Search

Begin New Search Topic International Community Political Geography Europe

1. Repercussions of the end of the war in Ukraine for the United Nations Security System

Author:
Carlos Espaliú Berdud
Publication Date:
06-2024
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal on International Security Studies (RESI)
Institution:
International Security Studies Group (GESI) at the University of Granada
Abstract:
Russia's invasion of Ukraine is an extraordinarily serious violation of the prohibition on the use of force that was embodied in Article 2.4 of the UN Charter after a long historical process. The fact that it was perpetrated by one of the permanent members of the Security Council implies a breach of the consensus among the Allies in World War II that gave rise to the United Nations and the system of international peacekeeping and security that it brought with it. The final outcome of the war in Ukraine may mean that the blow to the system of collective security envisaged in the Charter may be fatal, should the outcome be favourable to Russian interests, or that, despite being badly damaged, it may continue to exist, should the final outcome of the conflict be favourable to Ukrainian interests.
Topic:
Security, United Nations, Peacekeeping, International Community, UN Security Council, and Russia-Ukraine War
Political Geography:
Russia, Europe, Ukraine, and Global Focus

2. The European China Strategy to Enhance Economic Security

Author:
Hyun Jean Lee
Publication Date:
11-2024
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Korea Institute for International Economic Policy (KIEP)
Abstract:
The recent strategy change of the European countries toward China has identifiable triggering factors such as the continuation of high growth in the Chinese economy, rising status of China in the international community, and China’s FDI expansion. The West has criticized the Chinese Communist Party’s dealing with human rights issues and media control, which was further aggravated by China’s pro-Russian stance upon the outbreak of the Russian-Ukrainian war. Eventually, the European countries responded with confrontational strategies against China. This study analyzes these recent de-risking methods of the EU and four European countries – i.e., Germany, France, United Kingdom, and Poland – regarding economic relations with China. Finally, the Brief concludes with an assessment of the impact of the recent changes in Europe’s China strategy on Korea and policy recommendations.
Topic:
Human Rights, Foreign Direct Investment, International Community, Economic Security, and Russia-Ukraine War
Political Geography:
China, Europe, and Asia

3. Rebuilding Ukraine: What the International Community Now Needs to Consider

Author:
Jörn Grävingholt and Jörg Faust
Publication Date:
01-2023
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS)
Abstract:
Rebuilding Ukraine starts now – even if it is being undertaken against a backdrop of conflict, violence and destruction, with Russia continuing to wage its war of aggression. In granting Ukraine European Union (EU) candidate status, the EU has also made the country’s recovery one of its own priorities. If this reconstruction project is to succeed, then it is necessary to take into account specific contextual conditions, along with experiences from other recovery processes, such as those in the Western Balkans and Iraq. • Functional statehood: Ukraine is better placed in this regard than many other countries, particularly given the functional and widely accepted statehood throughout much of its territory. Reconstruction assistance can kick-start a forward-looking, sustainable green transformation in the economy and society. At the same time, there is a risk that massive external cash flows could feed old networks of corruption and patronage and create new ones. Clear accountability structures are required, along with sanctions for the misuse of funds, if this is to be counteracted. • Agile planning over linear phase model: Rebuilding work is taking place in an atmosphere of great uncertainty. Consequently, planning processes must be flexible in order to adapt to different war scenarios. A linear sequence of recovery phases fails to properly address the situation. This is already visible when it comes to efforts to secure critical infrastructure. Its proper functioning is essential to people’s daily lives and to all forms of reconstruction, yet this infrastructure could become a target for attacks again at any time. • Ukraine as a self-confident partner: As a result of the war’s trajectory, the Ukrainian Government is adopting a self-assured demeanour in its dealings with international donors. While this is essentially a positive thing, it can also give rise to a resistance to reform. The prospect of EU accession creates a common objective to work towards and can also establish coherent criteria for the recovery process, but only as long as accession remains a credible prospect. • Managing reconstruction assistance: Recovery funds have proven an effective means of coordination, though it remains to be seen whether there will be a single fund or several complementary ones. A central Ukraine fund should be (co-)managed on the donor end by the European Commission, as it has at its disposal the strongest reform incentive, namely EU accession. In the meantime, the EU needs to ensure that the Commission and the member states also provide the majority of the funding between them. • Diversity and inclusion: The governance structures of the reconstruction project should be designed to afford participation and a say to pluralist political institutions and civil society voices, and strengthen gender equality. In order to counter brain-drain, it is also imperative that young, mobile population groups (including refugees abroad) feel included. • Social equity: Incorporating social factors into the recovery process will also be essential. Vulnerable groups will require particular support, given the alarming level of impoverishment among the population as a result of the war. • Investment incentives: Essential reconstruction services have to be provided by the private sector. This requires that clear incentives be created, not least by providing investment guarantees. • Developing trauma sensitivity: The rebuilding work is taking place in a context of violence and trauma. This requires that all stakeholders develop a particular sensitivity in dealing with survivors of violence and engaging with a traumatised society.
Topic:
Reconstruction, International Community, Post-Conflict, and Russia-Ukraine War
Political Geography:
Europe and Ukraine

4. Developing EU Trade Incentives: A Support Tool for Refugee Self-Reliance and Host Community Resilience in Turkey

Author:
Basak Kale
Publication Date:
03-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
IEMed/EuroMeSCo
Abstract:
The European Union (EU) is developing innovative mechanisms to investigate the root causes of migration in order to offer better socioeconomic opportunities both to migrants and host communities. These mechanisms and actions require multi-country bilateral and regional assistance tools to support different partner countries. Innovative and out-of-the-box ideas include multiple countries and various stakeholders. They are developed to provide cooperation solutions in different regions to have a wider impact on the causes and implications of migration. Despite these efforts, political, social, economic and environmental causes continue to generate human mobility around and beyond the immediate neighbourhood of the EU. The Arab Spring and the civil war in Syria have been creating human mobility in the EU neighbourhood. The war made approximately 7 million Syrians flee to neighbouring countries. Turkey is hosting around 3.7 million Syrians and another half a million asylum seekers and refugees from other regions (DGMM, 2021; UNHCR, 2021). The presence of Syrians in Turkey, together with other refugees benefitting from international protection, has become protracted. The efforts to create durable solutions in the form of “voluntary return, resettlement or local integration” have not yet successfully provided sustainable solutions. Turkey does not pursue an official state integration policy to integrate asylum seekers, refugees and the Syrians under temporary protection (STP). However, STPs, asylum seekers and refugees are becoming increasingly integrated into their host communities through informal and local integration mechanisms (Kale & Erdoğan, 2019). The delay in the access to formal employment and challenges in receiving formal employment permits aggregate the difficulties in the inclusion of refugees into formal employment schemes. Summer 2015 has shown that when there is a lack of economic and employment opportunities for asylum seekers, refugees and persons under temporary protection the incentive to have onward movement to other countries persists and the possibilities of integration in host communities stay low. It is clear that resilience-building and livelihood support through formal work is essential for vulnerable populations to have dignified living conditions in host countries. The EU-Turkey Statement in 2016 triggered the development of changes in the legal framework of international protection and migration policy. The Statement paved the way for the preparation of regulations on work permits for persons under temporary and international protection (Official Gazette, 2016). Legal developments targeted the acceleration of the economic integration of refugees into the Turkish labour market through formal employment. However, the difficulties in getting formal work permits resulted in only 132,000 issued until 2019. This indicates that approximately 4% of the STP working population has formal employment (UN Turkey, 2020). This percentage more or less matches the International Labor Organization (ILO) estimations (ILO, 2020). As a result, the majority of the refugee population is working informally, underpaid (Balkan & Tümen, 2016), without formal social and health security mechanisms, in unskilled jobs that are not wanted by Turkish citizens (Sunata, 2017). Informal employment has been a key element contributing to the lack of durable solutions and a protracted process. In Turkey, informal employment is widespread even among the host community members. It is estimated that there is about 30% of labour in host community among all sectors working unregistered. Informal employment is higher in sectors such as agriculture but significantly lower in the industrial sector. The COVID- 19 pandemic has also aggravated the increasingly poor state of the Turkish economy (Akay Ertürk, 2020). Previously, there were continuous efforts through FRIT (Facility for Refugees in Turkey) and 3RP (Regional Refugee and Resilience Plan) projects with programmes focusing on improving the employability of refugees in the Turkish labour market as well as support for the entrepreneurship capacities of the refugees in accessing the formal labour market. However, under the current economic conditions these projects are failing to generate a significant long-term impact on employment for refugees (Özçürümez & İçduygu, 2020). These projects provide short-term trainings or restricted employment possibilities while including a very limited number of participants. In addition, the COVID-19 pandemic conditions have shown that these livelihood support arrangements when they are not based on rights-based approaches overtime can transform back into humanitarian aid services (Kale & Yavçan, 2020). Long-term policy planning needs to include other incentive mechanisms that will cover multi-country and multi-region solutions. In the long run, if vulnerable populations in the host societies turn into the most vulnerable requiring humanitarian and emergency aid, the incentive for secondary movements to third countries can be high.
Topic:
International Trade and Finance, Regional Cooperation, European Union, and International Community
Political Geography:
Europe and Turkey

5. Attacks on Hospitals from Syria to Ukraine: Improving Prevention and Accountability Mechanisms

Author:
Elise Baker and Gissou Nia
Publication Date:
06-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Atlantic Council
Abstract:
When Russia invaded Ukraine on February 24, 2022, it soon began implementing one of its frequent—and criminal—tactics that it had already been using in its military intervention in Syria: bombing healthcare and medical facilities. Syrian government forces first began targeting health workers in Syria in 2011 at the start of the Syria crisis, and Russia joined them in targeting the healthcare system upon its official entrance to the conflict in 2015. Over the course of the conflict, over 90 percent of 601 recorded attacks on medical facilities were attributable to either Syrian or Russian forces. In Ukraine, Russia has reportedly perpetrated more than 200 attacks on healthcare facilities and ambulances since the start of the invasion. The well-documented pattern of targeted attacks on healthcare in Syria and Ukraine undermines long-established and hard-won provisions under international humanitarian law intended to protect civilians during conflict. Despite the scale of the problem, which extends beyond Syria and Ukraine, there has been no prominent criminal prosecution of any alleged perpetrators of attacks on healthcare in any conflict, no establishment of a UN mandate dedicated to this issue, and no task force created by national governments specifically aimed at prevention of and accountability for these crimes. The international community’s failure to compel meaningful action to stop the criminal practice of targeting healthcare in conflict after conflict has resulted in continued deaths of health workers and civilian populations. In a new issue brief by the Atlantic Council Strategic Litigation Project‘s Elise Baker and Gissou Nia, the two propose recommendations to UN bodies, the World Health Organization, national governments and other institutions and decision makers for concrete actions to prevent future attacks and advance accountability for past ones.
Topic:
Syrian War, Accountability, International Community, Hospitals, and Atrocity Prevention
Political Geography:
Europe, Ukraine, Middle East, and Syria

6. Turkey-Armenia Normalization: A Quest for Realism

Author:
Hay Ertan Cohen Yanarocak
Publication Date:
01-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:
Ironically, the American recognition of the Armenian genocide removed an obstacle for Armenia and Turkey to move forward.
Topic:
Genocide, Human Rights, International Community, and Humanitarian Crisis
Political Geography:
Europe, Turkey, and Armenia

7. Coming Home to Roost: War Threatens to Spill Beyond Syria’s Borders

Author:
James M Dorsey
Publication Date:
04-2020
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
The Begin-Sadat Centre for Strategic Studies (BESA)
Abstract:
As tens of thousands more refugees are shunted by Turkey toward Europe and a new phase of the brutal Syrian war unfolds, Russia, Turkey, the EU, and the international community are being handed the bill for a flawed short-term approach to the nine-year conflict that lacked empathy for the millions of victims and was likely to magnify rather than resolve problems.
Topic:
War, Refugees, Syrian War, and International Community
Political Geography:
Russia, Europe, Turkey, Middle East, and Syria

8. NATO SPACE OPERATIONS: The Case for a New NATO Center of Excellence

Author:
Col. Paul A. Tombarge
Publication Date:
12-2014
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
George C. Marshall European Center for Security Studies
Abstract:
There is no doubt current North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) operations depend extensively upon space capabilities and, given NATO trends towards ballistic missile defense, precision, reach-back, communication, and maximum flexibility, the use of space is only likely to increase in the future. In 2012, NATO’s Joint Air Power Competence Center (JAPCC) put forth a broad framework for a NATO space policy. JAPCC originally developed the proposal and provided it to Allied Command Transformation (ACT) Space Integrated Project Team, known colloquially as the Space IPT.1 While the Space IPT subsequently decided to suspend its efforts on the policy front, development of a NATO space policy is still worthy of continued investigation.
Topic:
NATO, Military Strategy, Space, and International Community
Political Geography:
United States, Europe, North Atlantic, and North America