Search

Begin New Search Topic Foreign Policy Political Geography Armenia

1. Hybrid Threats in EaP Countries: Building a Common Response

Author:
Kakha Gogolashvili, Valeriu Pasa, Mikayel Hovhannisyan, Viktor Ohiienko, and Julya Sahakyan
Publication Date:
01-2019
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Georgian Foundation for Strategic International Studies -GFSIS
Abstract:
Four non-governmental organisations from Georgia, Moldova, Armenia and Ukraine conducted a joint study assessing hybrid threats that the EaP countries are currently facing. The project aimed to study the hybrid threats which affect Eastern Partnership states and elaborate recommendations to actively engage civil society in countering them. The project envisaged the creation of a team of experts from Georgia, Moldova, Armenia and Ukraine, which would travel to the capital cities of the mentioned states and meet all relevant stakeholders from government, parliament and civil society. The meetings resulted in the collection of all necessary information, opinions and ideas on the state of institutional and legal measures taken in the countries on countering existing hybrid threats. The team of experts also undertook desk research based on accessible open sources and interviews conducted with different stakeholders, among them government officials, experts and civil society organizations. The research and study visits provided the ground for four country reviews to be written by the experts. Their reports have been integrated mutatis mutandis into the present policy paper, followed by a comparative analysis of threats and institutional responses, similarities and distinctions in the policies of the four mentioned countries. The paper also explores the role and areas of potential engagement of civil society. To effectively counter the hybrid threats, a joining of efforts of official bodies and non-state actors is required. It also needs reinforced international cooperation on a government and civil society level. The paper recommends the governments establish active cooperation among and with the EU countries with the aim of analyzing, exchanging knowledge and countering jointly, where appropriate, hybrid threats. The cooperation should target the development of an appropriate legal environment and adequate institutional capacity. Civil society itself should become more organized and consolidated. The paper advises the EaP CSF to conduct work on consolidating the efforts of civil society in the direction of strengthening the resilience of EaP countries, especially in countering attacks aiming to discredit and weaken the Europeanisation of the mentioned countries. It was advised that the EaP CSF contribute to facilitating the capacity building of civil society organizations so as to help them to actively engage in countering hybrid threats. Despite the existing differences between EaP partner states as regards their foreign policy priorities and geopolitical orientation or trade arrangement, all of them seek closer cooperation with the European Union, peaceful co-existence, and the chance to develop efficient economic ties within the wider region. Continuation of Europeanisation and interaction with EU institutions, supporting democratic transformation, economic and regulatory convergence, social cohesion and human capital development, institutional and state build up, has become irreversible thanks to the success of the EaP. The sources of the new hybrid threats predominantly aim at discrediting and weakening the motivation of the EaP partner states to further integrate with the EU. Indeed, EaP partner states understand the importance of this cooperation and are interested in countering, jointly where possible, any adverse action or attempt to disengage them from that process. Based on the results of the study, we propose a set of recommendations for the governments of EaP states, EU and NATO institutions and their member states.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Civil Society, Regional Cooperation, European Union, and Partnerships
Political Geography:
Eurasia, Ukraine, Caucasus, Moldova, Armenia, and Georgia

2. The EU’s Niche in the South Caucasus: Old Partners, New Challenges

Author:
Daniel Khachatryan
Publication Date:
01-2015
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Turkish Economic and Social Studies Foundation (TESEV)
Abstract:
Daniel Khachatryan is a Hrant Dink Foundation fellow at the Turkish Economic and Social Studies Foundation (TESEV) within the framework of the Support to the Armenia-Turkey Normalisation Process Programme financed by the European Union. Khachatryan’s academic background includes studies at Yerevan State University, University of Oslo and Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Tufts University. In this article, Khachatryan dwells upon the possible steps to be taken by the EU towars the South Caucasus in order to define its role in the region by focusing on the recent developments in Azerbaijan, Armenia and Georgia. Daniel Khachatryan, Avrupa Birliği tarafından finanse edilen ve Hrant Dink Vakfı’nın yürütmekte olduğu “Ermenistan-Türkiye Normalleşme Süreci Destek Programı” kapsamında bursiyer olarak TESEV’de çalışmaktadır. Erivan Devlet Üniversitesi, Oslo Üniversitesi ve Tufts Üniversitesi’nde eğitimini tamamlamış olan Khachatryan bu makalesinde Azerbaycan, Ermenistan ve Gürcistan’daki gelişmelere odaklanarak Avrupa Birliği’nin Güney Kafkasya’daki yeri ve rolünü tanımlamak için atması gereken muhtemel adımlara ve mekanizmalara değinmektedir. Makale yalnızca İngilizce olarak yayınlanmıştır.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Regional Cooperation, Bilateral Relations, Territorial Disputes, European Union, and Economy
Political Geography:
Europe, Turkey, Middle East, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, and South Caucasus

3. Security in the South Caucasus: the EU, NATO and Russia

Author:
Maria Raquel Freire
Publication Date:
03-2013
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Norwegian Centre for Conflict Resolution
Abstract:
TThis policy brief focuses on the interplay of external actors in the South Caucasus, i.e. the EU, NATO and Russia, looking specifically at how political and security relations have been shaped. Three main issues are highlighted: firstly, that the South Caucasus is a heterogeneous area and that the concept of being a region in its own right is underdeveloped; secondly, that despite the enlarged involvement of international players in the area, the South Caucasian countries retain agency and are not mere agents of foreign role-players; and, thirdly, that the area is characterised by processes of competition and collaboration that do not necessarily meet common agendas, despite shared interests regarding regional stability. The paths of the three South Caucasian republics has been different, with Armenia being dependent on Russia, Azerbaijan pursuing a policy of independence regarding external players, and Georgia assuming a pro-Western, anti-Russian position. The lack of diplomatic relations between Armenia and Azerbaijan due to the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, EU involvement in crisis management in the wake of Georgia's 2008 war with Russia, a diminished NATO presence and increased Russian assertiveness in the area are central elements to understanding ongoing policies and practices. This complex framework suggests the need to address challenges and opportunities in the South Caucasus in terms of the complexity of the actors and factors at play.
Topic:
Security, Foreign Policy, NATO, Diplomacy, and Regional Cooperation
Political Geography:
Russia, Europe, Caucasus, Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia

4. Implications of Turkish-Azerbaijani Relations for Regional Security and Development

Author:
Burcu Gültekin Punsmann
Publication Date:
08-2013
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Istituto Affari Internazionali
Abstract:
Turkey's actions in the South Caucasus face serious limitations as long as it has no direct influence over the dynamics of conflict settlement. Turkey has the potential to support transformation and reform within the societies of the South Caucasus through soft power. The current state of Turkey's relations with Armenia will keep on seriously curtailing Turkey's outreach in the South Caucasus. Azerbaijan is a stakeholder in Turkish-Armenian relations and Turkey, because of its inability to proceed further with its bilateral agenda with Armenia, has become a stakeholder in the settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. Azerbaijan's leverage on Turkey appears to be more and more influential. The importance of the notion of Turkishness in national politics is an important factor in assessing the strength of pro-Azeri feeling. The Kurdish problem is today a major political challenge. It is the most powerful dynamic underpinning the questioning and progressive redefinition of national identity.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Ethnic Conflict, and Islam
Political Geography:
Turkey, Armenia, and Azerbaijan

5. Towards 'EuroNest 2.0': What should the next European Parliament learn from its predecessor?

Author:
Hrant Kostanyan and Bruno Vandecasteele
Publication Date:
10-2013
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Centre for European Policy Studies
Abstract:
Besides the Eastern Partnership's (EaP) bilateral and multilateral framework and the Civil Society Forum, the European Union (EU) engages with the EaP countries – Belarus, Ukraine, Moldova, Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan – through multilateral parliamentary cooperation, namely within the EuroNest Parliamentary Assembly (EuroNest PA).
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Economics, International Trade and Finance, Politics, and Treaties and Agreements
Political Geography:
Europe, Ukraine, Armenia, and Belarus

6. Tableau de bord des pays d’Europe centrale et orientale et d’Eurasie 2013 (Volume 2 : Eurasie)

Author:
Jean-Pierre Pagé, Anne De Tinguy, Jacques Sapir, Hélène Clément-Pitiot, Matthieu Combe, Vitaly Denysyuk, and Raphaël Jozan
Publication Date:
12-2013
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Centre d'Etudes et de Recherches Internationales
Abstract:
Dans le Tableau de bord d’Europe centrale et orientale et d’Eurasie de 2009, nous écrivions que les pays de l’Europe centrale et orientale étaient « touchés mais pas coulés » par la crise mondiale. Quatre ans après, ce diagnostic est toujours valable. Si l’Union européenne reste pour eux un idéal et si l’adhésion à cette union demeure un projet clairement balisé pour les Etats qui n’en sont pas encore membres, celle-ci, engluée dans ses contradictions, paraît trop souvent absente, silencieuse. Aux populations qui lui demandent un meilleur niveau de vie et plus de justice sociale, elle répond par des exigences de réformes et d’austérité et alimente ainsi dangereusement leurs désenchantements. Savoir leur répondre, c’est le défi majeur de l’Union européenne aujourd’hui. Les pays de l’Eurasie, s’ils sont moins directement touchés par la crise de la zone euro et conservent, en conséquence, une croissance nettement plus élevée, ont d’autres préoccupations. Fortement sollicités par la Russie qui entend consolider sa zone d’influence avec la concrétisation de l’Union économique eurasiatique, ils sont aussi l’objet de l’attraction qu’exerce sur eux l’Union européenne – comme en témoignent éloquemment les évènements survenus en Ukraine – et, de plus en plus, la Chine. Cet espace est donc actuellement dans une recomposition qui conditionne les possibilités de son développement.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Economics, Energy Policy, International Trade and Finance, Markets, Nationalism, Political Economy, Privatization, Natural Resources, Regulation, Finance, Economy, Regional Integration, and Multinational Corporations
Political Geography:
Central Asia, Caucasus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, and Belarus

7. Turkish-Armenian Relations and the Issue of the Recognition of the claims of the Armenian genocide

Author:
Alica Vidlickov
Publication Date:
05-2012
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Alternatives: Turkish Journal of International Relations
Institution:
Center for International Conflict Resolution at Yalova University
Abstract:
This article examines the Turkish-Armenian relations, its development throughout the history and the situation between those two countries since Recep Tayyip Erdogan became the prime minister of Turkey in 2003 resulting in the change of the Turkish foreign policy. The main focus is on the problems between Turkey and Armenia stemming out from the different view on the happenings in 1915 and the recognition of the so called Armenian genocide. The article analyzes the decision-making of the individuals, the international organizations and the states when it comes to the question of the so called Armenian genocide and the reasons of the decisions made by individuals and states. These decisions are subjected to criticism on the basis of the reality image theory by Ibrahim Canbolat (1993) and the Thomas theorem (1928) as well as other criteria. States are the most important actors in the article because they form the foreign policy and the influence of this particular problem of the decisions of states influences the relations between Turkey and the EU as well as other world powers. Turkey's importance and image are still worsened due to these reasons and unfortunately, it seems that states have no interest in finding the truth.
Topic:
Foreign Policy and Genocide
Political Geography:
Turkey and Armenia

8. Regional Energy Equations and Turkish Foreign Policy: The Middle East and the CIS

Author:
Tuncay Babalı
Publication Date:
07-2010
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Insight Turkey
Institution:
SETA Foundation for Political, Economic and Social Research
Abstract:
Turkey has become an important east-west and north-south gas and oil transit route and an energy hub, thanks to the Turkish straits, and the existing and proposed pipelines that run through its territory. Economic opportunities, however, can present diplomatic liabilities. In a tough and complicated region, Turkey finds itself caught between the interests of competing superpowers and regional players. As the world's 16th largest economy, Turkey's thirst for energy will only increase. Satisfying this thirst requires not only diversification of sources and routes, but also good relations with all neighbors, in addition to traditional partners. An analysis of Ankara's options and new foreign policy vision shows that Turkey has little choice but to use greater caution and engagement. Following its own national interests and security concerns will drive Turkey to new openings in Syria, Iraq, Iran, Armenia and other CIS countries. Energy will be one of the main pillars of Turkey's policy of engagement and integration in the region.
Topic:
Foreign Policy
Political Geography:
Iraq, Iran, Turkey, Middle East, Armenia, and Syria

9. The Bermuda Triangle: Turkey, Azerbaijan and Armenia

Author:
Yalım Eralp
Publication Date:
05-2010
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Global Political Trends Center
Abstract:
The Protocols signed between Armenia and Turkey constitute a significant threshold in the relationship between the two countries. The process of ratification has been stalled, especially due to issues in Turkish domestic politics, and the Protocols have been shelved for now. However, it is important to not completely kill the process. It would thus be helpful in terms of a soft transition into the future if both parties implement those clauses in the Protocols that do not require ratification.
Topic:
Conflict Resolution, Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Treaties and Agreements, and Bilateral Relations
Political Geography:
Central Asia, Turkey, and Armenia

10. Turkish Foreign Policy in 2009: A Year of Pro-activity

Author:
Ufuk Ulutaş
Publication Date:
03-2010
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Insight Turkey
Institution:
SETA Foundation for Political, Economic and Social Research
Abstract:
Since the early 2000s, Turkish foreign policy has experienced a fundamental transformation. Turkey's regional and global position, its relations with the countries in surrounding regions, and its long-lasting disputes with its neighbors were reshaped through the adoption of the "zero-problem with-neighbors" policy. In line with this policy, Turkey has taken a pro-active stance and followed a multi-dimensional foreign policy approach to establish itself, first, as a conciliatory partner for peace with its neighbors, and second, as an agent of mediation between its clashing neighboring countries. 2009 was a year of foreign policy initiatives towards Syria, Armenia, and Iraq, including the Kurdish Regional Government. And it marked the beginning of more positive and constructive relations between Turkey and the United States. Turkey gained substantial ground in becoming a regional hub for energy by undersigning two critical energy deals. Yet, two major issues remain as challenges for Turkish foreign policy: a) the EU accession process, and b) the Cyprus dispute.
Topic:
Foreign Policy and Government
Political Geography:
United States, Iraq, Turkey, Armenia, and Syria