Search

Begin New Search Topic Democratization Political Geography Europe

231. Achieving a Final Status Settlement for Kosovo

Author:
Janusz Bugajski, R. Bruce Hitchner, and Paul Williams
Publication Date:
08-2002
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Public International Law Policy Group
Abstract:
On November 19, 2002, the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), the National Albanian American Council, and the Dayton Peace Accords Project held a one-day conference in Washington, D.C., at CSIS, entitled “The Future of Kosovo.” The conference was attended by U.S. policymakers, congressional representatives, regional specialists, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), business leaders, journalists, as well as key activists and analysts from Kosovo. The vital question of Kosovo's emerging status was discussed openly with a view to producing a subsequent report offering concrete recommendations to the U.S. administration, U.S. legislators, and major international organizations on the question of Kosovo's future status.
Topic:
Democratization, Government, and Politics
Political Geography:
America, Europe, Washington, Kosovo, and Albania

232. A Private Hero for a Privatized Country

Author:
Leon Aron
Publication Date:
06-2002
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research
Abstract:
The most interesting phenomenon on Russia's literary scene today is the popularity of the Erast Fandorin mysteries by Grigoriy Shalvovich Chkhartishvili, who writes as Boris Akunin.
Topic:
Democratization, Economics, and Emerging Markets
Political Geography:
Russia, Europe, and Asia

233. On Democracy and the “Public Interest”: in the European Union

Author:
Andrew Moravcsik and Andrea Sangiovanni
Publication Date:
10-2002
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Minda de Gunzburg Center for European Studies, Harvard University
Abstract:
Perhaps the most fundamental question in contemporary European Union politics is whether the existing division and sharing of competences between national and supranational levels is pragmatically and normatively justifiable. In his classic book, Governing in Europe (1999), Fritz Scharpf argues that the current policy mix is sub-optimal and, therefore, democratically illegitimate, because the multi-level European polity lacks the 'problem-solving capacity' necessary to permit citizens and their representatives to bargain to optimal outcomes. Instead it is likely to trigger a vicious circle of downward adaptations in social policy and public services that are likely to sap the EU's support. Scharpf recommends granting domestic social welfare policies constitutional status in EU jurisprudence, and permitting 'differentiated integration' or 'flexibility' for high-standard countries to legislate as an EU sub-group. In this challenge by Scharpf to the 'output legitimacy' of the EU, we argue, a number of important issues remain unresolved. First, his argument rests on an implicit and insufficiently elaborated conception of the public interest in maintaining or expanding current patterns of social welfare protection. Second, any effort to specify this 'public interest' must address three fundamental problems of democratic theory, namely the status of uninformed or inexpert citizens, underlying biases in democratic representation, and proper scope of majoritarian decision-making. Third, and fully in the spirit of the concerns raised in Governing in Europe, we suggest two possible strategies for addressing these concerns and some tools for rethinking output legitimacy and its relation both to the 'public interest' and to participatory procedures. The research agenda on democratic legitimacy in Europe launched by Scharpf is likely to be a lively one for some time to come.
Topic:
Democratization and Government
Political Geography:
Europe

234. The Role of the University in Ethnic Conflict Transformation, Democratization, and Developing Human Rights in the Balkans

Author:
Zlatko Isakovic
Publication Date:
03-2002
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Danish Institute for International Studies
Abstract:
The aim of this paper is to elaborate the role of the University in democratization, developing human rights and transforming ethnic conflicts in the Balkan states proposing creative and applicable solutions. The main conclusions are, first, that if a system cannot be qualified as democratic one, appears the complex dilemma what could and should come first: developing democracy (including the university education) or transforming ethnic conflicts or preventing their escalations/deescalating them. Second, during conflict escalation, the Balkan and other University's duty is to offer to country's decision makers and the rest of the society and the world the knowledge residing on scholars in peace and conflict studies, philosophers, historians, economists, engineers, political scientists and many other fields that can help understand the goals, attitudes, interests, identities, and/or behaviors of the other and our conflict side as well as of the mediators, arbitrators, etc.
Topic:
Democratization, Education, and Human Rights
Political Geography:
Europe and Balkans

235. Kosovo/a Standing Technical Working Group, Training Workshop and Study Visit - Council of Europe

Author:
Graham Holliday
Publication Date:
11-2002
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
European Centre for Minority Issues
Abstract:
A joint study visit and training workshop was organized by the European Centre for Minority Issues (ECMI) in collaboration with the Directorate General of Political Affairs at the Council of Europe (CoE). This workshop took place at the CoE headquarters in Strasbourg between 18 and 21 November 2002, and brought together approximately forty local experts from Kosovo and sixteen officials of the CoE. The general aim of the study visit/training workshop was to increase awareness of different dimensions of the CoE's work on standard setting and technical assistance in Europe, within the framework of building democratic and inclusive institutions. Special attention was paid in the training sessions of the workshop to raising awareness of international standards on minority and human rights legislation and protection, but provision was also made to cover other aspects of democracy building that were of particular interest to the project participants, such as evolving standards and good practice in local governance, social cohesion and education. The workshop further provided a forum for the participants to discuss the applicability of these standards to the Western Balkans, and to the future development of Kosovo in particular.
Topic:
Civil Society, Democratization, and Development
Political Geography:
Europe

236. Democracy Promotion: The Case of European Union Strategy

Author:
Richard Youngs
Publication Date:
10-2001
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Centre for European Policy Studies
Abstract:
This working paper examines the nature of European Union democracy promotion policies since the mid-1990s. The analysis covers: EU democracy assistance projects; debates over the imposition of political conditionality; the importance attached to 'socialisation' dynamics; the relationship between commercial policy and democracy promotion; and a comparison between European and US approaches to political change. It is noted that the EU has developed significant new initiatives in the field of democracy promotion, many of which compare favourably with those of the US. The EU's approach to encouraging political change in the developing world has focused on enhancing the social and ideational foundations of sustainable democratisation, and has not favoured the systematic use of punitive conditionality. There have been notable attempts to link the democracy agenda to both grass roots development work and good governance initiatives. However, European democracy promotion still suffers from significant weaknesses. In particular, the different components of EU policy need to be dovetailed more effectively, based on a more balanced and comprehensive conceptualisation of the complex relationships between social, economic and political change.
Topic:
Democratization
Political Geography:
Europe

237. Shusha's Pivotal Role in a Nagorno-Karabagh Settlement

Author:
Elchin Amirbayov
Publication Date:
12-2001
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
Abstract:
Peace in Nagorno - Karabagh will demand painful compromises from both Armenia and Azerbaijan. A “winner's peace” — one that only reflects the military gains of one side — will not foster long - term resolution of the conflict. The Shusha region of Nagorno - Karabagh has special symbolic meaning for Azerbaijanis. A key element in obtaining Azerbaijani acceptance of a peace agreement is the return of the Shusha region to Azerbaijani control and the guaranteed right of internally displaced Azerbaijani persons to return to the Shusha region.
Topic:
Conflict Resolution, Security, Democratization, and Energy Policy
Political Geography:
Russia, Europe, Asia, Armenia, and Azerbaijan

238. A Russian Reporter in Chechnya: One Experience (Event Summary)

Author:
Anna Politkovskaya
Publication Date:
11-2001
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
Abstract:
Anna Politkovskaya, special correspondent for Novaya Gazeta, covers the war in Chechnya, having spent two years on the ground there. In October 2001, she relocated to Vienna due to death threats she had received. Politkovskaya is presently being provided working space by the Institute of Human Sciences in Vienna.
Topic:
Conflict Resolution, Security, Democratization, and Energy Policy
Political Geography:
Russia, Europe, and Asia

239. Transcript of speech at Kennedy School: 'Searching for Security in a Changing World'

Author:
Eduard Shevardnadze
Publication Date:
10-2001
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
Abstract:
As soon as I first learned that I would come to speak at Harvard, I began to prepare my remarks. Therefore, I had practically completed them when the unspeakable events happened. That unprecedented surge of evil may one day come to be regarded as an historical watershed, an infamous hallmark.
Topic:
Conflict Resolution, Security, Democratization, and Energy Policy
Political Geography:
Russia, Europe, Asia, and Georgia

240. Caspian Energy (event summary)

Author:
Nurlan Kapparov
Publication Date:
09-2001
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
Abstract:
As a part of its Director's Lunch Series, the Belfer Center invited Nurlan Kapparov, former president of the National Oil Company of the Republic of Kazakhstan (KazakhOil) and former Kazak vice-minister of energy and mineral resources, to give a talk entitled "Caspian Energy." Mr. Kapparov previously represented state interests in TengizChevrOil (a Kazakh-American joint venture) and the Offshore Kazakhstan International Oil Consortium (OKIOC). He was the chairman of the board of directors of National Atomic Company KazAtomProm, as well as the head of Kazakhstan's delegation on delimitation of the Caspian Sea with the Russian Federation. Instead of dealing with the Caspian energy situation as a whole, Mr. Kapparov's talk focused primarily on the oil resources of Kazakhstan. Prior to starting his presentation, Kapparov took the time to stress that Kazakhstan was the first ex-Soviet state to promise practical support for the United States' war on terrorism, offering the country's "strategically vital aerodromes and bases for a potential strike on Afghanistan." Kapparov echoed the words of Kazakh president Nursultan Nazarbayev and said that "Kazakhstan is ready to support an action against terrorism with all the means it has at its disposal." Beginning with basic background information on Kazakhstan and the Caspian Sea, Kapparov provided projected extraction figures (both in barrels per day and billions of dollars per year) and potential transportation routes for Kazakh oil. Using the most recent data gathered for Kazakhstan's five major offshore fields (Kashagan, Aktote, Kairan, Kashagan SW, and Kalamkas A), Kapparov indicated that if these fields will be developed with primary depletion recoverable reserves would be approximately 24 billion barrels of oil. If Kazakhstan is able to successfully re-inject gas into the fields — a process that yields more oil — the country's potential recoverable reserves could climb as high as 42 billion barrels from the fields that are included in the OKIOC consortium alone. Kapparov noted that by the year 2020, this oil could bring up to $35 billion per year in income to OKIOC. The total potential oil income could increase Kazakhstan's budget to more than twenty times its current level. Kapparov also showed on the map that Kazakhstan has many other petroleum structures in its sector of the Caspian Sea. He emphasized that Kazakhstan has not yet started the licensing round on other blocks that might have the same reserves as OKIOC. Kapparov acknowledged that the shallow waters that predominate the Kazakh portion of the Caspian Sea place certain constraints on the oil extraction process. The first constraint involves environmental factors, as shallow-water extraction is more complicated than deep-water extraction. Kapparov stressed Kazakhstan's concern for the environment, describing the Caspian as "a unique ecosystem which is the habitat for hundreds of kinds of plants and animals." The second constraint has to do the weather — the Caspian freezes over for four months a year, preventing work during that time. Kapparov subsequently tried to place the importance of Caspian petroleum resources within the overall international context. He described Caspian oil as geopolitically significant, based on the assumption that more active oil production in the region would help to lessen the importance of Persian Gulf producers. This trend would enable countries such as the United States to diversify their sources of oil, providing security in an otherwise unstable field. Kapparov noted that the region's most persistent problem remains the legal status of the Caspian Sea itself. Since the countries surrounding the Caspian have not agreed on each country's jurisdiction over the seabed and its oil and gas reserves, there is still strong regional tension. Iran's recent actions against Azerbaijani-based BP ships working in the southern Caspian are only the most recent examples of this tension. Kapparov articulated the hope that the United States, which is already exerting a strong mediating influence in the region, would play a role in resolving this issue. Kapparov supports demarcation of the Caspian between Iran and former Soviet countries according to the old agreements that were signed between Iran and the USSR. Kapparov is also hoping that Kazakhstan, Russia, Azerbaijan, and Turkmenistan will work together to solve this problem among themselves as soon as possible. Kapparov then talked about the challenges involved in bringing Caspian oil to market. He described the transportation of hydrocarbons as "difficult, geopolitically sensitive, and expensive," which has led to some degree of intrigue regarding the current and proposed routes for transporting oil from the Caspian Sea. From Kazakhstan's perspective, the current pipeline capacity is sufficient, since it is only exporting 2 million barrels of oil a day. However, the country will eventually be exporting up to 7 million barrels a day. Consequently, a strategy of pursuing multiple transportation solutions makes not only sound commercial and strategic sense (since reliance on a single production route or a small group of options leaves a producer such as Kazakhstan open to too many potential constraints). It is, in fact, necessitated by the sheer quantity of the country's remaining reserves. As Kapparov candidly noted, "In Kazakhstan we say 'happiness is multiple pipelines.'" In his conclusion, Kapparov reemphasized the importance of the Caspian region to the world's energy market. Acknowledging that Kazakhstan's fate does depend on the actions of the United States and the other G7 countries, he underscored the fact that Kazakhstan is committed to "developing and implementing domestic policies to continue both our economic growth and the social welfare of our population." During the subsequent question and answer session, Michael Lelyveld of RFE/RL asked why the government of Kazakhstan insisted upon maintaining a monopoly system over the routing of oil. Kapparov replied that this system reduced paperwork, facilitated the transport of oil, and actually increased the overall amount of oil being shipped. Professor Francis Bator of the Kennedy School asked what percentage of the Kazakh national budget is derived solely from oil. Kapparov estimated the current figure to be 40 percent of the budget, but also noted that by 2020 — when oil production should be at full capacity — this number could be as high as 80 to 90 percent if other industries are not developed more extensively. However, Kapparov underscored that Kazakhstan does not want to depend solely on the oil industry. In response to a question about Kazakhstan's plan for dealing with the excess funds derived from its vast petroleum resources, Kapparov said that the country had established a separate oil fund according to the "Norway model" — whereby excess money would be placed in this fund so as not to interfere with the national economy.
Topic:
Conflict Resolution, Security, Democratization, and Energy Policy
Political Geography:
Russia, Europe, and Asia