Search

Begin New Search Topic Annexation Publication Year within 25 Years

1. Russian Disinformation and Propaganda Campaign Justifying the Annexing of Crimea in 2014

Author:
Oksana Voytyuk
Publication Date:
06-2023
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Nowa Polityka Wschodnia
Institution:
Faculty of Political Science and International Studies, Nicolaus Copernicus University in Toruń
Abstract:
On February 26, 2014, the Russian Federation annexed the Crimean Peninsula. Russia's offensive actions have been condemned in the international arena, but this has in no way changed the decision of the authorities in the Kremlin. In order to prove the credibility of the occupation of Crimea, the Russian Federation launched a disinformation and propaganda campaign aimed primarily at the internal arena, ie at the Russians. The aim of the article is to analyze selected statements by Vladimir Putin regarding the annexation of Crimea and to try to answer the question of whether disinformation and internal propaganda were effective in convincing Russians that the occupation of Crimea was an act of restoring historical justice. For the purposes of the article, research methods appropriate for international relations were used.
Topic:
Propaganda, Annexation, Disinformation, and Invasion
Political Geography:
Russia, Ukraine, Eastern Europe, and Crimea

2. One step forward, one step back: International discourse on advancing Israeli-Palestinian peacemaking

Author:
Lior Lehrs
Publication Date:
01-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Mitvim: The Israeli Institute for Regional Foreign Policies
Abstract:
The Israeli-Palestinian peace process has been locked in a stalemate since the 2014 collapse of the US mediation initiative led by then-Secretary of State John Kerry. The relations between the parties have been all but severed and characterized by a series of crises and tensions that peaked over Israel’s 2020 West Bank annexation plan. While the Israeli-Arab normalization agreements removed the annexation idea from the agenda, this did not change the Israeli-Palestinian situation. Developments in recent months in the Israeli-Palestinian arena pose challenges and risks but also new opportunities and possibilities. Special attention should be paid to the impact of the May 2021 escalation, the deep crisis in the Palestinian Authority (PA), and the establishment of a new government in Israel. This paper maps the international discourse on advancing Israeli-Palestinian peace under the current conditions, and constitutes a follow-up to the paper we published in April 2021. It is based on a series of dialogues held by Mitvim Institute experts in August and September 2021 with European, American and Palestinian diplomats and experts, as well as UN officials, and also on a series of discussions among a team of Israeli experts formed by Mitvim.[1] The paper offers an analysis of the positions and perceptions of international actors regarding the effects of the latest developments on the Israeli-Palestinian arena, and their insights and conclusions about the feasible and desired measures that could be undertaken to advance Israeli-Palestinian peace.
Topic:
Territorial Disputes, Negotiation, Peace, Annexation, and Dialogue
Political Geography:
Middle East, Israel, and Palestine

3. Russia, Ukraine and international Law

Author:
Robert Schuman Foundation (RSF)
Publication Date:
02-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Robert Schuman Foundation (RSF)
Abstract:
Russian actions in Ukraine since 2014, and the tensions to which they have led, obscure the legal aspects of these attacks thereby opening the way to propaganda and approximations. To contribute to a better understanding of what is at stake, this contribution is limited to the legal aspects of an otherwise eminently political issue. This in fact heralds a spectacular break in the international order and a violation of commitments and treaties signed by a member of the Security Council of the United Nations that have not been witnessed since the Second World War[1].For a long time, Russian diplomacy was attached to the strict and formal respect of the rules of international law, sometimes "clinging" to them in a bid to resist the demands made by the different populations. Even during the succession of the USSR, this constant was respected. However, the actions in Crimea and Donbass since 2014 have marked the abandonment of this formalism, while the Kremlin's diplomacy is promoting the need to conclude new treaties with the United States and European states so that Russia can endorse its claims.
Topic:
International Law, Conflict, Norms, Annexation, and Disputes
Political Geography:
Russia, Europe, and Ukraine

4. Security Review: Black Sea Security

Author:
Giorgi Surmava, Zurab Batiashvili, David Batashvili, and Nika Petriashvili
Publication Date:
03-2021
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Georgian Foundation for Strategic International Studies -GFSIS
Abstract:
The following anthology is dedicated to the Black Sea security situation, an issue that drew particularly focused attention following the illegal annexation of Crimea by Russia, when the Kremlin began rapid militarization of the peninsula, while also strengthening its military capabilities in the entire Black Sea basin. The Russian-Ukrainian War was soon followed by the active intervention of Russia in the Syrian conflict, further emphasizing the importance of the Black Sea, as it was precisely through the Black Sea that Russia aided hostilities in Syria and established communication lines with a Russian naval base there. Russia's active engagement in the Black Sea precipitated increased NATO interest towards the region. In recent years, NATO experts have been actively discussing the so-called "Black Sea dimension", that is, the need to develop a new strategy for the region which reflects the improved capabilities of NATO and its individual member states in the Black Sea, forging closer ties with local partners, increasing visits of naval vessels to the Sea, and resisting Russian military domination in general. The exacerbation of the situation in the Black Sea is a significant challenge for Turkey, in particular. The Montreux Convention grants Turkey a special role, which it is trying to maintain, and yet the Russian aggressive policy in the region cannot but trouble it. What role can Georgia play in this situation? What challenges or opportunities does the return of the Black Sea to the strategic map of the world bring for Georgia? This anthology presents the views of four experts from the Rondeli Foundation: General Giorgi Surmava reviews the military capabilities of the Black Sea countries; the Turkish perspective is introduced by Zurab Batiashvili; David Batashvili discusses the Russian point of view; while Alex Petriashvili deliberates the Western approach and the role of Georgia.
Topic:
Security, Military Affairs, Conflict, and Annexation
Political Geography:
Russia, Eurasia, Ukraine, Crimea, and Black Sea

5. Security Review: Russia-Ukraine Confrontation

Author:
Giorgio Bilanishvili, Zurab Batiashvili, Nika Petriashvili, and Giorgi Surmava
Publication Date:
06-2021
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Georgian Foundation for Strategic International Studies -GFSIS
Abstract:
After the occupation and annexation of Crimea in 2014, the epicenter of hostilities shifted to eastern Ukraine, specifically to the Donetsk and Luhansk regions. The Russian-speaking population was not loyal to Kyiv even before that but the events in Crimea and the Russian assistance invigorated the local separatists who, along with adventurers backed by the regular Russian troops, managed to gain control over parts of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions. The fighting turned out to be quite bloody and long lasting. There were large casualties on both sides, including civilians. Coupled with a high-profile incident of the downing of a passenger plane, it caused a wide international reverberation and world interest in resolving the conflict. The efforts of the leading OSCE countries had led to a certain agreement and the cessation of intense hostilities by September 2014. A quadripartite agreement (Germany, France, Russia, Ukraine) was achieved on the separation of the parties and a ceasefire. The line of contact was divided into sectors and precincts where a group of OSCE military observers began to monitor the “silence” regime. Since then, the intensity and scale of the hostilities have been significantly reduced. However, every now and then the situation would worsen which was followed by a new agreement on a ceasefire and the establishment of a “silence” regime. It should be noted that since March 2021, the number of incidents has increased dramatically. At the same time, regular Russian troops began to gather along Ukraine's eastern borders and Crimea.
Topic:
International Relations, National Security, Military Affairs, Conflict, Separatism, and Annexation
Political Geography:
Russia, Eurasia, Ukraine, Eastern Europe, and Crimea

6. Annexation of Crimea from the Perspective of Offensive Realism | Ofansif Realizm Bağlamında Kırım’ın İlhakı

Author:
Oğuzhan Çakır and Ayça Eminoğlu
Publication Date:
09-2020
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Novus Orbis: Journal of Politics & International Relations
Institution:
Department of International Relations, Karadeniz Technical University
Abstract:
The main purpose of this study is to understand what motives the Russian Federation, a regional power, uses military force against its neighbor, Ukraine, and annexes Crimea. As a result of the literature review conducted for this purpose, this approach of Russia was generally interpreted from two different theoretical perspectives. Some of the critics evaluated Russia's attitude during the crisis process under the name of defensive realism, while the other group, on the contrary, evaluated Russia's attitude under the name of offensive realism. The work is addressed in the context of these two theories, with a deductive approach. The great powers do not refrain from using hard power when it comes to their security. The answer has been searched to the arguments that the Revisionist movement that Russia displayed in this crisis was caused by international developments rather than domestic political developments and that there is no sanctioning power against the great powers that have become a chronic problem of international law. When the relevant study concluded, and the previous crisis experiences of Russia taking in the consideration, it is observed that Russia has similar characteristic features in this crisis as well. It has been concluded that Russia has not been able to get rid of the sense of the siege it experienced during the Cold War and has pursued aggressive policies when it feels such a threat in its nearby geography. On the other hand, what happened in Crimea has clearly shown that the great powers do not refrain from using force and ignoring international law when it comes to their benefits and security. | Bu çalışmanın temel amacı, bölgesel bir güç olan Rusya Federasyonu’nun, komşusu olan Ukrayna’ya karşı hangi saiklerle askeri güç kullandığı ve Kırım’ı ilhak ettiğidir. Bu amaç doğrultusunda yapılan literatür çalışması sonucunda, Rusya’nın bu yaklaşımı genel olarak iki farklı teorik perspektiften yorumlanmıştır. Düşünürlerin bir kısmı Rusya’nın kriz sürecindeki tutumunu defansif realizm bağlamında değerlendirmekteyken diğer grup ise tam aksine Rusya’nın tutumunu ofansif realizm bağlamında ele almışladır. Çalışma, bu iki teori bağlamında, tümdengelimci bir yaklaşımla ele alınmıştır. Büyük güçler, güvenlikleri söz konusu olduğunda sert güç kullanmaktan kaçınmamaktadırlar. Rusya’nın bu krizde sergilemiş olduğu revizyonist hareketin, iç politik gelişmelerden ziyade uluslararası gelişmelerden kaynaklandığı ve uluslararası hukukun kronik sorunu haline gelen büyük güçlere karşı bir yaptırım gücünün olmadığı argümanlarına cevap aranmıştır. İlgili çalışma sonuçlandığında, Rusya’nın geçmişte yaşadığı krizler de ele alındığında, bu krizle benzer karakteristik özelliklere sahip olduğu gözlemlenmiştir. Rusya’nın, Soğuk Savaş dönemi yaşadığı kuşatılma algısından kurtulamadığı ve yakın coğrafyasında bu şekilde bir tehdit hissettiği zaman saldırgan politikalar izlediği sonucu varılmıştır. Öte yandan Kırım’da yaşananlar, büyük güçlerin kendi menfaatleri ve güvenlikleri söz konusu olduğunda güç kullanmaktan ve uluslararası hukuku hiçe saymaktan kaçınmadıklarının açıkça göstermiştir.
Topic:
International Law, Territorial Disputes, Realism, and Annexation
Political Geography:
Russia, Ukraine, and Crimea

7. The Evaluation of Russia's Foreign Policy Towards Georgia Following the ‘Rose Revolution’

Author:
Ekaterine Lomia
Publication Date:
08-2020
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal of Liberty and International Affairs
Institution:
Institute for Research and European Studies (IRES)
Abstract:
For more than twenty-eight years, following the disintegration of the Soviet Union, Russian-Georgian relations have been a substantial ground for mutual confrontation, sharp dispute, and a lack of trust. Continuous tensions and disagreements have adversely affected efforts to achieve a proper balance in bilateral relations between the neighboring countries and resulted in a number of direct and indirect confrontations. Whilst the Russian president seeks to restore Russia’s great power status, regain its past glory and control strategically important regions of the former Soviet space, Georgia, from the very first day of independence, tries to maintain its sovereignty and territorial integrity, develop modern state institutions, strengthen democratic values and integrate into the Euro-Atlantic structures. The paper aims to study Moscow’s current foreign policy strategy towards Georgia following the ‘Rose revolution’ and argues that Russia’s military intervention in Georgia, in August 2008, was a clear illustration of classical realism used by a great power in the XXI century. Russia actively uses hybrid warfare and regularly employs economic leverage on Georgia to eventually achieve its political ends in the Caucasus region.
Topic:
Bilateral Relations, Geopolitics, Economy, and Annexation
Political Geography:
Russia, Eurasia, and Georgia

8. Wrestling with Annexation: The Elusive Search for a Policy Rationale

Author:
Robert Satloff
Publication Date:
06-2020
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
Abstract:
As soon as next month, Israel’s new government could approve plans to annex a substantial portion of the West Bank. The trigger for this comes from Washington—a shift by the Trump administration to recognize Israel’s new self-declared borders. But that still doesn’t explain why. What might Israel gain by discarding a reasonably tolerable, surprisingly sustainable status quo for a step that virtually the entire world considers a violation of law and reason? And what costs might Israel incur—strategically, diplomatically, politically, and otherwise—for carrying out annexation? In this Policy Note, Washington Institute executive director Robert Satloff looks at annexation through the prism of its advocates and finds their arguments sadly defeatist and surprisingly indifferent to the dangers the move could produce. The impact, he notes, will reach America too, given that this example of U.S.-Israel cooperation risks undermining the edifice of the bilateral relationship. But the worst outcome is by no means certain, and numerous actors are capable of dissuading Israel from taking this fateful step. All the same, the idea of annexation has now been legitimized in Israel and will surely reemerge. Ultimately, the threat annexation poses to shared U.S. and Israeli interests will only dissipate when U.S. policy no longer incentivizes it.
Topic:
International Cooperation, Territorial Disputes, and Annexation
Political Geography:
Middle East, Israel, Palestine, and United States of America

9. A Nation Divided: Palestinian Views on War and Peace with Israel

Author:
David Pollock
Publication Date:
06-2020
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
Abstract:
Recently, much attention has focused on Israel’s drift away from a two-state solution and toward annexation of the West Bank. But hard data shows that the Palestinian public has also clearly moved away from the classic compromise peace deal with its neighbors. When the Trump peace plan was announced in January, it met with wide Palestinian condemnation. More troubling, majorities of Palestinians now oppose a two-state resolution to the conflict, a reversal from previous years. They also say that even if an agreement is reached, unlikely though that may be, it should not end the conflict. Still, surveys show Palestinian pragmatism on a range of short-term issues, from economic cooperation with Israel to compromising on the “right of return” for refugees. In this Policy Focus, filled with informative charts, polling expert David Pollock explores a decade’s worth of Palestinian views on everything from Jerusalem archaeological digs to West Bank annexation. The opinions illuminate dynamics far beyond the stalled peace process, while also hinting at openings where that process could begin anew.
Topic:
Territorial Disputes, Conflict, Peace, and Annexation
Political Geography:
Middle East, Israel, and Palestine

10. Annexation Makes No Policy Sense

Author:
Daniel C. Kurtzer
Publication Date:
06-2020
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Cairo Review of Global Affairs
Institution:
School of Global Affairs and Public Policy, American University in Cairo
Abstract:
The fors and againsts of the West Bank’s annexation.
Topic:
Territorial Disputes, Borders, Annexation, and Strategic Interests
Political Geography:
Middle East, Israel, Palestine, and West Bank