Search

Begin New Search Publishing Institution Finnish Institute of International Affairs Publication Year within 10 Years

131. Pushed together by external forces? The foreign and security policies of Estonia and Finland in the context of the Ukraine crisis

Author:
Katri Pynnöniemi, Charly Salonius-Pasternak, Mika Aaltola, and Kristi Raik
Publication Date:
01-2015
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Finnish Institute of International Affairs
Abstract:
New turbulence in the international environment is pushing Estonia and Finland closer together in the foreign and security policy domain. The Ukraine crisis has re-introduced old geopolitical constraints and concerns about national security and sovereignty, limiting the room for manoeuvre for small states. Estonia and Finland took similar positions on many key issues regarding the Ukraine crisis. The common ground is based on both countries' attachment to the liberal world order and Western structures. However, there are deep-rooted differences between the Estonian and Finnish positions on the way to handle Russia and the need to adjust security arrangements, notably the role of NATO in the Nordic-Baltic region. It is common in Finland to see Estonia's approach as unhelpfully hawkish, and common in Estonia to see Finland's approach as too accommodating towards Russia. Shared interests stem from an understanding that the weakening of the security of one country inevitably weakens the security of the other. As both countries are investing more in national security and defence, relevant bilateral cooperation is increasing.
Political Geography:
Russia, Ukraine, Finland, and Estonia

132. War on two fronts: The EU perspective on the foreign terrorist fighters of ISIL

Author:
Teemu Sinkkonen
Publication Date:
01-2015
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Finnish Institute of International Affairs
Abstract:
The ISIL surge has inspired a new generation of jihadist terrorists. The large number of foreign volunteers in Syria may cause a global terrorism blowback when ISIL is defeated in Syria/Iraq. This underlines the need for common goals and policies regarding the foreign terrorist fighter phenomenon. The EU has not been able to take a decisive role regarding the Syrian conflict and foreign terrorist fighters, but it can still play an important role in coordinating the responses of the member states. The EU could take a role in establishing common guidelines for social media regarding extremist material and agitation for violence. Finding common ground with Turkey on information gathering and sharing would be essential in preventing the travel-for-terrorism cause. Countries bordering Syria and Iraq are in danger of ISIL spill-over effects in the form of potential affiliates and organizations emulating the rebel group. Egypt and Libya are also likely to become breeding grounds for such groups.
Political Geography:
Iraq, Turkey, Libya, Syria, and Egypt

133. The US Congress and decision-making on war: Debates on war powers in the separation of powers system

Author:
Anna Kronlund
Publication Date:
02-2015
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Finnish Institute of International Affairs
Abstract:
Debates on the war-making powers of the US Congress and the President have been topical of late. President Barack Obama's actions in relation to Libya (2011), Syria (2013), and more recently the "targeted” actions against ISIL in Iraq and Syria, have raised discussions about the powers of the President as the Commander-in-Chief vis-à-vis the powers of Congress. If and when should the President seek congressional authorization for the use of US armed forces? This Working Paper argues that Congress has constitutionally established but contingently manifest powers when it comes to decision-making on war. To examine this, the paper explicates the procedures of congressional involvement in the decision-making process on war and illustrates congressional debates on the war powers between the branches of government. The recent cases of Libya and Syria are examined in more detail to indicate the (aspired) role of Congress. The powers between the branches of government are not static but rather (re)interpreted and (re)defined in different political contexts. War powers are one example to explicate the constitutional powers of the US Congress and the President that are divided, and to examine how these powers are considered and debated. While the debates are considered against the backdrop of the Constitution, the question to consider is how they relate to the political realities and power relations in changing political settings. The Working Paper also explicates the role of Congress in the broader perspective rather than through the legislative record and voting only, even though the members of Congress have particularly emphasized debate (and voting) in the decision-making process. Concepts such as collective judgment, popular sovereignty and separation of powers are used in this context to indicate the role of Congress in this field. The changing nature of war and the concept of war pose new challenges for understanding and defining the powers related to "war making”, and are reflected in the continuing debates concerning the scope and relevancy of the power of Congress (and the President) when it comes to decision-making on the use of US armed forces.
Political Geography:
United States, Iraq, Libya, and Syria

134. Turkey under the AKP: A critical evaluation from the perspective of Turkey's EU negotiations

Author:
Toni Alaranta
Publication Date:
02-2015
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Finnish Institute of International Affairs
Abstract:
Turkish social science research has been steeped in interpretations according to which Turkey's 20th century political history is marked by an uneven struggle between an "omnipotent Kemalist state” and a rather powerless society. This argument has been very coherently used by the governing Justice and Development Party (Adalet ve Kalkınma Partisi, AKP) in its articulation of the (Kemalist) Westernizer as the "domestic other”. This paper argues that Turkey's European Union membership negotiation process under the current AKP regime can only be adequately explained based on these premises. Turkey's EU accession negotiations started in October 2005, six years after the EU had confirmed the country's official candidate status. As of the beginning of 2015, only one of the 35 negotiation chapters has been completed. Thus, as the tenth anniversary of the kick-off of the accession negotiations is approaching, it is an appropriate time to ask some very basic questions concerning its nature. The present working paper tackles this issue by concentrating on the following questions: What is the nature of the AKP as a political movement, and how best to evaluate Turkey's EU bid under its rule? The paper first presents a Western view of Turkey that has been widely held during the last decade. This is followed by a short summary of the main factors that induced the EU to start official membership negotiations with Turkey. After this, the AKP's attempt to destroy what its leadership asserts is the old Kemalist regime and replace it with a "New Turkey” is evaluated. This evaluation leads to an outline of the main factors behind the AKP's EU accession negotiations. The paper argues that it is highly unlikely that the AKP can ever establish a workable liberal democracy in Turkey. A further observation directly following on from this is that the AKP regime will never be able to fulfil Turkey's EU aspirations. The dominant image of Turkey as a European country firmly in the Western camp no longer corresponds with reality. Internally, the current regime believes that Turkey's Westernization has been a degenerating process – a historical mistake – that has now been annihilated. As the internal state legitimation no longer requires anchoring Turkey to the West, but rather making the West a counter-image, a radical redefinition of Turkey's national interests and position in the world has come about.
Political Geography:
Turkey