Energy as an issue area in the European Union and the United States foreign policy-making: oscillating between independence and interdependence

2018 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 24-44
Author(s):  
Michael Charokopos
2019 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 74-79
Author(s):  
Nargiza Sodikova ◽  
◽  
◽  

Important aspects of French foreign policy and national interests in the modern time,France's position in international security and the specifics of foreign affairs with the United States and the European Union are revealed in this article


2020 ◽  
pp. 35-39
Author(s):  
Andrei Martynov ◽  
Sergey Asaturov

The European Union has met Donald Trump's presidency in a crisis, caused by Britain's exit, quarrels over migration policy and prospects for European integration. Trump has abandoned a project to create a transatlantic free trade area. He demanded a one-sided trade advantage for the United States. The rejection of the liberal project of multilateral foreign policy contributed to the deepening of contradictions between the EU and the US in the field of trade, environment, the regime of international disarmament treaties, the algorithm for resolving regional conflicts. The Trump era in US foreign policy was a time of abandoning liberal globalism. But it is impossible to realize this task in one cadence. The question is whether it is possible for Democrats to fully restore liberal globalism in equal cooperation with the European Union.Trump has abandoned the project of a transatlantic free trade area between the United States and the European Union. This shocked the European elites. Differences in approaches to world trade contributed to the coolness. The European Union is promoting a liberal approach. Trump insisted on the priority of the patronage of American interests. As a result, the tradition of relationships has suffered. Until 2017, the United States bought European goods and paid the most to the NATO budget. Trump demanded trade parity and more European funding for NATO. European elites perceived Trump's approach to migration issues as unacceptable. Trump's policy on international conflicts has become another reason for mutual misunderstanding. Trump recognized Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and helped establish diplomatic relations between Israel and the United Arab Emirates. This has become a challenge for the European Union's Middle East policy.


2015 ◽  
Vol 59 (11) ◽  
pp. 38-46
Author(s):  
A. Kokeev

Relations between Germany, the US and NATO today are the core of transatlantic links. After the Cold War and the reunification of Germany, NATO has lost its former importance to Germany which was not a "frontline state" anymore. The EU acquired a greater importance for German politicians applying both for certain political independence and for establishing of a broad partnership with Russia and China. The task of the European Union Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) development has been regarded by Berlin as a necessary component of the NATO's transformation into a “balanced Euro-American alliance”, and the realization of this project as the most important prerequisite for a more independent foreign policy. Germany’s refusal to support the US invasion of Iraq in 2003 led to the first serious crisis in US Germany relations. At the same time, there was no radical break of the deeply rooted Atlanticism tradition in German policy. It was Angela Merkel as a new head of the German government (2005) who managed to smooth largely disagreements in relations with the United States. Atlanticism remains one of the fundamental foreign policy elements for any German government, mostly because Berlin’s hope for deepening of the European integration and transition to the EU CFSP seems unrealistic in the foreseeable future. However, there is still a fundamental basis of disagreements emerged in the transatlantic relationship (reduction of a military threat weakening Berlin’s dependence from Washington, and the growing influence of Germany in the European Union). According to the federal government's opinion, Germany's contribution to the NATO military component should not be in increasing, but in optimizing of military expenses. However, taking into account the incipient signs of the crisis overcoming in the EU, and still a tough situation around Ukraine, it seems that in the medium-term perspective one should expect further enhancing of Germany’s participation in NATO military activities and, therefore, a growth in its military expenses. In Berlin, there is a wide support for the idea of the European army. However, most experts agree that it can be implemented only when the EU develops the Common Foreign and Defense Policy to a certain extent. The US Germany espionage scandals following one after another since 2013 have seriously undermined the traditional German trust to the United States as a reliable partner. However, under the impact of the Ukrainian conflict, the value of military-political dimension of Germany’s transatlantic relations and its dependence on the US and NATO security guarantees increased. At the same time, Washington expects from Berlin as a recognized European leader a more active policy toward Russia and in respect of some other international issues. In the current international political situation, the desire to expand political influence in the world and achieve a greater autonomy claimed by German leaders seems to Berlin only possible in the context of transatlantic relations strengthening and solidarity within the NATO the only military-political organization of the West which is able to ensure the collective defense for its members against the external threats. However, it is important to take into consideration that not only the value of the United States and NATO for Germany, but also the role of Germany in the North Atlantic Alliance as a “representative of European interests” has increased. The role of Germany as a mediator in establishing the West–Russia relations remains equally important.


Modern Italy ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 111-113 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maurizio Carbone

Following the end of the Cold War, Italy took on greater responsibilities in dealing with the increased challenges to international security, especially in its neighbourhood. The aim of this special issue of the journal Modern Italy is to understand to what extent Italy has been successful in developing a third circle in its foreign policy beyond the two traditional lodestars, Atlanticism and Europeanism; or whether Italy's competence in the Mediterranean has been strategically used to improve its relationship with the United States or its position within the European Union.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Philipp Lutscher

Conventional wisdom expects to see a rise of cyber activities around aggressive foreign policy events. In this article, I test this claim by investigating whether sanctions lead to an increase in DoS attacks using new data on Denial-of-Service (DoS) attacks measured from Internet traffic. Exploring the development of DoS attacks around sanctions imposed against Russia in 2014 indeed shows an increase of DoS attacks against several sanction sender states. Extending this case study to a systematic analysis including all sanction threats and impositions made by the United States and the European Union from 2008 until 2016 shows no apparent patterns. However, when I exclusively consider sanctions against technologically advanced countries, the frequency of attacks rises systematically against the United States. Overall, it appears that countries do not always have to expect a digital retaliation after aggressive foreign policies. Nevertheless, this article finds evidence for an increase of DoS attacks against states when they impose sanctions against technologically advanced countries.


2021 ◽  
Vol 48 (4) ◽  
pp. 19-38
Author(s):  
Józef M. Fiszer

In this article, the author analyses Ukraine’s international policy and particularly its balancing between the East and the West from the moment of its declaration of independence in 1991 to the present day. He states that Ukraine’s foreign policy fluctuates between Russian (eastern) and transatlantic (western) orientations. In the author’s opinion, this difficult choice is determined by many factors, including historical, cultural, social, economic and international ones. Moreover, the author presents the position of Poland towards this still unsolved Ukrainian dilemma and towards Ukraine’s accession to NATO and the European Union. The main thesis of this article is the author’s conclusion that the imperial international policy of Russia under President Vladimir Putin and the passive stance of NATO, the European Union and the United States have exerted a particular influence on Ukraine’s foreign policy and the position of Poland towards its Euro-Atlantic aspirations. Being afraid of Russia, the West in a broad sense has come to terms with its aggressive policy towards Ukraine and has forgotten about Crimea. It cares about its economic cooperation with Russia more than about the security of Ukraine and Poland.


Author(s):  
Sergei Valer'evich Krivov ◽  
Tat'yana Vladimirovna Baranova ◽  
Sergey Valer'evich Starkin

The subject of this research is the sanctions imposed by Western countries against Russia in response to the Ukrainian events of 2014. Leaning on the available empirical data and expert assessments conducted by various financial and analytical structures, an attempt is made to identify the nature and severity of impact of sanction pressure upon different economic sectors of the Russian Federation, implemented for achieving the foreign policy goals. Emphasis is placed on the absence of uniform sanctions policy due to the specificity of foreign policy goals and peculiarities of sanction mechanisms used by the United States and the European Union. It is underlined that anti-Russian sanctions and Russia’s response in many instances are substantiated by the preceding trends in strategic vision of foreign and domestic policy by the Russian Federation, as well as the nature of its relations with the West. The conclusion is made that the focus in studying the problem of sanctions has shifted towards the political analysis and further analytical and scientific examination. The author believes that in the conditions of uncertainty of the economic effects and absence of common approaches towards understanding the prospects of sanctions policy by the Western countries the two main scenarios of its further development. It would either gradually fade out without “renewed efforts”, slowly negating its practical effect, and prompt the United States and the European Union intensify the dialogue with Russia, avoiding the problematic issues on the status of Crimea, implication in the events in South-Eastern Ukraine, etc.; or it can lead to full “politicization” of sanctions polity and its integration into the negotiation process on settlement of the Ukrainian situation and turning into a powerful tool for conducting negotiations.


Author(s):  
Attarid Awadh Abdulhameed

Ukrainia Remains of huge importance to Russian Strategy because of its Strategic importance. For being a privileged Postion in new Eurasia, without its existence there would be no logical resons for eastward Expansion by European Powers.  As well as in Connection with the progress of Ukrainian is no less important for the USA (VSD, NDI, CIA, or pentagon) and the European Union with all organs, and this is announced by John Kerry. There has always ben Russian Fear and Fear of any move by NATO or USA in the area that it poses a threat to  Russians national Security and its independent role and in funence  on its forces especially the Navy Forces. There for, the Crisis manyement was not Zero sum game, there are gains and offset losses, but Russia does not accept this and want a Zero Sun game because the USA. And European exteance is a Foot hold in Regin Which Russian sees as a threat to its national security and want to monopolize control in the strategic Qirim.


2016 ◽  
pp. 26-46
Author(s):  
Marcin Jan Flotyński

The global financial crisis in 2007–2009 began a period of high volatility on the financial markets. Specifically, it caused an increased amplitude of fluctuations of the level of gross domestic products, the level of investment and consumption and exchange rates in particular countries. To address the adverse market circumstances, governments and central banks took actions in order to bolster the weakening global economy. The aim of this article is to present the anti-crisis actions in the United States and selected member states of the European Union, including Poland, and an assessment of their efficiency. The analysis conducted indicates that generally the actions taken in the United States in response to the crisis were faster and more adequate to the existing circumstances than in the European Union.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document