Search

Begin New Search Topic Security Publication Year within 25 Years

731. NATO’s Nordic enlargement and Turkey’s reservations: Trilateral Memorandum of Understanding in the context of Turkey’s wider strategic interests

Author:
Toni Alaranta
Publication Date:
09-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Finnish Institute of International Affairs (FIIA)
Abstract:
With the signing of the trilateral Memorandum of Understanding (MoU), Turkey dropped its initial objection to Finland’s and Sweden’s NATO membership, but has since argued that the conditions agreed in the MoU have not yet been fulfilled. In addition to requiring Sweden and Finland to take a more vigorous stance regarding the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) and its extension in Syria, Turkey has used Nordic NATO applications as a tool to raise these issues on NATO’s agenda, pressuring the US in particular for a change in its Syria policy. Turkey’s reservations need to be conceptualized within its determined search for strategic autonomy, increased room for manoeuvre, and an ideological decoupling from the West. Turkey’s strategic interests have increasingly diverged from the rest of the alliance, likely leading to a more permanent intra-alliance opposition position in the coming years, part of which are the ongoing trilateral talks between Turkey, Finland and Sweden.
Topic:
Security, Defense Policy, NATO, and Regional Cooperation
Political Geography:
Europe, Turkey, and North America

732. Global South Perspectives on a Global Ban on Nuclear Weapons: A Comparative Approach

Author:
Leonardo Bandarra, Miriam Prys-Hansen, Jo-Ansie van Wyk, Layla Dawood, Monica Herz, Nir Hassid, Harsh V. Pant, and Shounak Set
Publication Date:
07-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
German Institute of Global and Area Studies
Abstract:
Banning nuclear weapons is an aspiration at the core of most disarmament and non-proliferation initiatives. It gained new momentum with the "Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons." The negotiation of that treaty, and its subsequent approval and entry into force, sheds light on the complexities and dissent surrounding diverse regional perspectives on the appropriate means and timing regarding the elimination of nuclear weapons and establishing a related global norm. Scholars from different academic backgrounds and epistemological standpoints jointly discuss these perspectives through lenses from Africa, Latin America, the Middle East, and South Asia. We seek to discuss how regional issues may shape global non-proliferation and disarmament politics, with a focus on the nuclearweapon-ban norm. This debate also reveals the broad trends and patterns organising and driving the current shifts in the global nuclear order, such as interrelations between regional and global institutions as well as domestic politics and decision-making.
Topic:
Security, Defense Policy, Arms Control and Proliferation, Nuclear Weapons, Military Strategy, and Nonproliferation
Political Geography:
Global South

733. German strengths and weaknesses in the Russo-Ukrainian war

Author:
Emmanuel Comte
Publication Date:
06-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Hellenic Foundation for European and Foreign Policy (ELIAMEP)
Abstract:
The Russian attack on Ukraine has activated a series of tropes about the international balance of power in Europe. Most mainstream opinion outlets have published criticisms of Germany for supposedly being dependent on Russia and threatening the European security system by hesitating when decisive action is required. The following points serve to reintroduce some facts into the conversation. The current war in Ukraine is primarily the result of German-Russian rivalry. The war is a case of an established power, Russia, miscalculating in its efforts to prevent a rising power, Germany, from absorbing a nation within its sphere of cooperation: Ukraine. Germany’s strategy has been subtle, seeking to manage through economic interdependence an international conflict predicated upon balance of power considerations. Since circa 1900, Turkey has also played a key role in the German security system in the Black Sea region. With the benefit of hindsight, Germany’s strategy has been the most appropriate to the situation, given that Russia has been completely isolated while Germany is surrounded by allies. Germany’s problems today are not in its Russian policy, but rather in self-defeating ideologies which include the “Green” movement and economic statism.
Topic:
Security, Foreign Policy, Economy, Regional Politics, and Russia-Ukraine War
Political Geography:
Russia, Europe, Ukraine, and Germany

734. What is new about the reset between Israel and Turkey?

Author:
Selin Nasi
Publication Date:
10-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Hellenic Foundation for European and Foreign Policy (ELIAMEP)
Abstract:
Entering 2021, revising its foreign policy became an ever more pressing necessity for Ankara, in the light of both international and domestic developments. The Turkish government only took steps towards mending its broken ties with countries in the region, including Israel, when the economic cost of its assertive policies began to threaten Erdoğan’s rule. Israeli PM Netanyahu’s defeat in the 2021 elections provided an opportunity for Ankara to step up its diplomatic overtures toward Israel. Bilateral relations may follow a different course than they did in the 2000s, primarily because the basic parameters of the relationship between Israel and Turkey have changed since Israel made new friends in the Mediterranean and the Middle East. The erosion of institutions and the subsequent personalization of Turkish foreign policy render bilateral relations prone to crisis. For Israelis, this is a manageable risk, at least for now, given the benefits Ankara can expect from normalizing relations with Israel. Against the backdrop of an intensifying power competition between the US and China, Russia’s ongoing invasion of Ukraine, and the current security landscape in the Middle East and Eastern Mediterranean, opportunities for cooperation between Israel and Turkey remain dependent on the resolution of long-standing issues.
Topic:
International Relations, Security, Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Bilateral Relations, and Strategic Competition
Political Geography:
Turkey, Middle East, and Israel

735. Georgian-Greek Relations: Building a Strategic Dimension

Author:
Ioannis N. Grigoriadis and Mariam Gugulashvili
Publication Date:
10-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Hellenic Foundation for European and Foreign Policy (ELIAMEP)
Abstract:
The cordial bilateral relations between Greece and Georgia are mostly centered on the culture and education domains, with less progress achieved in the areas of the economy, foreign policy, and security. Greece can emerge as Georgia’s key supporter in its EU membership aspirations, with Greek experts and diplomatic circles contributing their experience to the country’s EU integration process. This support can be realized at both high and low levels, through EU Twinning projects and results-oriented memoranda between state institutions to import best practices, so Georgia can successfully carry out the required democratization reforms and implement the EU Association Agreement effectively. As the international system becomes more multipolar and the strategic significance of the Black Sea and Caucasus regions increases, Greece and Georgia should work to deepen their ties and build interest-oriented synergies in order to forge a strategic alliance. The promotion of Western and European interests can be significantly aided by a democratic Georgia on the road to European integration and a resurgent Greece with a stronger regional presence in the Black Sea and Caucasus.
Topic:
Security, Foreign Policy, Bilateral Relations, European Union, and Economy
Political Geography:
Europe, Greece, and Georgia

736. Greece and Turkey in the world today: the public’s view

Author:
Ioannis N. Grigoriadis, Panagiota Manoli, and Evangelos Areteos
Publication Date:
06-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Hellenic Foundation for European and Foreign Policy (ELIAMEP)
Abstract:
The Policy Paper by Ioannis N. Grigoriadis, Senior Research Fellow, Head of ELIAMEP Turkey Programme; Associate Professor, University of Bilkent; Panagiota Manoli, Research Fellow, ELIAMEP; Assistant Professor of Political Economy of International Relations, University of Peloponnese and Evangelos Areteos, Research Associate at ELIAMEP Turkey Programme, highlights the main findings of the third joint poll in Greece and Turkey, which took place in the first ten days of May 2022. Among other things, it aims to capture and compare the perceptions of Greek and Turkish public opinion regarding Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the role of the United States and NATO in European security, and Greek and Turkish identity.
Topic:
International Relations, Security, NATO, and Public Opinion
Political Geography:
Turkey, Middle East, and Greece

737. Turkey’s quest for Strategic Autonomy

Author:
Alexandros Diakopoulos
Publication Date:
06-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Hellenic Foundation for European and Foreign Policy (ELIAMEP)
Abstract:
Ankara is pursuing a radical revision of the regional status quo by projecting power in neighboring regions with increasing aggression and disregard for international legality. Turkey moved from a security-based to a power-based foreign policy and took advantage of the power vacuum in Eastern Mediterranean to make a bid for regional hegemony by resorting to the use of hard power. The Turkish army developed autonomous expeditionary capabilities, bolstered by a strengthened national defense industry. The lessons learned in Syria clearly informed the series of Turkish foreign policy moves that followed. A revisionist Turkey involved itself in all regional theaters of conflict, fomenting instability in the region while also reaping strategic and economic benefits. These interventions shaped Turkish-Russian competitive cooperation and strategic realignment. Since 2016 the relationship has evolved into something almost symbiotic, with the two countries coordinating their presence on multiple fronts. The two countries are drawn to one another by their shared authoritarian models of governance and similar strategic cultures and operational codes: Both countries are revisionist, aggressive and assertive on their peripheries. Both countries claim to be surrounded, which serves as a pretext for their unilateral actions. Both countries have militarized their foreign policy by conducting hybrid warfare, using surrogate forces and coercing countries that resist.
Topic:
Security, Foreign Policy, Authoritarianism, Strategic Autonomy, and Regional Politics
Political Geography:
Russia, Turkey, and Middle East

738. Europe after Putin’s War: EU Foreign and Defence Policy in the new European security architecture

Author:
George Pagoulatos and Spyros Blavoukos
Publication Date:
03-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Hellenic Foundation for European and Foreign Policy (ELIAMEP)
Abstract:
Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is a game changer for Europe and the global system and a call for the EU to emerge as a coherent security actor. Any EU discussion about an autonomous EU military capacity becomes irrelevant in the face of a systemic global security challenge, such as Russia, which cannot be dealt with through the existing or envisaged EU military instruments. Faced with a security challenge on a global scale, NATO remains the only game in town. The EU ambition of developing its strategic autonomy becomes practically meaningful only within the transatlantic alliance. EU member-states should take advantage of the existing clauses that enable significant steps to be taken towards foreign and security integration. The existing Treaty framework provides legal space for significant advances in the field of foreign and security integration, even though all relevant Treaty Articles contain strong ‘brakes’ which enable member-states to retain control of the process. Enhanced cooperation in EU foreign and security policy remains an important way forward, even though there are significant safety clauses. The ‘mutual defence’ or ‘mutual assistance’ clause (Article 42(7) of TEU) and the ‘solidarity clause’ (Article 222 of TFEU) are the closest things the EU has to security guarantees. Adding teeth to 42(7) should be an EU priority. Supporting EU ‘coalitions of the willing’ (Article 44 of TEU) also provides the opportunity for swifter military action under the EU aegis. The modality of cooperation between such coalitions and the EU rapid deployment capacity, which is also envisaged in the Strategic Compass and the Permanent Structured Cooperation (PESCO), has still to be worked out. Transition to qualified majority voting (QMV) in EU foreign policy decision-making presents both advantages and disadvantages, both from the standpoint of the EU and of the dissenting member states. The EU cannot become a credible global power if it cannot reach collective decisions on EU foreign and security policy. Moving towards QMV would address structural weaknesses and serve the objective of European sovereignty. However, smaller member-states need a strong and explicit reassurance that they can always use the existing emergency brakes when they consider an issue which is to be decided on by QMV to be a matter of national security. Transition to QMV should be the result of the gradual forging of a common foreign policy understanding on the major security challenges facing the EU. Human rights issues and sanctions are a good place to start when building momentum towards QMV. In the meanwhile, the current reform effort should be focused on investing in the institutional framework of EU foreign and security policy and making good use of existing instruments.
Topic:
Security, Foreign Policy, Defense Policy, European Union, Vladimir Putin, and Russia-Ukraine War
Political Geography:
Europe

739. Achieving qualitative superiority: Greek conscription and the Turkish threat

Author:
Antonis Kamaras and Nikos Stournaras
Publication Date:
03-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Hellenic Foundation for European and Foreign Policy (ELIAMEP)
Abstract:
This policy paper argues that, by emulating its peer countries, wealthy, small to medium sized democracies facing national security threats, in Northern Europe and the Middle East (namely Finland, Norway, Denmark, Sweden and Israel), Greece can modernize its conscript component and thus attain qualitative superiority over the Turkish Army. Turkey’s conscript model is riven by deep-seated class, geographical and ethnic cleavages, giving to Greek political and military leaders the opportunity to gain a qualitative military edge through judicious modernization of the Greek conscript model. Such a modernization is eminently feasible today as Greece’s economic crisis has created the political space to overcome resistance to the reform of conscription. By contrast, Greece’s main national security threat, Turkey, belongs to that group of authoritarian or illiberal countries which have suboptimal conscription models, featuring evasion of conscript service by the well-educated, inefficient training and harsh, counterproductive treatment of those conscripts who do serve. Greece, also due to its post WWII illiberalism or authoritarianism, and not unlike Taiwan which has a similar legacy, has not infused its conscript component with demanding training and operational standards, roles and missions. The time is ripe, due to the resurgence of the Turkish threat and Greece’s economic crisis, which has removed many of the country’s outdated shibboleths, to modernise Greek conscription, as its peer countries have done, and thus acquire an Army qualitatively superior to that of Turkey. By doing so, Greek policy-makers will decisively strengthen Greece’s deterrence and produce positive externalities for the consripts themselves . Indeed, the more effective conscription becomes in operational terms for the Greek Armed Forces, the greater the benefits to be reaped in civilian life.
Topic:
Security, National Security, Armed Forces, Deterrence, and Conscription
Political Geography:
Europe, Turkey, Middle East, and Greece

740. The United Nations mission in disarmament, demobilization and reintegration in Democratic Republic of Timor-Leste

Author:
Muhammad Zahrul Anam Sugito
Publication Date:
01-2022
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Revista UNISCI/UNISCI Journal
Institution:
Unidad de investigación sobre seguridad y cooperación (UNISCI)
Abstract:
Timor-Leste during and after the process of disarmament, demobilization, and reintegration (DDR) in the years 2000-2004 did not achieve an acceptable level of security. This article, using a DDR maximalist perspective and a liberal perspective in security studies, examines the UN limitations in providing a solid problem-solving process and its implications for DDR. The qualitative data collected from several personal interviews to different stakeholders is analyzed using thematic analysis. Based on these interviews and observations this research finds that the UN had several limitations to carry out DDR in Timor-Leste, being the most salient, the weak legitimacy and the lack of professionalism in human resources.
Topic:
Security, United Nations, Disarmament, Demobilization, and Reintegration
Political Geography:
Timor-Leste and Southeast Asia