian conflicts have proven unsuccessful.
> Against the background of tensions between the
US/EU and Russia, novel solutions hinging on
security and political confidence-building
measures, and political, economic and social
remedies are advised.
> Confidence-building measures include, among
others, institutionalizing high-level meetings,
modifying the OSCE Minsk Group, safeguarding the
demilitarized zones and sending a permanent
monitoring to Nagorno-Karabakh. Additional
measures require creating a longer-term EU-Russia
monitoring mission for Abkhazia and South
Ossetia, adding a ‘civilian’ ‘wing’ to the peacekeeping mission in Transnistria, capping defence
expenditures and armaments and using preemptive and preventive measures for all conflicts.
> In terms of additional remedies, banning ‘hate
speech’, re-shaping the existing economic patterns
and supporting SMEs, as well as paving the way for
visa-free travel to Abkhazians and South Ossetians
and fostering infrastructural links would be useful
measures.
> The recommendations aim at achieving the type of
‘sustainable peace’ that the EU champions in its
Global Strategy.
2018-02
Policy Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/97349/1/vasilyan_cepob_2%2D18.pdf
https://www.coleurope.eu/page-ref/cepob-college-europe-policy-brief-series-2
Vasilyan, Syuzanna (2018) Novel Solutions to Resolve the Conflicts in the EU’s Eastern Neighbourhood. College of Europe Policy Brief #2.18, February 2018. [Policy Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/97349/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:102700
2020-04-25T18:21:12Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324561737465726E506172746E657273686970
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:44303031303436
74797065733D706F6C6963797061706572
Geopolitical symptoms of COVID-19: Narrative battles within the Eastern Partnership. Bertelsmann/Stiftung Policy Brief | 08.04.2020
Kosmehl, Miriam
public health policy (including global activities)
EU-Eastern Partnership
The spread of the latest Coronavirus strain is not simply a health crisis. It has
long taken on a geopolitical dimension. China and Russia are engaged in a
‘global battle of narratives’ over who is the most generous international power.
In the geopolitical competition for Eastern Partnership (EaP) countries, the
European Union (EU) struggles to cut a good figure. The COVID-19 crisis could
bring an EaP crisis.
2020-04
Policy Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/102700/1/EZ_Flashlight_04_2020_ENG_MK.pdf
Kosmehl, Miriam (2020) Geopolitical symptoms of COVID-19: Narrative battles within the Eastern Partnership. Bertelsmann/Stiftung Policy Brief | 08.04.2020. [Policy Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/102700/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:102708
2020-04-25T19:37:38Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324561737465726E506172746E657273686970
7375626A656374733D46:46303430
7375626A656374733D46:46303337
7375626A656374733D46:46303335
7375626A656374733D46:4641726D656E6961
7375626A656374733D46:46417A65726261696A616E
7375626A656374733D46:4647656F72676961
74797065733D706F6C6963797061706572
Eastern Partnership policy beyond 2020:
advances and omissions in a vast agenda. CEPS Commentary 14 April 2020
Emerson, Michael
Blockmans, Steven
Cenusa, Denis
Kovziridze, Tamara
Movchan, Veronika
EU-Eastern Partnership
Ukraine
Belarus
Moldova
Armenia
Azerbaijan
Georgia
The Joint Communication on the Eastern Partnership (EaP)1 published in March offers a broad
array of policy orientations but relatively little operational specificity.
This drafting is presumably intended to be acceptable to all six EaP states. The lack of reference
to the joint request of the three states with Association Agreements (AAs) – Georgia, Moldova
and Ukraine – to open a ‘quadrilogue’ with the EU to treat matters of common concern to
them, and which are not relevant or plausible in relation to the other EaP states, is a glaring
omission that could still be corrected at the EaP summit on 18 June. This summit should also
agree on EaP policy beyond 2020, with the partner states, and include the many transnational
issues worthy of quadrilateral consultations, such as how revisions of major EU policies (for
instance, on energy, climate and competition) may affect the associated states.
2020-04
Policy Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/102708/1/Eastern%2DPartnership%2Dpolicy%2Dbeyond%2D2020.pdf
Emerson, Michael and Blockmans, Steven and Cenusa, Denis and Kovziridze, Tamara and Movchan, Veronika (2020) Eastern Partnership policy beyond 2020: advances and omissions in a vast agenda. CEPS Commentary 14 April 2020. [Policy Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/102708/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:103198
2020-08-19T15:28:31Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324561737465726E506172746E657273686970
7375626A656374733D46:46303332
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:44303032303031
7375626A656374733D46:464B6F736F766F
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:44303032303130
74797065733D6F74686572
Pushing on a string? An evaluation of regional economic cooperation in the Western Balkans
Weiss, Stefani
EU-EFTA/EEA
EU-South-Eastern Europe (Balkans)
EU-Eastern Partnership
Turkey
Kosovo
This study evaluates the success of the EU’s
strategy of regional cooperation in the Western
Balkans over the last two decades from an
economic perspective.
First, we define the prerequisites for successful
regional cooperation in an institutional, political
and economic sense, and assess the extent to
which they existed in the Western Balkans at
the start of the 2000s. Second, we identify the
key facets of the EU’s strategy to deepen trade,
investment and infrastructure connectivity in the
Western Balkans, and establish the impact that
this has had. Third, we assess the state of play in
2020, and make some suggestions for the way
forward.
Our main findings are a) that many of the most
important prerequisites for regional cooperation
have not existed in the Western Balkans during
the past two decades, and that the potential gains
from the EU strategy have therefore always been
quite limited; b) that regional trade, investment
and infrastructure integration has increased
somewhat, but that there are still many gaps and
challenges ahead; and c) that these efforts have
not fundamentally altered the main obstacles
to normalising political relations in the Western
Balkans and, ultimately, to the EU accession of its constituent countries.
Our findings lead to two main conclusions. First,
regional cooperation efforts should continue,
but more effort should be focused on securing
the maximum possible level of economic
integration with the EU. Second, economic
development and EU accession in the region are
severely hamstrung by territorial disputes and
constitutional deadlock. Without a breakthrough
on these issues – and especially the normalisation
of relations between Serbia and Kosovo – no
amount of regional cooperation initiatives can fundamentally change the situation.
2020
Other
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/103198/1/Pushing_on_a_string.pdf
Weiss, Stefani (2020) Pushing on a string? An evaluation of regional economic cooperation in the Western Balkans. UNSPECIFIED.
http://aei.pitt.edu/103198/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:103286
2021-01-26T15:01:19Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324561737465726E506172746E657273686970
7375626A656374733D46:46303036
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:44303032303137
7375626A656374733D46:46303034
7375626A656374733D45:45303035
74797065733D6F74686572
Seeking an additional reassurance. The EU and France in Estonia’s security policy. OSW COMMENTARY 2020-09-23.
Szymański, Piotr
EU-ACP
EU-Eastern Partnership
NATO
Estonia
France
Over the last few years, Tallinn has been increasingly involved in military cooperation in the EU and with France. To date, Estonia is the only country on NATO’s eastern flank to join the French-led European Intervention Initiative. The country is developing the European pillar of its security policy with a view to diversifying military cooperation, which has centred primarily around the US and UK. This is due to Estonia’s concerns about the future of their military posture in Europe. However, due to the leading role of the US and UK in NATO’s deterrence and defence on the eastern flank, working with the two countries will continue to be Estonia’s security policy priority.
Apart from involvement in a number of PESCO projects, Estonia is focused on expanding its participation in the EU defence industrial cooperation. In June 2020, five Estonian-based entities received over EUR 10 million from the European Defence Industrial Development Programme, making this small country the main Central and Eastern Europe recipient of the programme funds. Estonia is also increasing its contribution to French military operations. In July 2020, roughly fifty Estonian special forces troops were sent to Mali to reinforce the French operation Takuba in the Sahel.
2020-09
Other
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/103286/1/Commentary_353.pdf
Szymański, Piotr (2020) Seeking an additional reassurance. The EU and France in Estonia’s security policy. OSW COMMENTARY 2020-09-23. UNSPECIFIED.
http://aei.pitt.edu/103286/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:103292
2021-02-03T15:21:24Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324561737465726E506172746E657273686970
7375626A656374733D46:46303037
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:44303032303039
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:44303032303035
7375626A656374733D45:45303035
74797065733D6F74686572
USA – Germany – NATO’s eastern flank. Transformation of the US military presence in Europe. OSW Commentary 2020-08-14.
Gotkowska, Justyna
EU-Central and Eastern Europe
EU-US
EU-Eastern Partnership
NATO
Germany
At the end of July, US Defence Secretary Mark Esper announced plans to withdraw approximately 12 000 US troops from Germany. Reactions in Berlin were varied. The main narrative is that of Germany being penalised and transatlantic ties being undermined. In anticipation of the US presidential election, the federal government is being guarded in its statements. The German federal states affected by the cuts have started lobbying to stop the plans. The political parties in Germany are divided in their views on the Trump administration’s decision, which is welcomed by almost half of German society. Regardless of the motives, the Pentagon’s plans show the trend in the restructuring of the US permanent military presence in Europe. US permanent forces in Europe could in future be cut further as the US is less and less engaged in the Middle East and Africa. The units being recalled from Germany will not be moved permanently to allies east of the Oder. For NATO’s eastern flank, the Pentagon is developing the concept of a flexible, scalable presence, allowing rapid reductions, but also rapid reinforcement of US forces. The changes to the US military presence in Europe are challenging for the European allies. A departure from the standard debate on the US’ withdrawal from Europe or on the NATO-Russia Founding Act is needed. The discussion is overdue on how to adapt to the transformation of the US presence with regard to collective defence within NATO, and how Europe, and not only France, should engage in crisis management in the European neighbourhood.
2020-08
Other
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/103292/1/OSW_Commentary_348.pdf
Gotkowska, Justyna (2020) USA – Germany – NATO’s eastern flank. Transformation of the US military presence in Europe. OSW Commentary 2020-08-14. UNSPECIFIED.
http://aei.pitt.edu/103292/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:103376
2021-04-21T16:11:32Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324561737465726E506172746E657273686970
7375626A656374733D46:46303430
7375626A656374733D46:46303335
7375626A656374733D46:4647656F72676961
74797065733D706F6C6963797061706572
Eastern Partnership policy beyond 2020: Advances and omissions in a vast agenda. CEPS Policy Contribution 14 Apr 2020.
Emerson, Michael
Blockmans, Steven
Cenusa, Denis
Kovziridze, Tamara
Movchan, Veronika
EU-Eastern Partnership
Ukraine
Moldova
Georgia
With the bold title EasternPartnership policy beyond 2020: Reinforcing Resilience – an Eastern Partnershipthat delivers for all, the recent EU Joint Communication offers a broad array of policy orientations but little operational specificity, find the authors of this commentary.
Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine – each with EU Association Agreements, requested a ‘quadrilogue’ with the EU to deal with matters of common concern to them but not the other EaP states. The fact that this request was not granted is a glaring omission from the Communication, but one that could still be corrected at the EaP summit on June 18th. The summit should also agree the policy direction of the EU and the Eastern partner states beyond 2020, and include the many transnational issues worthy of quadrilateral consultations. Among these issues is how the revision of major EU policies, such as those on energy, climate and competition, may affect the associated states.
2020-04
Policy Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/103376/1/Eastern%2DPartnership%2Dpolicy%2Dbeyond%2D2020.pdf
Emerson, Michael and Blockmans, Steven and Cenusa, Denis and Kovziridze, Tamara and Movchan, Veronika (2020) Eastern Partnership policy beyond 2020: Advances and omissions in a vast agenda. CEPS Policy Contribution 14 Apr 2020. [Policy Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/103376/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:103390
2021-05-12T13:50:10Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324561737465726E506172746E657273686970
7375626A656374733D46:46303334
7375626A656374733D46:46303133
7375626A656374733D46:46303337
7375626A656374733D46:46303335
7375626A656374733D41:41303035
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324575726F7065616E4E65696768626F7572686F6F64506F6C696379
74797065733D706F6C6963797061706572
Winds of change in Belarus: implications for the EU. College of Europe Policy Paper September 2020.
Kolarz, Stefania
Lozka, Katsiaryna
civil society
EU-Eastern Partnership
European Neighbourhood Policy
Lithuania
Russia
Ukraine
Belarus
The crisis in Belarus arising from the contested August 2020 presidential election is unprecedented: primarily internal, it has important repercussions for the region and the European Union.
Within the European Union, the crisis has altered the dynamics of the traditional division of labour. Despite a new leadership promise by Belarus’ neighbour Lithuania, the Union should generally focus more on speaking with one voice in this crisis.
From the regional perspective of the Eastern Partnership (EaP), the crisis has highlighted that the EU has to rethink its approach to the country, revitalize the multilateral dimension of the Partnership and further strengthen its cooperation with key cooperation partners, notably Ukraine.
From the general viewpoint of regional stability, the Belarus crisis could substantially alter security in Central Europe and cause its further militarisation. There is still a window of opportunity, however, that a national dialogue in Belarus could maintain the security-related status quo and possibly also re-dynamise EU-Russia cooperation in their ‘shared neighbourhood’.
To ultimately deal with the consequences of the 2020 elections, the EU needs to rethink its policies by enhancing humanitarian aid, retargeting political dialogue towards civil society, imposing targeted sanctions regarding Belarus and reinforcing its energy diplomacy vis-à-vis Russia.
2020-09
Policy Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/103390/1/kolarz%2Dlozka_cepob_7%2D2020_.pdf
Kolarz, Stefania and Lozka, Katsiaryna (2020) Winds of change in Belarus: implications for the EU. College of Europe Policy Paper September 2020. [Policy Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/103390/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:103402
2021-06-08T15:23:05Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324561737465726E506172746E657273686970
7375626A656374733D46:46303430
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324575726F7065616E4E65696768626F7572686F6F64506F6C696379
7375626A656374733D46:4647656F72676961
74797065733D776F726B696E677061706572
EU Education Diplomacy: Embeddedness of Erasmus+ in the EU’s Neighbourhood and Enlargement Policies. College of Europe EU Diplomacy Paper 3/2021.
Bobotsi, Constance
EU-Eastern Partnership
European Neighbourhood Policy
Moldova
Georgia
Erasmus+ is a powerful tool of public diplomacy for the European Union (EU); however, its international dimension remains under-researched. This paper seeks to help bridge
this gap by analysing the degree to which the EU’s engagement through Erasmus+ is embedded in the overarching frameworks of its neighbourhood and enlargement
policies. Drawing in particular on the experience of Georgia, the Republic of Moldova, and Bosnia and Herzegovina, the EU’s engagement in the Eastern Partnership and the Western Balkans is scrutinised under three lenses: the objectives pursued, their implementation, and the domestic receptibility of Erasmus+. The paper finds a low
degree of Erasmus+ embeddedness in the Eastern Partnership framework and a moderate degree of integration in the enlargement framework. In light of this finding,
it argues that the EU should better employ this valuable tool in its external action and diplomacy. The three countries are highly receptive, but domestic constraints must be considered in EU planning. The paper concludes with policy recommendations that seek to better embed Erasmus+ in the EU’s external policies, as well as to capitalise on
the programme’s potential as a tool for the Union’s broader diplomatic strategy.
2021-04
Working Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/103402/1/edp_3%2D2021_bobotsi.pdf
Bobotsi, Constance (2021) EU Education Diplomacy: Embeddedness of Erasmus+ in the EU’s Neighbourhood and Enlargement Policies. College of Europe EU Diplomacy Paper 3/2021. [Working Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/103402/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:103406
2021-06-08T15:28:27Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324561737465726E506172746E657273686970
7375626A656374733D44:44303031:443030316C61776C6567616C61666661697273
7375626A656374733D46:46303430
7375626A656374733D46:46303334
7375626A656374733D46:46303335
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324575726F7065616E4E65696768626F7572686F6F64506F6C696379
7375626A656374733D46:46417A65726261696A616E
7375626A656374733D46:4647656F72676961
74797065733D776F726B696E677061706572
The European Union’s Engagement with the ‘de-facto States’ in the Eastern Partnership. College of Europe EU Diplomacy Paper 8/2020.
Kolarz, Stefania
law & legal affairs-general (includes international law)
EU-Eastern Partnership
European Neighbourhood Policy
Russia
Ukraine
Moldova
Azerbaijan
Georgia
Through its enlargements and the launching of the Eastern Partnership the European Union (EU) approached Russia’s so-called near abroad. The shared neighbourhood is spotted with ‘de facto states’ such as Abkhazia, South Ossetia, Nagorno-Karabakh, Transnistria, Donetsk and Luhansk, which proclaimed independence from their ‘mother states’: Georgia, Azerbaijan, Moldova and Ukraine respectively. In the absence of international recognition, however, these self-proclaimed republics depend on the support of their patrons: Russia and, in the case of Nagorno-Karabakh, Armenia. This translates into particular legal implications for those regions: while they are formally perceived to remain integral parts of their mother states, the latter do not exercise an effective control there. Since the EU is tightening its bonds with the Eastern Partnership countries, the question arises how it engages with these de facto states. The EU’s interaction with the ‘unrecognised states’ in the Eastern Partnership is shaped by both international and EU law. While Brussels respects the international legal framework limiting its engagement (e.g. the obligation to respect the territorial integrity and sovereignty of the mother states or the lack of competence to grant recognition or establish diplomatic relations), it has found pragmatic ways to interact with the de facto states. The Union addresses those self-proclaimed republics by shaping the recognition practices of its member states, by enabling the EU Delegations and Special Representatives to have contacts with the de facto authorities, by highlighting its adherence to the principles of international law in its political statements and jurisprudence, and by pursuing a Non-recognition and Engagement Policy.
2020-11
Working Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/103406/1/edp_8_2020_kolarz.pdf
Kolarz, Stefania (2020) The European Union’s Engagement with the ‘de-facto States’ in the Eastern Partnership. College of Europe EU Diplomacy Paper 8/2020. [Working Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/103406/
oai:aei.pitt.edu:103751
2021-12-09T20:15:22Z
7374617475733D707562
7375626A656374733D44:44303032:443030324561737465726E506172746E657273686970
7375626A656374733D46:46303238
7375626A656374733D46:46303332
7375626A656374733D46:46303334
7375626A656374733D45:45303035
7375626A656374733D46:46303139
74797065733D706F6C6963797061706572
Kremlin’s quest for mare nostrum: Enhancing Black Sea security to stop Russian encroachment. EPS Commentary June 2021.
Paul, Amanda
Ciolan, Ionela
EU-Eastern Partnership
NATO
Romania
Bulgaria
Turkey
Russia
NATO must look for new ways to push back against Russia’s military build-up and hybrid activity in and around the Black Sea. It should establish a Black Sea Strategy and a unified deterrence and defence posture for its eastern flank.
The Black Sea is a strategic crossroads between Europe and Asia of enduring geopolitical and geo-economic relevance. It connects energy routes from the Caspian Sea and Central Asia to Europe. It is also a meeting point of four great forces: democracy to the West, Russian military aggression to the north, growing Chinese financial influence to the east, and Middle Eastern instability to the south.
More recently, the Black Sea has become the maritime frontline between the West and Russia. As the importance of the Black Sea grows and Russia expands and reinforces its militarisation of the region, it is high time for NATO to buttress its presence, including developing a comprehensive regional strategy. Based on peaceful measures, the strategy would improve the land, air and maritime defence of NATO’s three littoral allies – Romania, Bulgaria, Turkey – and decrease regional insecurity and the potential for unintentional conflicts.
2021-06
Policy Paper
NonPeerReviewed
application/pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/103751/1/Kremlin%E2%80%99s_quest_for_mare_nostrum_Enhancing_Black_Sea_security_to_stop.pdf
Paul, Amanda and Ciolan, Ionela (2021) Kremlin’s quest for mare nostrum: Enhancing Black Sea security to stop Russian encroachment. EPS Commentary June 2021. [Policy Paper]
http://aei.pitt.edu/103751/