Кризис в отношениях России и ЕС: между «суверенитетом» и «европеизацией»
Marina Larionova and Vitaliy Nagornov of the Moscow High School of Economics review the prospects for progress in the five key areas for technological modernization - energy efficiency, nuclear technology, space technology and communications, medical technology and strategic information technology. The authors also examine the most important legal changes for stimulating investment and innovation, such as amendments to the list of strategic enterprises and acts on special economic zones. They emphasise the importance of higher education reform in ensuring the success of the modernization agenda. Finally they look at EU-Russia cooperation in practice taking as examples various cross border initiatives.
This study focuses on such a complex issue as an energy security. The energy security is often considered from the consumer's point of view. But it's an "umbrella term", covering a lot of concerns. This study looks at how the concept of demand security came about and how it evolved. The chapter examines requests of consuming and producing countries. Energy has a significant role in the relations between Russia and EU and this case is considered in the chapter.
This review brings out clearly the many issues concerning the EU-Russia modernisation partnership. Perhaps the most important is the differences within Russia about how far and how fast to proceed with modernisation. President Dmitry Medvedev has spoken of the need to reform Russia’s “backward” economy, to end its “primitive reliance” on oil and gas. Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, seems not to share this sense of urgency, arguing recently that modernisation was already under way, “but we need to make this development quite gradual”. Mr Putin has also been far less vocal than Mr Medvedev on the need to tackle corruption and take measures to strengthen the rule of law.
The article presents an overview of EU-Russia relations in the sphere of information security. Actors' stances in the sphere as well as obstacles for and prespectives of cooperation are discussed.
The current crisis and pause in development of the EU-Russia relations provide a unique chance to shed the burden of past problems and start new relations from scratch. Both sides shuld sort their values and get rid of the ballast generated ny the bureaucratic inertia or false understandings of partnership. Russia and Europe are unlikely to evolve a common vision for the future. Their future is not in unity but co-existing next to each other. It is time that Russia and the EU clearly formulate their real interests and try to make relations predictable. To achieve this, howeverm both sides nees to answer some basic questions.
EU-Russia relations are on the stage of fundamental rethinking. Unshakeable foundations of mutual understanding and trust have been undemined. Ukraine crisis demonstrated an absolutely different vision of european security by Russia and West. New Helsinki can become the platform for launch of common free trade zone from Lisbon o Vladivostok.
The article assesses the evolution of EU-Russian relations, identifying structural levels of analysis in them (first and foremost, the dialogue between Russia and the EU as a block and Russia and individual EU member states). Stressing the evolution in the development of two levels from synchrony to cacophony and back to synchrony, the author identified the factors, which facilitated the synchrony of the EU’s position towards Russia. Particular attention is paid to the fact that factors, which led to the synchrony of national and community levels of the EU were different before and after the Ukrainian events in 2014, which led to a pronounced and deep crisis of EU-Russian relations. The author also examines in details the growth in complexity of the structural levels of analysis in 2014-2015. Two processes led to the latter: increased importance of international organisations, where both Russia and the EU are equal members, and strengthening of the institutions of the Eurasian integration.
This is the first annual special issue of the International Organisations Research Journal published in English. It presents a collection of papers focused on the G8/G20 summitry performance, the division of labor emerging over the period of their co-existence, their comparative strengths and limitations, and how the future G8 – G20 partnership can be improved to the benefit of both, prosperity and well-being of their citizens, sustainable and balanced growth of world economy. Though the papers present the analysis and insights of the authors, they are the outcome of a collaborative research of the International Organisations Research Institute of the University Higher School of Economics and the Munk School of Global Affairs of the University of Toronto. The collection also draws on the wisdom of a network of international experts including analysts from the World Bank, Royal Institute for International Relations of Belgium, University of Ghent and Institute of Foreign Affairs and National Security (IFANS) of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade of the Republic of Korea. It opens with reflections from Dr. Vadim Lukov, Ambassador-at-Large, Deputy Representative of the President of Russia in the G8, Ministry of Foreign Affairs Coordinator for G20 and BRIC Affairs, which combine unique practical experience and analytical assessments. Most of the papers and research findings were debated in the international conference “Partnership for Progress. From the 2010 Muskoka – Toronto Summits to the Seoul Summit” organized by the International Organisations Research Institute of the University Higher School of Economics with support of Oxfam and the Department for International Development of the United Kingdom.
The paper analyses the process of establishment and development of the national system of international development assistance in Russia. The analysis covers the period starting from 2005 when key national priorities for international development assistance were defined and amounts of foreign aid were substantially increased on the threshold of Russia’s G8 Presidency preparations. The emerging structure of governance, the aid flows and amounts of allocated ODA, as well as the funding priorities in the sphere of development assistance are described on the basis of the analysis of official documents, statements and speeches of officials, reports of international institutions, and statistics available for public access. Russia’s participation in multilateral international organizations and institutions in the sphere of development cooperation is also considered. Drawing on the results of the analysis the author proposes recommendations for further development of the national system of international development assistance in Russia.
The article examines the main trends in the study of the Stalinist period and the phenomenon of Stalinism in connection with the mass opening of the archives.