04.12, curs

Former Soviet republics. The Black sea geopolitics.

Courses Outline 9.10 Introductory Course and seminar16.10 Course: The political construction of Eastern Europe and the Western Balkans. Seminar: Who draws the boundaries and the borders? 23.10 Course: Europeanization as a development policy. EUs policies in its neighborhood. Seminar: EU main development instruments and their evolution in time. 30.10 Course: Former Yugoslav Republics. The Western Balkans - the conflict region. Seminar: Types of humanitarian intervention6.11 Bosnia and Herzegovina13.11 Kosovo 27.11 Macedonia 28.11 The most important donors in the WB and their interests. Conclusions.

Courses Outline4.12 Course- Former Soviet Republics. The Black Sea geopolitics.MID Term exam 8.12 - Moldova Seminar - Romanias focus on Moldova. Guest - Specialist on the Eastern Partnership, from Moldova.18.12 - GeorgiaSeminar World Bank strategy for Eastern Europe and Georgia. Guest World Bank specialist from Washington15.01 - UkraineSeminar The main challenges of the Humanitarian crisis in Ukraine. Guests 1 OSCE youth expert from Romania and 1 expert from Amnesty International22.01 The future of Eastern Europe after the Ukrainian crisis. Concluding Course and Seminar.

The Former Soviet Republics and The Black Sea Geopolitics.Thursday, 4th of DecemberEastern European StudiesDICHA, second yearDr Miruna Troncota

Readings

2020 a Vision for the Black Sea report of the Commission for the Black Sea, 2012.Charles King, Extreme Politics, chapter The Benefits of Ethnic War, 2010.Eastern Partnership presentation by the EEAS, 2013Eastern Partnership index, 2014TopicsRegion-building strategies along the Black SeaMain features of the Black Sea region before and after the Cold warThe most important players & events that have marked the regionThe efficiency of the Eastern Partnership

Region-building in the Black SeaToday, the Black Sea remains a fascinating bridge between Europe and the Middle East and between the cultures of Eastern Orthodox Christianity and Islam. The turbulent past and present of this fascinating regionfrom ancient Greek seafarers to the glories of Ottoman Istanbul to the current issues in Ukraine.

Mysteries of the Black Sea World

Herodotus, the ancient Greek historian, painted a picture of the Black Sea as the domain of barbarians and monsters. Explode what this region was really like in antiquity, including Greek encounters with non-Greek tribes and the creation of vibrant trading centers, most spectacularly at Byzantium. The strange ecology of the Black Sea played a role in ancient patterns of settlement and gave rise to some of the most enduring of the Greek mythsthe intrepid Argonauts and the quest for the Golden Fleece.

The Age of EmpiresTravelers to the Black Sea today are often surprised to find architectural evidence of a forgotten age, a time when the great Italian trading empires of Genoa and Venice maintained commercial centers all around the coastline. The arrival of Tatar-Mongol invaders and the slow rise of Russia brought new powers into the region. In the 19th century, the rivalry between Russia and Ottoman Turkey led to the Crimean War and made the Black Sea one of the centerpieces of European strategy.8

Odessa and Istanbul: Cosmopolitan Cities

The two most important cities around the Black Sea, Odessa in Ukraine and Istanbul in Turkey, have long had reputations as cosmopolitan centers. Odessa's mixed Russian, Ukraine, and Jewish heritage and Istanbul's Muslim, Christian, and Jewish traditions made both into urban environments where culture, art, and commerce flourished. But in the 20th century, the fate of each illustrated the fragility of multiculturalism in an age of nation-states.

Over the last quarter century, the Black Sea has been one of Europe's most turbulent zones.

Understanding the past can give a more nuanced understanding of contemporary predicaments, such as the conflicts in Chechnya and the Caucasus, the dilemmas of Turkish foreign policy, and the tensions over Ukraine.

The Black Sea regionIt has undergone countless political transformations over time.A fascinating area because of:- the changing dynamics of the Black Sea countries and the complex realities of their politics and conflicts, economies and societies. - its complicated geography, the interests of others and the regions relations with the rest of the world in large part explain its resurgence. The Black Sea RegionHowever, despite the fact that the region was divided by EastWest strategic rivalry, this strained political and military balance did provide stability, albeit accompanied by marginalization, political fragmentation and economic paralysis. The existence of blocs precluded the possibility of much meaningful communication and cooperation across the sea. At the same time the situation left isolated some of the regions lands and peoples from the outside world.

The Black Sea RegionSituated at the crossroads of Europe and Asia, the Black Sea has been a zone of contention and confrontation for centuries. From antiquity, the region was traditionally the backyard of one or two powers, which dominated and closed it to the outside world. Then, during the Cold War, it found itself on the frontline of the global struggle for dominance. For 40 years NATO members, Turkey and Greece, guarded the south and south-east while Warsaw Pact members, the Soviet Union, Bulgaria and Romania, dominated the rest. The Black Sea Region Its strategic location, between the hydrocarbon reserves of the Caspian basin and energy-hungry Europe, places the Black Sea in a unique position.Oil, gas, transport and trade routes are all crucial in explaining its increasing relevance.

The Black Sea regiona heightened US interest since 9/11 the enlargement of NATO and the EU along its shores and repeated Russian-Ukrainian crises over gas. August 2008 war between Russia and Georgia followed by its fallout,discussions over the fate of the Russian Black Sea fleet in Sevastopol, the impact of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict on the Armenian-Turkish rapprochement,developments regarding the conflict in Transnistria,the changing nature of Russo-Turkish relations and finally, the evolving global economic and political landscape as a result of the current world financial crisis.The Black Sea RegionThe regional stakeholders: Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bulgaria, Georgia, Greece, Moldova, Romania, Russia, Turkey and Ukraine. The other key players are the EU and NATO, both of whom are now present on the Black Sea, along with the United States.All three have openly expressed their interests in the region and have formulated policies accordingly.

The Black Sea Regioncompetition to control pipelines, shipping lanes and transport routes to secure increased political and economic influence, not only throughout the region, but on a global scale, raises the risks of confrontation.The Black Sea RegionIn the early 1990s, a half dozen small wars raged across the region, a series of armed conflicts that we might term collectively the wars of the Soviet succession: Nagorno-Karabakh, Transnistria, South Ossetia, Abkhazia, Chechnya, Tajikistan. Each involved a range of players, including the central governments of newly sovereign states, secessionists, the armed forces of other countries, and international peacemakers.The Black Sea RegionEurasias de facto countries are informational black holes. Traveling there is diffi cult and sometimes dangerous. Elections have been held but never under the eyes of disinterested international observers. Economic and demographic data are not included in statistics compiled by national and international agencies. Locally published books and newspapers barely circulate within the secessionist regions themselves, much less to national capitals or abroad. Charles KingThe Black Sea RegionThe leaders of these republics and their counterparts in central governments speak a common languageRussianduring negotiating sessions. Many had similar professional backgrounds during the Soviet period. The territory that separates them is in some cases minuscule: Tiraspol is fifty kilometers from the Moldovan capital, Chisinau; Tskhinvali is under two hours drive from the Georgian capital, Tbilisi. The Black Sea RegionYet the problems they have spawned are immense. They are the central political problem for the recognized states whose territory they inhabit, and they have become conduits for trafficking in drugs, arms, and even people across Eurasia into Europe and beyond. Especially after the independence of Kosovo, they have become bones of contention among Russia, the United States, and the EU.

The Black Sea RegionFrom 2000 until the onset of the world economic crisis, the region had one of the fastest rates of growth in the world. Trade between countries of the region was also on the rise.Since the end of the Cold War it has undergone a fundamental change in terms of economic development and has now secured a place on the global economic agenda.The Black Sea RegionSince the end of the wars, secessionist elites have moved on with the process of building states, and even central elites and average citizens have learned to accommodate themselves to that process. But the cessation of the armed conflict has perversely made a final political settlement even more difficult to achieve.The Black Sea RegionThe energetic institution building in the secessionist regions is a legacy of the Soviet system. Three of the conflict zones had some of the basic institutions of statehood already (through their status as autonomous areas)The Black Sea Region Diaspora politics has also played a role. Armenia and the Armenian diaspora have been the sine qua non of Karabakhs existence. For all practical purposes, Karabakh is now more an autonomous district of Armenia than a part of Azerbaijan.

International Intervention as a Resource

In each of these conflicts, international involvement has been frequent, if not frequently successful.

In Azerbaijan, the OSCE-sponsored Minsk Group has provided good offi ces and a mechanism for negotiations since 1992. In Moldova, an OSCE mission that has been active since 1993 has sponsored numerous rounds of negotiations. International Intervention as a ResourceIn Georgia, a United Nations observer mission was deployed in 1993 to provide a basis for negotiations on Abkhazias future and to monitor the peacekeeping operation conducted by the CIS forces in the Georgian-Abkhaz security zone.In South Ossetia, Russian peacekeepers have been in place since the end of the war, and negotiations on South Ossetias final status have continued apace, involving Russia, North Ossetia, and the OSCE as mediators.

Despite this active engagement, little of significance has been achieved, even despite political change in each of the recognized states.At times the policies of international negotiators have actually strengthened the statehood of the secessionist regions. International intervention can itself be a useful resource for the builders of unrecognized states. Charles KingThe Kosovo PrecedentThe real precedent, from this perspective, is not Kosovos declaration of independence but rather its swift recognition by the same Western governments that routinely condemn Eurasias other unrecognized regimes as separatists or, worse, terrorists.Charles KingRussiaThe Russian official history of the post-Soviet wars argues for Moscows pacifying role in each of the conflicts.Russian foreign and security policy since the wars has been complex in each of these cases, but it has centered around three main elements, all of which have turned out to be crucial resources for the unrecognized republicsSoviet union Existed between 1922 and 1991In the late 1980s the last Soviet leader,Mikhail Gorbachev, sought to reform the Union and move it in the direction ofNordic-style social democracy, introducing the policies ofglasnostandperestroikain an attempt to end theperiod of economic stagnationand democratize the government. However, this led to the rise of strongnationalistand separatist movements. Central authorities initiateda referendum, boycotted by the Baltic republics, Armenia, Georgia, and Moldova, which resulted in the majority of participating citizens voting in favour of preserving the Union as arenewed federation.

Russia1. Russian economic support 2. negotiations with Moldova and Georgia regarding the withdrawal of Russian troops have been linked with the resolution of the secessionist disputes.3. Russian citizenship and visa policy has encouraged the secessionist regions to see themselves as effectively independent states.RussiaThe proliferation of energy routes while potentially increasing bilateral cooperation at the expense of the regional may, at the same time, result in redundancy owing to too much capacity for not enough gas and oil.RussiaRussia intervened in Georgia, in August 2008, to repel a Georgian attack on South Ossetia. After five days of fighting, a ceasefi re brokered by the EU brought open hostilities to a halt. In the weeks that followed, Russia beefed up its military presence in both South Ossetia and Abkhazia and, on August 26, formally recognized the two republics as independent.RussiaRussias own go-it-alone approach to foreign policy, along with the blind eye that Western governments had turned to the problem of Eurasias secessionist struggles over the last fifteen years, produced the five-day war of summer 2008. Although Western governments and news agencies were quick to see a revived Russian imperialism as the chief cause, this chapter elucidates the rather more complicated prehistory of the August crisis.

The year 2008The Russian intervention and recognition changed the dynamics of Eurasias unrecognized states, but it was a change that was, in many ways, predictable. Kosovo had set a clear precedent, despite repeated denials by Western governments, for how territorial issues were to be treated across the postcommunist world.

Black Sea politics works best if the approach is regional. The Commission on the Black Seaa civil society initiative developed and launched jointly inJanuary 2009 by The Bertelsmann Stiftung, Gtersloh; the Black Sea Trust for Regional Cooperation(BST-GMFUS), Bucharest; the Economic Policy Research Foundation of Turkey (TEPAV), Ankara,and the International Centre for Black Sea Studies (ICBSS), Athens.The regional actors Interested outsidersThe international community

Is there a Black Sea regionalism?The Organisation of the Black Sea Economic Cooperation (BSEC) 1992-2012 - 20 years

With the end of the Cold War, the geopolitical position of the Black Sea changed beyond recognition:- The demise of communism unleashed armed conflicts and pent up historical tensions. It led to the dissolution of a superpower, the birth of six new sovereign states and several secessionist movements.- It also opened the region to outside influences and competition while at the same time witnessing the birth of a slow process of region-building.The role of Bulgaria Romania Turkey and the former Soviet countriesRussiaMoldovaUkraineGeorgia The emerging map of Eastern Europe

Europeanization - EU's Model of Development?

Eastern Partnership Index2011-2013http://www.eap-index.eu/

EaP Index 2013 - Ukrainian leaflet.pdf(271.75 KB)EaP_Index_2013.pdf(1.07 MB)EaP Index 2012.pdf(2.42 MB)EaP Index 2011.pdf(761.25 KB)

The European Integration Index for Eastern Partnership Countriestracks the progress of Eastern Partnership (EaP) countriesArmenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Moldova, and Ukraineon an annual basis. It provides a nuanced crosscountry and cross-sector picture that is comparative.The Index is a monitoring tool that is also intended to assist EU institutions in applying the more for more/less for less principle, announced by the EU in May 2011. Although the EU and independent civil society initiatives provide numerous regular assessments of the progress of EaP countries in European integration, few of these assessments have attempted to place the countries in a comparative perspective. The European Integration Index for Eastern Partnership CountriesThe Index was developed by independent civil society experts who advocate reforms related to European integration. It is prepared by the International Renaissance Foundation (IRF) in partnership with the Open Society Foundations (OSF) and experts from think-tanks and university institutions in EaP countries and the EU. The project is funded by the IRFs European Programme and the EastEast: Partnership Beyond Borders Programme of the OSFThe European Integration Index for Eastern Partnership CountriesThe Index interprets progress in European integration as the combination of two separate yet interdependent processes: - increased linkages between each of the EaP countries and the European Union;- greater approximation between those countries institutions, legislation and practices and those of the EU. The European Integration Index for Eastern Partnership Countries1. Linkage Dimension2. Approximation dimension3. Management DimenionThe European Integration Index for Eastern Partnership CountriesIndex o Europeanization?While the first process reflects the growth of political, economic and societal interdependencies between EaP countries and the EU, the second process shows the degree to which each EaP country adopts institutions and policies typical of EU member states and required of EaP countries by the EU.

Conclusion Straddling Europe and Asia, the Black Sea links north to south and east to west. In the last two decades the Black Sea has changed beyond recognition. We have witnessed the transformation of the former communist societies and the impact of globalisation.Eastern Partnership was not an efficient development tool and especially after the Ukranian war it needs to be reinvented.

Lets have a break!Mid term exam, 4.12Shortly describe the aim and the main instruments used by the European Union in the Western Balkans starting with 2003.Indicate the most important bilateral and multilateral donors in the Western Balkans (at least 3 for each).Indicate 2 multi-ethnic political systems in the WB region and shortly explain their connection with the periods 1992-1995 and 2001.Please choose a donor and a recipient country from the WB and shortly describe the political dimension of their international cooperation interactions.

Mid term exam

5. According to the 2014 Transparency International Corruption Perception Index published on the 3rd of December 2014, Albania and Kosovo are ranked joint 110thout of 174 countries around the world that were assessed in the report. Compared to other countries in the region, Kosovo and Albania continue to be the most corrupt countries in South-East Europe. Please comment these results from the perspective of the development policy efficiency in the WB.54