The EU's Policies of Security of Energy Supply Towards the Middle East and Caspian Region: Major Power Politics?

2007 ◽  
Vol 6 (1-3) ◽  
pp. 485-507 ◽  
Author(s):  
Femke Hoogeveen ◽  
Wilbur Perlot
Keyword(s):  
Middle East ◽  
Energy Security ◽  
Security Policy ◽  
Fossil Fuels ◽  
The United States ◽  
The European Union ◽  
External Energy ◽  
Major Power ◽  
Power Politics ◽  
The Eu

AbstractVast reserves of fossil fuels make the Greater Middle East (GME) region the centre of attention in terms of security of supply considerations of all major energy-consuming countries, most notably of the United States (US), China, India, and of the European Union (EU). Although energy security is on the EU's agenda, the supranational nature of the EU inhibits it to pursue an external energy security policy in the same way as other consuming countries. Its power, mandate, and in many ways preparedness to execute a common foreign policy towards the GME, let alone as specific as a common foreign energy strategy, are limited. This article seeks to answer the questions of what role the EU wants to play in the GME region in relation to objectives of energy security, what role it can play in this respect, and whether the EU's Middle East politics can be regarded as major power politics.

Italy's politics without policy: Balancing Atlanticism and Europeanism in the Middle East

Modern Italy ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 135-153 ◽  
Author(s):  
Raffaella A. Del Sarto ◽  
Nathalie Tocci
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Middle East ◽  
The United States ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Short Term ◽  
The Government ◽  
Specific Interests ◽  
Policy Shifts ◽  
The Eu

Focusing on Italy's Middle East policies under the second Berlusconi (2001–2006) and the second Prodi (2006–2008) governments, this article assesses the manner and extent to which the observed foreign policy shifts between the two governments can be explained in terms of the rebalancing between a ‘Europeanist’ and a transatlantic orientation. Arguing that Rome's policy towards the Middle East hinges less on Italy's specific interests and objectives in the region and more on whether the preference of the government in power is to foster closer ties to the United States or concentrate on the European Union, the analysis highlights how these swings of the pendulum along the EU–US axis are inextricably linked to a number of underlying structural weaknesses of Rome's foreign policy. In particular, the oscillations can be explained by the prevalence of short-term political (and domestic) considerations and the absence of long-term, substantive political strategies, or, in short, by the phenomenon of ‘politics without policy’ that often characterises Italy's foreign policy.

scholarly journals The Weimar Triangle: France, Germany, Poland in the Middle East. United Arab Emirates Perspective

2021 ◽  
pp. 107-126
Author(s):  
Adam Krzymowski
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Middle East ◽  
United Arab Emirates ◽  
Security Policy ◽  
Research Question ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Scientific Goal ◽  
Foreign And Security Policy ◽  
Trade Potential ◽  
The Eu

The article’s scientific goal is to investigate the Weimar Triangle countries’ relations with the United Arab Emirates. Therefore, the author asks the research question. Are the Weimar Triangle states’ role and significance increasing in the external dimension of the European Union? Based on the example of the United Arab Emirates, the research adopted a hypothesis. It is the statement that after Brexit, the Weimar Triangle countries have a chance to improve their importance in the EU external activities. Apart from case studies, to revise the hypothesis, the author performed a meticulous comparative analysis. Moreover, the research implemented International Practice Theory as an appropriate tool to investigate the presented issue. This empirical research and its findings resulted from over ten years of the author’s direct observation, analysis, and participation in many initiatives, both in the European Union and in the United Arab Emirates. The Middle East for the Weimar Triangle countries is more significant than just from a trade potential perspective. The situation in this region is also affecting Europe, as well as global security architecture. For this reason, one should develop a coherent and comprehensive EU foreign and security policy towards the region, and the Weimar Triangle formula should be one of its pillars.

EUROPEAN UNION’S SECURITY POLICY IN REGARD TO CENTRAL ASIA WITHIN THE EU STRATEGY FOR CA

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (3) ◽  
pp. 007-014
Author(s):  
Zhansaule Zharmakhanova ◽  
Saniya Nurdavletova ◽  
Leila Akhmetzhanova
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Central Asia ◽  
Security Policy ◽  
The United States ◽  
Transformation Process ◽  
The European Union ◽  
New Strategy ◽  
Eu Project ◽  
External Actors ◽  
The Eu

As Central Asia undergoes a rapid transformation process, political, economic and security developments remain uncertain and difficult to predict. External actors will play a key role in defining the contours of transformation in Central Asia. In recent years, a number of powerful countries—mainly China, the Russian Federation and, to a lesser extent, the United States, Japan and Turkey—have sought to increase their influence in Central Asia. There was a timely initiative proposed by Germany, which presided over the European Union at the time, to launch the process of rethinking EU participation in Central Asia, culminating in the development of a Strategy for Central Asia. Thus, the European Union has reinforced its presence at a strategic moment for Central Asia. The Strategy for a New Partnership, adopted by the European Council on 21-22 June, 2007, became the main document for the significant and decisive strengthening of EU policy in Central Asia. The strategy represents the most ambitious EU project in the region and demonstrates a significant improvement in relations. The EU has the needed resources and, in line with the Strategy, it wants to do its part to transform the region into a secure and well-governed area, which is also in the interests of Central Asians. In 2019, in order to intensify cooperation, the EU updated and launched the new Strategy for Central Asia. It should be noted that security is a particularly important issue. In both the first Strategy 2007 and the updated Strategy 2019, the theme of security is reflected in various EU programs and projects. Thus, the article will provide a general analysis of EU’s security programs in Central Asia.

scholarly journals The main trends in the formation of the Great Britain’s foreign policy after Brexit

2021 ◽  
pp. 38-50
Author(s):  
Viktoriia Orlyk
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Security Policy ◽  
The United States ◽  
Economic Consequences ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Policy Positions ◽  
Bilateral Relations ◽  
Foreign And Security Policy ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Eu

The article deals with the peculiarities of forming the new trends in the British foreign policy, due to the results of the referendum on Brexit and the country’s withdrawal from the European Union. Formation of the strategic priorities for the UK foreign policy course is becoming one of the most important tasks for the political, diplomatic and expert circles. The refusal to develop a common foreign policy of the EU as a result of Brexit, sets the essential challenge for Britain: to maintain existing influence and allied relations with continental European states (primarily, due to the strengthening of bilateral relations and the preservation of the Euro-Atlantic alliance), and at the same time to establish itself as an independent center of influence, not limited to the collective will of the EU. The main provisions of the “Global Britain” concept, presented in 2016 as the doctrinal basis of the foreign policy dimension of Brexit, are analyzed. The most significant of them are the next: the promotion of the UK`s economic and security interests around the world as the basis of foreign and security policy; alliance with the United States as a major foreign policy and security priority; rethinking the partnership with the EU and giving it a new depth in the name of protecting the international order and common values; the development of cooperation within the Commonwealth to strengthen Britain’s international presence and global influence. The author identifies the key foreign policy positions of London, which are not reflected in the concept presently, but will be of key importance for the European and global securities in the short and medium terms. The positions of leading regional and world players are analyzed, the risks of aggravation of relations with Russia and China are assessed. It is summarized that because of the new global threats and risks (first of all COVID-19 pandemic and its global impact and economic consequences) the “Global Britain” concept is still in its forming.

scholarly journals Islamic Military Alliance (IMA) – and Pakistan

2017 ◽  
Vol II (I) ◽  
pp. 135-151
Author(s):  
Ghulam Qumber ◽  
Waseem Ishaque ◽  
Saqib Riaz
Keyword(s):  
Middle East ◽  
Energy Security ◽  
The United States ◽  
Power Politics ◽  
Military Alliance ◽  
Continuous State ◽  
Violent Extremism ◽  
Stake Holder ◽  
Soviet Invasion ◽  
Oil Crises

The power politics and dominance are recurring features of Middle East which is in the continuous state of transformation ever since the Iranian revolution of 1979 and Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. The United States since the oil crises of 1970s has declared energy security. The unfortunate incident of 9/11 generated ferocious US response which was unleashed in the Middle East on the premise of regime change. This transition has proved to be uncertain and full of risks with catastrophic consequences and resultant rise of non- state (NSA) actors like ISIS and ISIL. This article unveils the basic contours and prime motives behind formation of IMA, its aims and objectives, analyses its efficacy in countering violent extremism with potential implications for Pakistan as a major stake holder and suggests a way forward for Pakistan to convert this into opportunity by mitigating challenges. This is academic narrative, views and comments are author’s own.

Iran and European Union Politics

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sebastian Harnisch
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Security Policy ◽  
The United States ◽  
Proactive Behavior ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Policy Coherence ◽  
Member States ◽  
Pahlavi Dynasty ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
The Eu

The Islamic Republic of Iran and the European Union (EU) have not yet established formal diplomatic relations, but since 1979 the Union and its member states have had various strong if often conflictual interactions. The relationship has been marked by distinct phases that reflect the emerging character of the partners, a theocratic republic on the one hand and a Union of interdependent democratic states on the other. While mutual economic interests have formed the basis for substantial interactions, relations with member states and the EU itself have been colored by a long and sometimes hurtful history of European states’ role in Iranian politics, including the Russian and British imperial influence over Persia in the late 19th and early 20th century, the British (and American) involvement in the coup against democratically elected Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddeq in 1953, and the French hosting of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, an avowed critic of the Pahlavi dynasty, prior to the anti-authoritarian revolution in 1979. Over time, the relationship has substantially shaped the character and direction of the politics of the EU’s common foreign and security policy, resulting in more policy coherence between member states and the EU, more policy autonomy, particularly vis-á-vis the United States, and more proactive behavior, such as during the nuclear negotiations leading to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (in 2015). By engaging with a problematic member of the nonproliferation treaty, the EU not only specified and thus strengthened the treaty, but it also grew into an international nonproliferation actor to reckon with.

scholarly journals The Eastern Partnership and the EU-Turkey Energy Relations

2014 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 50-68 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tolga Demiryol
Keyword(s):  
Energy Security ◽  
The European Union ◽  
External Energy ◽  
Eastern Partnership ◽  
Energy Cooperation ◽  
Energy Needs ◽  
Two Factors ◽  
Commitment Problem ◽  
Energy Relations ◽  
The Eu

AbstractThis article discusses the prospects and challenges of energy cooperation between the European Union (EU) and Turkey within the context of the Eastern Partnership (EaP). Part of the EaP agenda is to advance energy cooperation between the EU and the partner states, particularly regarding the diversification of import routes. As an energy corridor between the EU and the hydrocarbon-rich Caspian states, Turkey is a strategic asset for European energy security. Turkey also has economic ties and political capital in the Caspian region that can help the EU reach out to its eastern partners. Despite robust incentives for cooperation, however, the EU-Turkey energy partnership has so far failed to meet mutual expectations. This article argues that this is primarily due to the inability of the two actors to credibly commit to regional energy cooperation. Commitment problem stems from two factors. First, the predominance of national energy interests over communal ones undermines credible commitment. The variation in energy needs of Member States prevents the EU from acting in unison in external energy policy. Similarly, Turkey also prioritizes its own energy security, particularly in its relations with suppliers, which undermines cooperation with the EU. Second, the EU and Turkey hold divergent perspectives on the potential political payoffs of energy cooperation. Turkish decision makers are convinced that energy cooperation warrants palpable progress in Turkey’s accession while most EU actors appear hesitant to establish a direct connection between energy and accession.

STRATEGIES OF MAIN ACTORS OF WORLD POLICY REGARDING THE MIDDLE EAST AND MODERN SYRIA(ON THE EXAMPLE OF THE USA AND THE EUROPEAN UNION)

2019 ◽  
pp. 316-322
Author(s):  
M. HADDAD
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
European Union ◽  
Middle East ◽  
The United States ◽  
The European Union ◽  
East Region ◽  
The World ◽  
The Usa ◽  
Middle East Region ◽  
The Eu

The article is devoted to the study of foreign policy strategies of the main actors of the world politics, represented by the USA and the countries of the European Union, regarding the Middle East and the Syrian Arab Republic. The interest in this topic is explained by the particular attractiveness of the Middle East region for the above-mentioned actors, since it has significant economic and transport potential and a favorable geographical position, which opens up opportunities for establishing strong partnership trade and economic ties between the US and the EU on the one hand and Middle Eastern states on the other. At the same time, the Middle East, as a region of increased military-political and social tension, directly influences peace and security situation in the entire world, and because of that the most developed countries of the world seek to establish control over the internal politics in the Middle East and spread their influence on its territory. The author pays great attention to the study of factors that have contributed to the formation of certain US and EU foreign policy courses in respect of the entire Middle East and Syria in particular, and comes to the conclusion that all of them can conditionally be divided into several large groups that equally affect the development process strategies. Their comparison allowed us to establish that in general both the USA and the countries of the European Union have similar perspective goals and objectives, however, they use different methods and forms of implementing their strategies. This explains the difference in the results achieved: while the United States successfully implement their geopolitical aspirations and gradually strengthen their presence in the Middle East, the EU countries are faced with a number of problems that impede their participation in the current regional events. Nevertheless, despite the successes and failures, the importance of the Middle East region for both the United States and the EU is beyond doubt.

DEVELOPMENT TRENDS AND PROSPECTS OF ECONOMIC AND TRADE COOPERATION BETWEEN CHINA AND UKRAINE

2018 ◽  
Vol 2018 (6) ◽  
pp. 3-12
Author(s):  
Zhang DONGYANG ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Free Trade ◽  
Bilateral Trade ◽  
The United States ◽  
Economic Cooperation ◽  
Free Trade Zone ◽  
Asia Pacific ◽  
Economic Downturn ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Association Agreement ◽  
The Eu

The status and prospects of development of trade and economic relations between Ukraine and China are considered. It is proved that bilateral cooperation in the trade and economic sphere has made significant progress. In 2012–2017, China was the second largest trading partner of Ukraine after Russia. However, the problem of imbalance in imports and exports between Ukraine and China has not yet been resolved. In addition, the scale and number of projects in which Ukraine attracts Chinese investment is much less than investments from European countries and the United States. It is justified that trade and economic cooperation between Ukraine and China is at a new historical stage. On the one hand, Ukraine signed the Association Agreement with the European Union, and on January 1, 2016, the rules of the free trade zone between Ukraine and the EU entered into force. This helps to accelerate the integration of Ukrainian economy into European one. On the other hand, the global economic downturn requires the introduction of innovations in the model of cooperation. The Chinese initiative “One belt is one way” is one of the variants of the innovation model of cooperation. Its significance is to unite the Asia-Pacific region with the EU in order to join the Eurasian Economic Union, create a new space and opportunities for development and achieve prosperity with the Eurasian countries. All this forms unprecedented opportunities for development of bilateral economic and trade relations. It seems that to fully open the potential of Ukrainian economy and expand bilateral trade and economic cooperation, it is necessary to take into account such proposals as the establishment of the Sino-Ukrainian industrial park, the promotion of cooperation in the field of electronic commerce, the formation of the Sino-Ukrainian free trade zone and enhanced interaction within multilateral mechanisms (for example, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization and the interaction of China and the countries of Central and Eastern Europe in the 16 + 1 format).

Russian-Japanese Relations: Long-Term Development Factors

2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 68-85
Author(s):  
D. V. Streltsov
Keyword(s):  
Security Policy ◽  
The United States ◽  
Peace Treaty ◽  
Strategic Decisions ◽  
Chinese Market ◽  
External Energy ◽  
Economic Relations ◽  
Bilateral Relations ◽  
Personal Diplomacy

The article analyzes long-term external and internal factors determining the course of development of Russian-Japanese relations in 2019-2020. On the one hand, the anti-Russian component in Tokyo's foreign policy is shaped by its membership in the Security Treaty with the United States and its solidarity with the sanctions policy of the Group of Seven towards Russia. On the other hand, Japan and Russia are both interested interest in political cooperation in creating multilateral dialog mechanisms of international security in East Asia, resolving the nuclear issue on the Korean Peninsula, and easing tensions around territorial disputes in the East China and South China seas. Among the economic factors, the author focuses on the significant place of Russia in the context of Japan's task of diversifying sources of external energy supplies, as well as on Russia's desire to avoid unilateral dependence on the Chinese market while reorienting the system of foreign economic relations from the West to the East. Personal diplomacy of political leaders plays a significant role in relations between Russia and Japan, and, above all, close personal relationships and frequent meetings between Prime Minister Abe and President Putin, which make it possible to partially compensate the unfavorable image of the partner country in the public opinion of both Russia and Japan. Against the background of a deadlock in the Peace Treaty talks which emerged in 2019, the search for a way out of the diplomatic impasse is on the agenda. In the author's opinion, it would be appropriate at the first stage to proceed to the conclusion of a basic agreement on the basis bilateral relations, which would be "untied" from the Peace Treaty. In addition, Russia could stop criticizing Japan for its security policy and show greater understanding of the Japanese initiative in the field of quality infrastructure. In turn, Japan could take a number of strategic decisions on cooperation with Russia and announce them in the Prime Minister's keynote speech. In addition, Tokyo could stop positioning the issue of the peace Treaty as the main issue in relations with Russia, which would allow our countries to "untie" bilateral relations from the problem of border demarcation and focus on their positive agenda.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document