| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
084712
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2008.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Abstract This article analyses the European Union's European Neighbourhood Policy in the context of the European Union as an actor employing normative power in international politics. The European Neighbourhood Policy can be seen as a substitute for the Union's enlargement that has previously been the main vehicle for the Union's normative power in Europe. By relinquishing enlargement, the EU is in danger of losing its capacity for effectively stabilising its nearest neighbours as well as losing its legitimacy and justification in their eyes. The article discusses whether the European Neighbourhood Policy can be seen as a fruitful way out of the Union's present conundrum. It concludes that at least in its present form the Neighbourhood Policy is far from a panacea. It suffers from a lack of legitimacy as a result of its inability to answer the neighbours' calls for full political and institutional belonging in Europe.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
092153
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2009.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
It seems that for the European Union (EU) its relationship with Russia is fraught with bitter frustrations. If we take the optimistic rhetoric of the 1990s at face value, then the relationship and later strategic partnership with Russia was to result in a substantial degree of convergence and cooperation between the parties. In the words of the Union's Common Strategy on Russia, the aim was nothing less than:
A stable, democratic and prosperous Russia, firmly anchored in a united Europe free of new dividing lines … [and] a stable, open and pluralistic democracy in Russia, governed by the rule of law and underpinning a prosperous market economy benefiting alike all the people of Russia and of the European Union.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
091409
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2009.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
In recent years, there has been a lively debate on "the end of the West" with the rise of authoritarian capitalist powers and the challenge they pose to the values and institutions of the West. The debate has to be qualified in two important respects. First, China and Russia have - albeit for different reasons - major stakes in the preservation of the current world order, thus making it unlikely that they will be able or willing to launch a sustained assault on it. Second, and perhaps more importantly, despite certain current similarities in their international outlook, China and Russia are in fact far from natural and permanent partners in the creation of a new anti-liberal world order. Therefore, instead of galvanising a strong resistance against the rise of China and, to a lesser extent, Russia, the future challenge for the West is to find ways to deal constructively with these countries so as to reinforce the liberal and multilateral elements of the present world order. This will necessarily require a moderate and constructive stance from China and Russia, one that can plausibly be expected in the natural course of events, provided they are given a chance to voice their legitimate concerns.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
146328
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This essay analyses and discusses the background and the evolution of the conflict in Ukraine in light of the wider contestation between the European Union and Russia. The main argument is that the conflict in Ukraine is first and foremost a symptom and not the root cause of the wider conflict between Russia and the West. The essay puts particular emphasis on examining the problems in the EU’s approach concerning the East. In particular the problems in policy and scenario planning are pointed out. The essay ends with conclusions, warning of the potential for a wider rupture and even conflict between the EU and the West and Russia.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 5 |
ID:
082270
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2008.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The Russian attitude towards the European Neighbourhood Policy constitutes a serious obstacle to the realisation of the Union's agenda in its neighbourhood. The Russian challenge takes three main forms: 1) with Russia not a part of the EU's overall approach involving the principle of conditionality, the Union's legitimacy and international actorness in general is in danger of being undermined; 2) Russia is increasingly starting to put forward its own model of operation, thus hampering the realisation of the Union's goals in the neighbourhood; 3) Russia is engaging in business activities that are in effect undoing the ENP's energy component. There are no easy fixes to these problems. What the Union must do is believe in its own values and visions: it is only by example that it can promote its ideals outside its institutional boundaries.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 6 |
ID:
120826
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2013.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
In the contemporary world also, the academic community is faced with increasing calls for being useful and relevant. But what is the actual space for academic expertise and policy analysis in the making of foreign policy? How do the two coincide and coexist temporally? The article takes its starting point the work of Robert Cox and Fred Chernoff to debate the issue of policy-relevant knowledge and theory. In addition, the article seeks to analyze the spatial and temporal aspects of providing scholarly analysis in the actual making of policy. Drawing from this, the article concludes by sketching out three strategies, or roles, a scholar may apply in trying to get the message across different audience groups and in different contingencies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|