Russia, the EU and the US as a security triangle. Action, Interactions and Challenges Ahead
The collective volume examines the relation between Russia, the United States and the European Union and its importance for understanding the current political situations in a global scale. Academics and scholars from the United Kingdom, the United States, Spain, Russia and Greece have contributed with their essays in this book. The book provides a deep and multidimensional perspective in the current relations between the three forces. Editors of this volume are Prof. George Voskopoulos (Assist. Professor, University of Macedonia) and Prof. Ilias Koskouvelis (Professor, University of Macedonia). The current edition highlights the critical point in the relations between Russia, US and the EU and emphasises the need to shape a common geopolitical vision that would enable a strategic co-operation through specific actions in the face of global threats. Instead what we are currently seeing is a growing drift with the EU increasingly introspect, the US shifting focus to the Pacific Rim and Asia and Russia looking to Central Eurasia and the Far East. The essays in this volume argue for the need of a joint aspiration for effective strategies of engagement and cooperation through a Eurasian-Atlantic framework. This framework can also cement the « reset » in US-Russian relations and give the wider Europe a more global geopolitical clout.
The various aspects of the relationship between Russia and the United States, Russia and countries of the European Union in the context of the Syrian crisis are analyzed. The role of international institutions (UN, NATO, EU) in conflict transformation process examined. Particular attention is paid to the prospects of cooperation between Russia and the West to repel the threat posed by the ISIL.
This chapter focuses on EU justice and home affairs (JHA) policies towards its East European neighbours. Based on the analysis of the relevant policy evolutions and academic research, it shows that migration and related issues have dominated the agenda of EU JHA cooperation with these countries. The chapter underlines that EU policies have been significantly shaped by the eastward enlargement. It also emphasizes an important distinction between EU approaches to Eastern Partnership countries, on the one hand, and Russia, on the other. This is reflected in a wide range of legally binding, non-legally binding as well as operational cooperation instruments deployed by the EU in the fields of readmission, visa liberalization and border management. The chapter devotes special attention to the inherent tension between values and interests within the external dimension of EU JHA policies in the region. This tension amplifies an important challenge of coherence of EU policies in the context of an increasing competition with Russia in the shared neighbourhood.
How is power and authority distributed in the European Union? What role does state capacity play in the framework of relations between the levels of authority in the EU? In this article, we seek to answer these questions by addressing two key approaches to the analysis of the European Union as a multi-level system of governance: the structural-actor approach and the approach of consociational democracy. While supporters of the structural-actor approach perceive the EU as a hierarchical system, where one of the levels of power is always in a position of dominance and can dictate its rules of the game, the theoreticians of European consociationalism are more interested in the issues related to the decision-making process under the conditions of “grand coalitions”, horizontal and vertical accountability and democratic deficit.
Justice and Home Affairs is one of the fastest expanding areas of research in European Studies. The European response to security concerns such as terrorism, organised crime networks, and drug trafficking as well as to the challenge of managing migration flows are salient topics of interest to an increasing number of scholars of all disciplines, the media and general public. This handbook takes stock of policy development and academic research in relation to justice and home affairs and analyses the field in an unprecedented thematic depth.
The book comprehensively investigates the field from the perspective of the three dimensions central to European integration: the sectoral (policies), the horizontal (states, regions) and the vertical (institutions, decision-making) dimensions. It also discusses the most important theoretical approaches used in this research area and provides the reader with a state of the art picture of the field.
By adopting such a comprehensive and broad-based approach, the handbook is uniquely positioned to be an important referent for scholars, practitioners and students interested in the area of justice, home affairs and European politics.
On 15 March 2019, the first “Connecting Eurasia Dialogue: From the Atlantic to the Pacific” was held in Brussels, at Europe’s political heart. The event was organized by the Roscongress Foundation and the Conoscere Eurasia Association with the support of the Association of European Businesses and the Belgian-Luxembourg Chamber of Commerce. Amid the current political cooldown, this was a unique gathering, enabling a high-level dialogue on trade, economic, and integration issues among stakeholders from the wider Eurasian space, including the European Union (EU), the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU), and China. The focus of high-level policy makers and top business executives attended the Dialogue was on challenges and opportunities of the EU’s engagement with the EAEU, harmonization of soft infrastructure to enhance trans-Eurasian connectivity, and the EAEU’s single pharmaceutical market. This IIASA discussion paper provides a summary of the deliberations, supported by research from inside and outside the Institute.
This article examines extreme-right online media as a site of discursive struggle over definitions of the causes, consequences and remedies of the European economic crisis. The authors focus on two Scandinavian countries, Denmark and Sweden, which have seen a rise in extreme-right activities across different arenas and in different media in the turbulent years since the collapse of global financial markets in 2008. Drawing on a discourse theoretical framework that builds on the work of Laclau and Mouffe (1985), the authors examine how the currently most active and visible extreme-right groups in these two countries understand and respond to the crisis as an opportunity to fuel anti-immigration discourses and prey on sentiments of instability and insecurity in the broader population, using online media to “involve members and supporters in the discursive construction of racism” (Atton 2006, 573). The analysis demonstrates how these groups look to Greece, as the “crisis epicentre”, for culturalist explanations for the Eurozone crisis and to the rise there of Golden Dawn as an inspiration for future mobilisations in Nordic and pan-European coalitions.
Mainstream research on the roles and contribution of civil society in the EU is characterised by a strong focus on European civil society in Brussels. Studies looking at activities and roles of national CSOs in the European Union (EU) depart from mainstream analytical and conceptual perspectives and rarely talk to each other. The contributions of this special issue attempt to bridge empirical and analytical gaps between existing studies on European civil society beyond Brussels. They show that the involvement of national CSOs in EU policymaking and democratisation is broader and more diverse than is usually thought. They approach the object of study from an original analytical perspective: a research agenda inspired by sociological approaches. This agenda hinges on an interactionist and pragmatic analytical framework, a pluralist approach to causality and takes into account the peculiarities and effects of context. Moving beyond Brussels and adopting diverse analytical perspectives, the contributions provide new evidence on the diversity of functions, roles and responses of national CSOs to the EU, and the roles and motivations of national CSOs implementing EU policies.
This article examines that all basic elements of a post-bipolar European system of collective security have been put to the test. This is largely due to the accumulation of a certain amount of “dysfunctions” and “threats” within the post-bipolar security system itself.