Search

Begin New Search Topic Dialogue Political Geography Europe

1. The politics of dialogue: How the EU can change the conversation in Kosovo and Serbia

Author:
Engjellushe Morina
Publication Date:
03-2023
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR)
Abstract:
The EU is concerned at rising tensions in the north of Kosovo and the prospect of Russian interference in disputes between Kosovo and Serbia. To address this, the EU drew up a new proposal for engagement between Kosovo and Serbia, which the two sides have agreed to. The agreement makes some progress on the unresolved question of mutual recognition but is not yet a roadmap to full normalisation. Tepid EU efforts to enable Western Balkans states to advance Euro-Atlantic ambitions are part of the reason for the unresolved issues in northern Kosovo. The EU can transform this dynamic by setting out clearer prospects for accession for both Kosovo and Serbia.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, European Union, Normalization, and Dialogue
Political Geography:
Europe, Kosovo, and Serbia

2. EU-Pacific talks: Free and Open Indo-Pacific: Bold vision for bold players

Author:
Zsanett Gréta Papp
Publication Date:
01-2023
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Europeum Institute for European Policy
Abstract:
If you missed the EU-Pacific talks: Free and Open Indo-Pacific: Bold vision for bold players, here you can read the report from the debate written by Zsanett Gréta Papp. During the debate it was discussed, for example, that although each country has its own interests concerning the region, there are several global problems that countries should face together, because one country cannot solve them. On the other hand, it is really difficult to establish dialogue with the Indo-Pacific countries.
Topic:
European Union, Geopolitics, Dialogue, and Debates
Political Geography:
Europe and Indo-Pacific

3. EU – Pacific Talks: EU – Security Challenges for the Pacific, EU, and Russia

Author:
Tomáš Moudrý
Publication Date:
01-2023
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Europeum Institute for European Policy
Abstract:
If you missed the debate EU - Pacific talks: EU - Security Challenges for the Pacific, EU, and Russia, here you can read the report from the debate written by Tomáš Moudrý. During the debate, it was discussed, for example, that despite the considerable geographical distance, the EU and the Indo-Pacific region are now more interconnected than ever before and both sides are seeking to strengthen their partnership in many areas, with security policy now one of the most important due to many factors.
Topic:
Security, European Union, Partnerships, Geopolitics, Dialogue, and Regional Security
Political Geography:
Russia, Europe, and Asia-Pacific

4. Charting a Transatlantic Approach to Russia: A Working Paper of the Transatlantic Forum on Russia

Author:
Andrea Kendall-Taylor
Publication Date:
09-2023
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for a New American Security (CNAS)
Abstract:
Although the United States and Europe are not directly engaged in the war with Russia in Ukraine, Moscow clearly sees itself as being at war with the West. The United States and Europe, therefore, must be prepared for a period of what is likely to be prolonged confrontation with Russia, with the war for Ukraine at the center of that confrontation. Successfully navigating this period of sustained confrontation requires continued cohesion and coordination between the United States and Europe to ensure they share a common picture of the challenge that Russia poses and the necessary response. Russia’s war in Ukraine has precipitated rapid and major changes in Europe and broader ripple effects that are altering political dynamics much farther afield. Because of the war in Ukraine, Russia itself is changing in still unknowable ways. Russian President Vladimir Putin is taking the country in a more authoritarian direction, Russian society is shifting, and the Russian military’s degradation in Ukraine means that the nature of the Russian threat is evolving. Russia’s war, therefore, requires the allies to re-examine long-held assumptions and understandings about Russia and its intentions and capacity, and it is those updated assessments that should guide the transatlantic partners’ future policy approach toward Moscow. There is no going back to the way things were with Russia prior to its invasion of Ukraine. Instead, Western allies must build on ongoing efforts to constrict and constrain the Kremlin’s ability to sustain aggression in Ukraine and more broadly beyond Russia’s borders. It also will require the development of a long-term and sustainable approach to restoring peace and stability to Europe, increasing resilience to the Kremlin’s tools and tactics, and planting the seeds for a less confrontational relationship with a future Russia. In many ways, such an approach will resemble the containment strategy first set out in the 1940s, a strategy designed to apply steady and forceful counterpressure to a regime whose paranoia and insecurities represented a clear danger to the West, just as the Putin regime does today. Each of the transatlantic allies’ preferred policy approaches will reflect their own proximity to and history with Russia, as well as current political realities within their own borders. Nonetheless, there is broad consensus within the alliance that the unprecedented cohesion and coordination among allies in the wake of Russia’s invasion must hold. To that end, this working paper provides a starting point for the development of a transatlantic approach to Russia. It articulates expectations for relations with Russia that should guide the allies’ approach, outlines the broad objectives that a transatlantic Russia policy should seek to accomplish, and in some cases more specific near-term actions the allies can take. The analysis reflects two years of dialogue that CNAS has conducted through its Transatlantic Forum on Russia (TFR). It brings together and builds on previous work facilitated by the Forum, including policy papers, op-eds, articles, a Senate Foreign Relations Committee testimony, “What Comes Next for U.S. Policy Toward Russia,” and other cited publications.1 The paper aims to provide fodder for policymakers and experts on both side of the Atlantic to debate and refine through continued dialogue, including through the future work of the TFR.
Topic:
Security, Defense Policy, Transatlantic Relations, Dialogue, and Russia-Ukraine War
Political Geography:
Russia and Europe

5. Resetting the Kosovo-Serbia Normalization Process

Author:
European Institute of Peace
Publication Date:
12-2023
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
European Institute of Peace (EIP)
Abstract:
This policy paper suggests a way forward to overcome the impasse in the Kosovo-Serbia normalization dialogue, and to enable conditions for a sustained process and successful implementation. It argues that the oscillating international attention and the resulting inability to closely monitor developments and conduct remedial steps at the first sign of non-compliance is an essential part of the problem. Therefore, the non-paper proposes a structural solution to reset the process and be able to identify, monitor, and address non-compliance early on, thus preventing derails and escalations.
Topic:
Bilateral Relations, Normalization, Dialogue, and Peacebuilding
Political Geography:
Europe, Kosovo, Serbia, and Balkans

6. EU- Pacific talks: U.S.-Japan relations - new leaders, new chance to restore the old relationship

Author:
Inka Koutná
Publication Date:
02-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Europeum Institute for European Policy
Abstract:
This year’s fifth debate in a series of expert discussions on the EU’s relations with the Pacific took place online on Tuesday 15th of February. The expert guests offered their views on the potential new developments and challenges in U.S.- Japan relations with new political leadership. And future challenges with consideration for a potential multilateral relation with other European countries and countries from the Indo-Pacific region.
Topic:
International Relations, European Union, Multilateralism, and Dialogue
Political Geography:
Japan, Europe, Asia, North America, and United States of America

7. EU - Pacific talks: EU - ASEAN relations: For better and for worse

Author:
Europeum
Publication Date:
11-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Europeum Institute for European Policy
Abstract:
If you missed the debate EU - Pacific talks: EU - ASEAN relations: for better and for worse, you can read the report from the debate written by Šárka Váchalová. During the debate these questions were discussed: As tensions with authoritarian powers such as Russia and China amplify, how can the EU and ASEAN partnership remain strong moving forward? What are the areas that the two regions can strengthen given the ongoing geopolitical tug of war?
Topic:
European Union, Geopolitics, ASEAN, and Dialogue
Political Geography:
Russia, China, and Europe

8. The beginning of the European Political Community

Author:
Corina Stratulat
Publication Date:
10-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
European Policy Centre (EPC)
Abstract:
The European Political Community (EPoC) idea was floated by President Macron back in May to encourage dialogue and cooperation among like-minded EU and non-EU countries on matters of common interest. It will be formally launched in the margins of the upcoming informal European Council summit in Prague, organised by the Czech EU Presidency. With the meeting just days away, the EU is under growing pressure to give some substance to Macron’s bold initiative. For the EPoC to set in motion a positive dynamic for the Union in the unfolding Zeitenwende, participating governments and leaders must take their preparations for the summit seriously. This Discussion Paper lays out short, but concrete checklists for all the essential players: Prague should organise bilateral consultations with the different invitees and collect ideas ahead of the summit. The agenda of this initial EPoC meeting should only include a limited number of substantive issues that reflect common concerns in the new geopolitical context transformed by Russia’s war in Ukraine. The organisers should also ensure that participants reserve time to discuss how the new format will run its affairs in the future. The details of the EPoC’s operational and governing structure will depend on the level of ambition that the initial participants will choose for the initiative. Establishing a community for dialogue and coordination among partners who might have diverging views and interests but also share security and economic concerns is in itself a valuable rationale for the initiative. And yet the EPoC should aspire to become more than ‘just’ a geopolitical forum for high-level dialogue. Current and potential new members in the future should aim to work in small or broad formations to align their positions in response to challenges that demand joint international action, like the energy crisis, the looming global recession and growing inequality, climate change, shifting demographics, and destabilising technological trends. EU leaders should be careful not to turn geography or democratic credentials into exclusion criteria for participants. A more legitimate and effective approach would be for the EU to rhetorically decouple its efforts to contain authoritarian Russia and rethink Europe’s role in the new global order from its desire to defend democracy and serve justice – or risk looking hypocritical in the process. Nor should EU leaders use the initiative as an excuse not to deal with internal EU reform or deliver on enlargement. Mustering the courage to embark on a European Convention that might lead to Treaty change would not only help the cause of EU hopefuls – especially if it deals with the Union’s absorption capacity, unanimity principle and lack of democratic acquis – it would also strengthen the credibility of the EU’s efforts to encourage political coordination beyond its borders. That being said, nothing stops the Balkan countries, together with Ukraine and the Republic of Moldova, from using their leverage in the EPoC format to negotiate in the margins of this and future EPoC meetings their progress in the accession process.
Topic:
International Cooperation, Politics, European Union, and Dialogue
Political Geography:
Europe

9. Germany and the UK: Perspectives for Deepening the Bilateral Dialogue on Development Policy

Author:
Niels Keijzer and Ina Friesen
Publication Date:
01-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS)
Abstract:
Germany and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (UK) are the second- and fourth-largest providers of official development assistance (ODA) worldwide and are key actors in driving international policy discussions on global development in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), the G7, the G20 and other key groupings and platforms. The development policies of both countries witnessed important convergence and detailed cooperation during the first decade of this millennium – a period when Western countries understood development cooperation as a source of considerable soft power, which was demonstrated in rising budgets and like-minded policy directions. The austerity policies that followed the global economic and financial crisis, and the UK’s decision to leave the European Union (EU) in 2016, have challenged the bilateral relationship in the development policy area between Germany and the UK. The UK’s departure from the EU has reduced the number of joint interactions and corresponding opportunities for identifying cooperation initiatives. Halfway through the period envisaged for the completion of the 2030 Agenda, both countries are adjusting their development policies, seeking to determine their future European roles and global development ambitions, but they remain key partners in global development. Both the UK and Germany have recently revised or are in the process of preparing development policy strategies as part of their integrated foreign policies – a reflection process which in recent months has been challenged to adjust to the implications of the war in Ukraine. The case remains strong for regular exchanges and cooperation on development policy between both countries, including by intensifying dialogues and resuming formal secondments between the FCDO and the German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ). Two areas in particular offer good prospects. First of all, the UK and Germany should closely work together to deliver on the current G7 Presidency agenda – including the key focus on infrastructure investment, as initiated during last year’s UK Presidency. Other key opportunities for cooperation include gender and climate action, as well as the provision of global public goods. Secondly, Germany and the UK should seek to engage in and harness the role of the OECD as a provider of key standards for international development policy and as an important forum for peer learning. As key providers of global development finance, the legitimacy of its reporting system is essential to both countries’ influence and contribution to global development.
Topic:
Development, Bilateral Relations, European Union, Development Assistance, and Dialogue
Political Geography:
United Kingdom, Europe, and Germany

10. The path to recognition: Kosovo’s and Serbia’s evolving dialogue

Author:
Engjellushe Morina
Publication Date:
06-2021
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR)
Abstract:
The EU-sponsored dialogue between Kosovo and Serbia is entering a critical phase: it is unclear whether the parties will agree on a new agenda or continue to discuss old issues. Kosovo Prime Minister Albin Kurti aims to set a new agenda for the dialogue and to place Kosovo on an equal footing with Serbia. The solution to the dispute between Kosovo and Serbia should be to create a societal consensus on both sides of the border. Kurti prefers not to prioritise the dialogue, but it is not in his interest to delay it – as this would only benefit Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic. Kosovo’s leadership should take greater responsibility for the Kosovo Serb community and provide services in areas such as healthcare and education, which are currently in the hands of the so-called ‘parallel structures’. The leadership should avoid linking this provision of services to any future Serbian concessions on Kosovo’s status. An internal dialogue would be the best way to address contentious, politicised issues such as the status of the Serbian Orthodox Church in Kosovo.
Topic:
Religion, Culture, European Union, Ethnicity, and Dialogue
Political Geography:
Europe, Eastern Europe, Kosovo, and Serbia