|
|
|
Sort Order |
|
|
|
Items / Page
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
161351
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Nuclear assets are one of the cornerstones of credible collective deterrence of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation. Paradoxically, the most endangered member states are the ones without nuclear capabilities, left with the hope and expectation that the owners of nuclear assets will defend them and that their potential enemies are deterred by these capabilities. However, the expectations from one side, practical commitment of allies from other side may not go in harmony and synchronisation. Is there a capability gap which needs to be fulfilled? If yes then, is the gap in the side of nuclear powers or is it on the side of those endangered states who need to understand what can or cannot realistically be expected? The current article focuses on the question of how the political and military elite of the Baltic states describes their expectations in terms of using Alliance's nuclear capabilities to deter Russia's regional ambitions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
133755
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2014.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
In June 1989, the First Congress of People's Deputies of the Soviet Union established the Commission for Historical and Legal Estimation of the Soviet-German Non-aggression Pact of 1939. In the commission, representatives from Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania condemned the Soviet annexation of the Baltic States, prompting heated arguments regarding the invalidity of the related secret protocol of the pact with other members who continued to hold the traditional Soviet ideological view of the pact as something positive. The debate over the secret protocol had the further potential to extend to disputes over 'recovery of lost territory' amongst the Baltic States, Ukraine, Moldova, Belarus and Russia. This article analyses the arguments used by commission members, considering the interplay of national interests, how they balanced arguments between restoration of 'state sovereignty' and maintenance of borders, and how they finally compromised and concluded the commission's report.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
128987
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2014.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
On 1 May 2014, the European Union (EU) celebrated the tenth anniversary of the accession of ten member states-Cyprus, Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Slovakia and Slovenia. Of these ten new members, eight were Central and East European (CEE) countries that had, for most of the twentieth century, been governed by communist regimes either as republics of the Soviet Union (Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia), satellite states of the Soviet Union (Poland, Hungary, Czech Republic, Slovakia) or as a constituent republic of Yugoslavia (Slovenia). In the subsequent ten years three additional post-communist countries have acceded to the EU (Romania and Bulgaria in 2007 and Croatia in 2013). Commenting on the 2004 EU accession of the first eight former communist countries, the then Irish Prime Minister and President of the European Council, Bertie Ahern, wrote that there was
a particular historical resonance as eight of the former communist countries in the east have emerged from the shadows of the Iron Curtain to join us in working for common goals and for mutual benefit. The artificial divisions, which have blighted our continent's history for so long, are finally being laid to rest.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
022400
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
Spring 2002.
|
| Description |
105-128
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 5 |
ID:
155027
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Archana Upadhyay shows that identitarian policies in Estonia have sharpened linguistic and political differences as well as age-old resentments kept dormant under Soviet rule. The country’s vast Russian community feels neglected and discriminated against as it is largely excluded from the political process, while the majority population fears that at Moscow’s prompting, Narva and other mostly russophone enclaves might break away to join the Russian Federation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 6 |
ID:
156069
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Archana Upadhyay shows that identitarian policies in Estonia have sharpened linguistic and political differences as well as age-old resentments kept dormant under Soviet rule. The country’s vast Russian community feels neglected and discriminated against as it is largely excluded from the political process, while the majority population fears that at Moscow’s prompting, Narva and other mostly russophone enclaves might break away to join the Russian Federation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 7 |
ID:
106284
|
|
|
| 8 |
ID:
169889
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This study examines how the European Union (EU) energy policy goals are translated in Estonia, a country heavily reliant on fossil fuel oil shale and having one of the most energy-intensive economies in the EU. Drawing on Hajer's approach to discourse and different qualitative methods, we analyse the production of different low-carbon storylines. Our findings show that state and industrial actors accommodate environmentally damaging oil shale production in low-carbon energy transformation, despite good conditions for expanding renewable energy. Additionally, they limit their ambition to transform mere technological modifications to the minimum requirements of the EU GHG emission reduction target. The socio-economic conditions of workers and people living near oil shale mining areas, primarily Estonian Russians, are a critical factor in upholding oil shale as a necessity. Despite being at the centre of dominant storylines, these people are portrayed as a category that needs to be kept at ease, rather than actively engaged in constructing acceptable sustainable routes to low-carbon futures. We conclude that in order to accelerate the decarbonisation in Estonia and beyond, and unleashing the transformative potential of EU energy policy, it is vital to make marginalised voices heard and engaged in energy policy decision-making.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 9 |
ID:
150534
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Engaging with nascent scholarly efforts to foreground the ‘geo’ of geopolitics, this article examines how certain low-quality geological substances are constituted as strategic, ‘unconventional’ fossil fuel resources, the exploitation of which is deemed indispensable for energy security reasons. Based on a detailed study of oil shale exploitation in Estonia, the paper specifically analyses the politics of knowledge that enable such carbon-intensive and energy-inefficient industries to perpetuate at the national level and, moreover, subvert the neoliberal imperatives of energy sector deregulation and decarbonisation arising from EU policies. This analysis leads to two key arguments. At one level, the Estonian case evidences and contextualises the growing recognition that ‘energy security’ represents a multifaceted and dynamic construct as it highlights, in particular, the contingency of expert knowledge in its conceptualisation and performance. What counts as energy security is in this case articulated via shifting and contested modes of knowledge-making, whereby state- and market-led modes of energy governance are continuously renegotiated. At another level, however, the politics of knowledge is explained here as exercised through contending ontologies of the fossil fuel resource that pivots security claims, or ‘geo-logics’, which has multiplying effects on resource materiality.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 10 |
ID:
168581
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The geopolitical discourses of hegemonic actors dominate the inter-state system and are significant determinants of how international politics play out on the world stage. Particularly in terms of security discourses, peripheral nation-states are often considered to be pawns moved (or not) at the will of dominant nation-states across the grand chessboard of the world. This assumption, however, ignores the ability of peripheral and peripheralised nation-states to influence geopolitical agendas. Through a critical analysis of the US and Estonian discourses present during President Barack Obama’s 2014 visit to Tallinn, Estonia, immediately preceding the 2014 NATO Summit in Wales, this paper argues that historically peripheralised nation-states can leverage historical context, “good geopolitical citizenship,” changes to the international status quo, and security goals that are complementary to those of more powerful actors to influence geopolitical agendas and become important players in geopolitical strategy and action. Drawing on Ó Tuathail’s theory of geopolitics as a drama played out on the world stage and Gee’s “building tasks of language” framework for discourse analysis, this paper investigates how the complementary security discourses of President Obama and President Toomas Ilves of Estonia produced a kind of “cooperative” geopolitical agenda that advanced both US and Estonian goals for NATO’s 2014 Summit and NATO’s future plans for addressing Russian action in the post-Ukraine Crisis environment. Specifically, the analysis suggests that peripheralised countries, such as Estonia, can and do exercise agency in geopolitical processes even while dominant security discourses, such as those of the US and NATO, seek to manage them according to hegemonic priorities.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 11 |
ID:
130893
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2014.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
AFTER THE USSR'S COLLAPSE, the Baltic states came under the political influence of the US and the economic influence of the European Union. This influence was used by their new geopolitical "curators" to initiate an anti-Russian line in both the foreign and domestic policies of Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia, as well as to break their economic ties with Russia. At present, the only significant economic ties that Russia still has with the Baltic countries are in the energy sector. It's the supply of natural gas through the pipeline and distribution systems with the use of the Incukalns underground storage facility. It's also the supply of Russian electricity and rail deliveries of hydrocarbons via the Ventspils and Klaipeda ports.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 12 |
ID:
093677
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2010.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Predictions of massive social unrest, political breakdown, or reformist reversals have, to date anyway, proved misplaced.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 13 |
ID:
079867
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2007.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Taking as its point of departure the recent heightened discussion surrounding publicly sited monuments in Estonia, this article investigates the issue from the perspective of the country's eastern border city of Narva, focusing especially upon the restoration in 2000 of a 'Swedish Lion' monument to mark the 300th anniversary of Sweden's victory over Russia at the first Battle of Narva. This commemoration is characterised here as a successful local negotiation of a potentially divisive past, as are subsequent commemorations of the Russian conquest of Narva in 1704. A recent proposal to erect a statue of Peter the Great in the city, however, briefly threatened to open a new front in Estonia's ongoing 'war of monuments'. Through a discussion of these episodes, the article seeks to link the Narva case to broader conceptual issues of identity politics, nationalism and post-communist transition.
This article is the first published output from British Academy small research grant ref. SG-39197, entitled 'Public Monuments, Commemoration and the Renegotiation of Collective Identities: Estonia, Sweden and the "Baltic World
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 14 |
ID:
091750
|
|
|
| 15 |
ID:
100088
|
|
|
| 16 |
ID:
108989
|
|
|
| 17 |
ID:
121970
|
|
|
| 18 |
ID:
017102
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
April 1994.
|
| Description |
7-9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 19 |
ID:
086758
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2009.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
After the collapse of Soviet Union, Estonia took pride in becoming a model of progressive social, economic and political reform. Its accomplishments have been commendable given the fact of its enormous diversity challenge. This diversity challenge (that Estonia must effectively manage as a part of its adjustment to democracy) is largely due to massive population shifts that were a part of Soviet strategy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 20 |
ID:
060819
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|