Search

Begin New Search Topic International Relations Publication Year within 5 Years Publication Year within 25 Years Publication Year within 10 Years

581. Turkey’s Membership Process In a Multi-Speed European Union

Author:
Ekrem Yaşar Akçay and İdris Turan
Publication Date:
07-2020
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
AURUM Journal of Social Sciences
Institution:
Altinbas University
Abstract:
The European Union, established after World War II, has strengthened the revival of Europe, which has suffered greatly due to the war in many areas, including economic, political and socio-cultural. At the same time, the European Union overtook the conflicts between states. The European Union, which has occasionally passed through major breaks since its foundation, has recently begun to evolve into a new structure called multispeed Europe. On the 60th anniversary of the signing of the Treaty of Rome, the member states, for the first time, have mentioned this new structure in an official publication. This structure has led to disagreements 13 among EU member states. On the other hand, it is also a matter of curiosity how the candidate countries will follow once this structure is created. This study assesses the potential effects of a a multi-speed European Union on Turkey-EU relations. In addition, it tries to evaluate whether the EU’s new structure will be an advantage for Turkey or not. In other words, this study aims to explore the possibility of Turkey’s EU full membership in the EU’s new model.
Topic:
International Relations, Treaties and Agreements, European Union, and Regional Integration
Political Geography:
Europe, Turkey, Middle East, and Mediterranean

582. Promoting European strategic sovereignty in Asia

Author:
Janka Oertel and Andrew Small
Publication Date:
12-2020
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR)
Abstract:
The continuing rise of China and the onset of the pandemic have made asserting European strategic sovereignty in Asia ever more complex and difficult. Both developments mean that economics, security, and technology issues in Asia are becoming ever more intertwined. On the one hand this leaves Europe exposed – its dependencies on China have grown, and the security framework that has enabled Europe’s burgeoning economic ties with the wider region is under strain. Yet as other Asian powers, and the United States under the new Biden administration, increasingly assess the emerging strategic competition through a geo-economic prism, Europe’s leverage and its opportunities for partnership have also grown. Europe should upgrade its security activities, and seize the moment to push multilateral institutions up the agenda. But it will be Europe’s connectivity agenda that provides the golden thread running through its foreign policy and its environmental, industrial, trade, development, values, and security objectives in the region.
Topic:
International Relations, Security, European Union, and COVID-19
Political Geography:
Europe and Asia

583. Promoting European strategic sovereignty in the eastern neighbourhood

Author:
Gustav Gressel
Publication Date:
12-2020
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR)
Abstract:
Since 2002, the European Union’s goal in its eastern neighbourhood has been to ensure that it is surrounded by democracies that uphold the rule of law while maintaining market economies and open societies. This goal remains relevant and important: as recent events in Belarus show, authoritarian stability in the neighbourhood has always proved to be an illusion. Russia has used political, economic, and military means to contest the EU’s support for the transition to democracy and market economies in eastern Europe. The EU’s tendency to shy away from security issues has helped make covert operations and military threats Russia’s tools of choice in the region. To counter these efforts, the EU’s neighbourhood policy should focus on the rule of law and judicial reforms, media regulation and information warfare, security sector reform and capacity building, and cyber and energy security. The EU should also add a military and security dimension to its assistance in reforming Eastern Partnership countries’ defence sectors and armed forces.
Topic:
International Relations, Authoritarianism, European Union, and Partnerships
Political Geography:
Russia and Europe

584. Climate superpowers: How the EU and China can compete and cooperate for a green future

Author:
Janka Oertel, Jennifer Tollmann, and Byford Tsang
Publication Date:
12-2020
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR)
Abstract:
The broad notion of ‘partnership’ no longer reflects the true complexity of the EU’s interactions with China in tackling the most important global challenge. Instead, as climate action becomes more material to economic interests, Europe and China will both compete and cooperate with each other, against the backdrop of an overarching systemic rivalry. To successfully manage this new reality, the EU and its member states will have to clearly define benchmarks and red lines for credible climate action, to set the framework for cooperation. At the same time, they will need to invest in future competitiveness, especially in the green technology needed to compete for markets, standards, and influence in a low-carbon world.
Topic:
International Relations, Climate Change, European Union, and Interstate Cooperation
Political Geography:
China and Europe

585. Recalibrating US-Africa Policy

Author:
James Barnett
Publication Date:
11-2020
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Hudson Institute
Abstract:
For better or worse, US-Africa policy will not be an urgent priority for the Biden-Harris administration when it takes office in January. Domestic challenges, particularly the COVID-19 pandemic and attendant economic crisis, will dominate the administration’s focus from day one. In the realm of foreign affairs, issues ranging from transatlantic relations to East Asian security are likely to command the attention of administration officials during its first months in office. Nevertheless, the day-to-day demands of the executive branch should hopefully not distract the new administration from the many challenges and opportunities Africa presents to US foreign policy. Some of these challenges are already being discussed in Washington, at least in broad terms. China’s continued efforts to build influence across Africa and the expansion of Salafi-jihadi insurgencies in various parts of the continent have been on the radar of US policymakers for several years. However, an exclusive focus on easily identifiable enemies and competitors misses the situation’s big picture and carries significant risks. Many of the impediments to US foreign policy in Africa are rooted in larger structural and ideological issues that Washington has little ability to affect in the short-term. Similarly, a black-and-white view of international politics elides the many ways external interventions impact Africa. For example, several of Washington’s Middle Eastern partners have waged proxy conflicts in East Africa that are detrimental to regional stability and, by extension, US interests. A better approach to US-Africa relations must begin, first and foremost, with a deeper understanding of the continent’s complex politics and its role within the wider international system.
Topic:
International Relations, Foreign Policy, National Security, and COVID-19
Political Geography:
Africa, China, and United States of America

586. Beyond International Relations Theory

Author:
William Smith
Publication Date:
07-2020
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Humanitas
Institution:
The Center for the Study of Statesmanship, Catholic University
Abstract:
Theories of American foreign policy are somewhat arbitrarily divided into two opposing camps: idealism and realism. Idealism involves constructing a world we hope would exist, such as freedom and democracy sweeping the globe, and then recommending foreign policy prescriptions based on this imaginary world. While realism is more firmly grounded in the world as it actually exists, it can suffer from a form of nihilism, sometimes positing that foreign policy is exclusively found in the domain of power politics and does not involve morality. The great Harvard professor Irving Babbitt refused to concede that these two lenses were the only way to view world affairs. As a fierce critic of the Romantic movement, Babbitt was particularly alarmed by the tendency of Western leaders to offer policies that were based on chimeras conjured up in their idealistic imaginations. Babbitt refused to accept an amoral realism, however, because he believed that sound statesmanship was determined by the character of statesmen and that the choices they made would not simply be matters of prudence but also a matter of character. Power may be the operative principle…
Topic:
International Relations, Foreign Policy, Hegemony, Leadership, and Ideology
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

587. Israel-Africa Relations: What Can We Learn from the Netanyahu Decade?

Author:
Benjamin Augé
Publication Date:
11-2020
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Institut français des relations internationales (IFRI)
Abstract:
Since he came to power in 2009, Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has not made Israeli-African relations a priority in his foreign policy. After they broke off diplomatic relations with Israel following the Yom Kippur War in 1973, most African states – besides Malawi, South Africa (apart from between 1975 and 1979), Swaziland and Lesotho – finally resumed relations with the Jewish state during the 1980s and 1990s and more recently for some others. The resumption of diplomatic ties was gradual, as peace efforts were initiated regarding Palestine. Israel now enjoys diplomatic relations with more than 40 sub-Saharan African states, but only has 12 embassies throughout the entire continent, including in Cairo. The last ones to be opened were in Kigali (Rwanda) in 2019 and Accra (Ghana) in 2011. The Israeli government today views Africa either as a longstanding sphere of influence (Ethiopia, Eritrea, Cameroon, Ghana, Côte d’Ivoire, Uganda and for the last two decades Rwanda) that needs to be strengthened, or as a new sphere of influence to be developed (the Sahel countries, central Africa, etc.) These relations operate through various conventional channels, including some that have been significantly weakened by Benjamin Netanyahu when he was Israeli prime minister between 1996 and 1999 and since 2009. This is particularly true for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and its counterpart, Mashav, responsible for development cooperation. However, the security and intelligence sectors (Mossad), controlled by the Prime Minister’s Office, are strong drivers of Israeli foreign policy, hence Benjamin Netanyahu’s dominance over foreign affairs in general, and Africa in particular. The objective of this paper is to explain how political, economic and security relationships between Africa and Israel have developed in practice during the decade 2009-2020. The aim here is to go beyond a mere account of the history of these relationships. Since 2009, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu – still in power at the time of writing – has frequently talked about his country’s return to the African stage, without necessarily providing his government with the financial resources to achieve this.
Topic:
International Relations, Foreign Policy, International Affairs, and Benjamin Netanyahu
Political Geography:
Africa, Middle East, and Israel

588. Ukraine’s European Integration: The Russian Factor

Author:
Hanna Pashkova and Halyna Balanovych
Publication Date:
06-2020
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
National Security and Defence
Institution:
Razumkov Centre
Abstract:
The pace and effectiveness of Kyiv’s European integration course depends on many internal and external factors. The key ones being the political will of Ukrainian government, ability to implement and dedication to real pro-European changes in the country that would be tangible for Ukrainian citizens. This is the internal factor that is the main issue on the path to integration into the European community. That being said, European integration is a two-way street. The quality and level of Kyiv-Brussels relations to a great extent depend on the position and engagement of the European side, including EU’s internal processes and trends, which are rather complex, controversial and sometimes centrifugal in their nature at the moment. We are talking about an increased sentiment of restoring partnerships with Russia in the “business as usual” format inside the EU’s business and political circles. Russian hybrid aggression is a dangerous factor. For the Russian leadership that views post-Soviet countries as its zone of “privileged” interest, an independent Ukraine headed towards Europe and NATO is both a challenge and a threat. Firstly, Kyiv’s successful European integration is an incentive for other post-Soviet countries to step up, which means a failure for Russia’s plans of “forced” reintegration of Eurasian countries. Secondly, Kyiv achieving success in its European project is a model for Russian citizens and a convincing evidence of the inability of Russia’s authoritarian regime to offer an attractive democratic model of social development. This is why the Russian regime is using all of its available “hybrid warfare” to prevent Ukraine from integrating into Europe – from political and diplomatic pressure, economic blockade, information warfare to military intervention – occupation of Crimea and Donbas. Currently, Ukraine is a training ground and a testing area for Russia’s massive purposeful expansion into the EU territory. In particular, this includes discrediting the unifying European values and institutions, disorienting public opinion, interfering with elections, formation of pro-Russian lobby within the European establishment, support of radical movements, etc. The goal of this influence is to disintegrate the EU, reform Europe’s political system in line with the Russian scenario. An important factor is the EU member states’, institutions’ and other countries’ assistance and solidarity with Ukraine, as well as sanctions introduced by the West. Regrettably, over the period of almost six years, the sanctions have failed to stop Russia’s war against Ukraine, failed to change the nature of Kremlin’s aggressive foreign policy. Yet it is certainly crucial that the EU and other countries uphold a common course of conduct in regard to Russia, maintain and strengthen the “sanctions frontline”. At the same time, assessing the current confrontation in the notional Ukraine-EU-Russia “triangle”, it is worth noting that these problems have been temporarily overshadowed by the global COVID-19 pandemic. On the one hand, the pandemic has affected internal and external priorities of different countries, has shaken the global economy. On the other – it has “hit the pause button” for Ukraine’s European integration, made adjustments to EU-Ukraine Association Agreement implementation plans. Obviously, the problems that have been temporarily postponed will later resurface again – this time in the new circumstances and in the new form.
Topic:
International Relations, European Union, Conflict, Regional Integration, and Integration
Political Geography:
Russia, Europe, and Ukraine

589. A New Direction: A Foreign Policy Playbook on Military Restraint for the Biden Team

Publication Date:
12-2020
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft
Abstract:
Two decades of endless war and a bloated Pentagon budget that has proven useless in preventing Covid–19 deaths, now 270,000 and counting, are a jarring reminder that America’s foreign policy is thoroughly broken: It actually makes America and Americans less safe. Successive administrations have deployed the military in a costly, counterproductive, and indiscriminate manner, normalizing war and treating armed dominance as an end in itself. In consequence, the foreign policies of the United States are detached from any defensible conception of U.S. interests and from a decent respect for the rights and dignity of humankind. Marginal adjustments to the current approach will prove insufficient. A deeper rethinking of American foreign policy is warranted. This must be an undertaking that puts the well-being of the American people ahead of ambitions to dominate the globe. President-elect Joe Biden appears to recognize the need for a serious reorientation. His just-named national security advisor, Jake Sullivan, recently said that Biden has tasked his foreign policy team with “reimagining our national security for the unprecedented combination of crises we face at home and abroad,” including pandemics and the climate crisis. Moreover, Sullivan said that American foreign policy has to be judged by a basic question: Does it “make life better, easier, and safer” for Americans at home? Our foreign policy, in Sullivan’s words, has to deliver for American families.
Topic:
International Relations, Foreign Policy, National Security, Military Affairs, Grand Strategy, and Joe Biden
Political Geography:
Global Focus

590. Brothers in Arms and Faith? The Emerging US-Central and Eastern Europe ‘Special Relationship’

Author:
Vibeke Schou Tjalve and Minda Holm
Publication Date:
01-2020
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Norwegian Institute of International Affairs
Abstract:
In this policy note, we explore the nature, strength and tensions of the contemporary US-Central Eastern Europe relationship. We describe the expanding US-CEE ‘brotherhood in arms’: growing trade relations, intensified military cooperation, and rekindled diplomatic ties. Further, we unpack the striking and largely ignored dimensions of the US-CEE ‘brotherhood in faith’: the many ways in which the United States and Central and Eastern Europe are tied together by overlapping ideologies of national conservatism and a particular version of Christian ‘family values’. This involves addressing the complexities of an increasingly influential and ambitious Visegrád Group, whose key players – Poland and Hungary – may be brothers, but are by no means twins. It also means raising some broader, burning discussions about the future of NATO and the meaning of ‘Europe’. Universalist, multicultural and postnational? Or conservative, Christian and sovereigntist?
Topic:
International Relations, Foreign Policy, NATO, Military Affairs, and Trade
Political Geography:
Eastern Europe, North America, Central Europe, and United States of America