THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE EU STRATEGIC PRIORITIES IN POST-SOVIET CENTRAL ASIA

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 007-017
Author(s):  
Agnieszka KONOPELKO

The Central Asian region has never been a priority area of EU external policy, although the European Union Global Strategy underlines its support for multilateralism in global strategy. The European Union has been more actively engaged in the region since the launch of the New Great Game in Central Asia between China, Russia and the U.S. Following the “neighbors of neighbors” concept, the EU shapes its relations with post-Soviet Central Asia (Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan) on the basis of multilateral strategies and bilateral partnership agreements. The first comprehensive EU strategic document focused on post-Soviet Central Asia, The EU and Central Asia: Strategy for a New Partnership, was concluded in 2007. Despite some allegations that the strategy should take into account the individual needs and specificities of each country, it should be emphasized that the strategy intensified mutual relations between Central Asia and the EU, as well as the EU’s institutional presence in the region, mainly in terms of political and diplomatic dialog. Due to a dynamic approach, the analysis undertaken in the research study allowed for the presentation of positive and negative tendencies, changes and reversals in the implementation of the particular components of the previous EU strategy towards Central Asian countries over time. It should be noted that most objectives outlined in its normative strategy towards Central Asia were achieved to a limited extent, especially in terms of democratization and civil society.

Author(s):  
L. Gusev

In this paper the author considers policy of the European Union in the Central Asia. The author analyzes an updated EU strategy for the Central Asia and emphasizes its pragmatism, based on individual economic interests of the Central Asian countries in promoting bilateral relations. In the offered paper is also considered the evolution of the EU policy in the Central Asia.


2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 288-296
Author(s):  
R. A. Valeeva

After the collapse of the USSR, the West received favorable conditions for promoting its geopolitical interests. Accordingly, the European Union began to establish relations with the countries of Central Asia. The EU policy in Central Asia in the early 90s of the twentieth century is characterized by the fact that Brussels concentrated its efforts on the allocation of economic assistance, the promotion of democracy and market relations. The EU policy in the Central Asian republics was based on cooperation and partnership Agreements signed with the leadership of the countries of the region. These agreements were intended to formalize the political and economic relations of the countries of the region with the EU. The role of the Central Asian countries in EU foreign policy was more clearly defined after the adoption of the European Union Strategy for Central Asia in 2007. The European Union has taken a number of steps to strengthen its position in the region. Several formats of bilateral and regional cooperation have been created, and EU representative offices have been opened in the countries of the region.Over the past decade, the European Union has significantly intensified its foreign policy in Central Asia. It expanded diplomatic ties and successfully implemented mechanisms for developing cooperation with Central Asia. In particular, it has expanded its presence in the region, successfully launching several of its strategic programs in various areas of cooperation.In 2019, the European Union adopted a new Strategy for Central Asia. This is the first radical revision of the document adopted in 2007. This indicates a desire to update the base of interac tion and to build relations with the countries of the region in a new way. The European Union pays special attention to such areas of cooperation as energy issues, global security problems and joint struggle against the threats of terrorism, Islamic fundamentalism and radical extremism, transport and infrastructure. Particular attention is paid to the prospects and problems of the EU’s interaction with the Kyrgyz Republic, which cover various aspects: political, economic, social, trade, cultural. On 19 November 2017, the European Union and the Kyrgyz Republic began negotiations to update the existing bilateral agreement, which is intended to replace the partnership and cooperation Agreement. After the completion of the negotiations, a new agreement on expanded partnership and cooperation between Kyrgyzstan and the European Union was initialed on July 6, 2019. It includes new areas of cooperation and significantly improves the regulatory framework for trade and economic relations in accordance with WTO rules and regional economic agreements. The new agreement provides for cooperation between Kyrgyzstan and the EU in areas such as: policy and reform, enhanced cooperation in foreign policy and security issues, in the areas of justice, security and freedoms, as well as in trade.


2020 ◽  
Vol 70 (2) ◽  
pp. 263-267
Author(s):  
G.R. Absattarov ◽  
◽  
M.F. Shamilov ◽  

For almost three decades of partnership, Central Asia has become of a great strategic importance to the European Union due to the geographic location of the region between Asia and Europe and mutual common interests in cooperationissues. Based on this study on the evolution of the development of relations between the EU and the countries of the Central Asian region, carried through political, legal, economic and humanitarian mechanisms, the author gives an attempt to research the formation of the regulatory framework of this cooperation, based under legal acts, documents and agreements between parties.


2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (4) ◽  
pp. 007-014
Author(s):  
Assima Aubakir

Today, the Central Asian region is once again becoming a point of attraction for the interests of the international community—in geopolitical, as well as in trade and economic terms. The interests of major world powers intersect here, and each has its own approach to establishing relations with the regional countries. The European Union, which never considered this region a geopolitical priority, has been implementing its own Central Asia Strategy since 2007. In July 2017, the Council of the European Union decided to completely revise the Strategy based on new realities, as well as the ambitions and priorities of the regional states in their relations with the EU. A new strategy for relations between the European Union and Central Asia was adopted in June 2019. The revision of the strategy is slated to allow the EU to strengthen its cooperation with the Central Asian countries, highlight the most effective projects, and revise those aspects of interaction that did not bring the desired results. Currently, there is an intensification of intra-regional cooperation in Central Asia; there are positive trends in the development of dialog on important issues of the regional agenda. For this reason, the approaches and tools of European diplomacy in the implementation of its policy in Central Asia are expected to undergo significant adjustments as the Strategy is updated. The subject of this article is precisely this transit period in the relations between the European Union and Central Asia.


2020 ◽  
pp. 72-79
Author(s):  
S. Gavrilova

For several decades, the European Union has been steadily increasing its presence in Central Asian countries. The EU's interests in the region are due to a number of reasons, including the desire to expand its influence in the Central Asian countries, the high importance of the region as a transit corridor between Europe and China, the prospects for economic cooperation, and the importance of the region's energy potential. In May 2019 The European Union has presented a new Strategy for Central Asia, designed to intensify cooperation in a number of areas of interaction. The new strategy is aimed at both implementing these interests and expanding cooperation in a number of other areas.


2019 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
pp. 121-134
Author(s):  
Marta Miedzińska

The foundations and the operating framework of the institutions of the European Union and its Member States are determined by legal acts established at the EU level. The legal bases at the EU level contain key standards in the scope of protection of the financial interests of the European Union and are the main determinants for the individual EU countries when their legal institutions create legal bases at the national level. The aim of this article is to present the main legal basis for the protection of the financial interests of the European Union at the EU level, which will help to examine the impact of these provisions on detecting irregularities and fraud in the EU.


2000 ◽  
Vol 42 (4) ◽  
pp. 847-875 ◽  
Author(s):  
József Böröcz

A series of diplomatic exchanges has recently unfolded between the Hungarian government and the Commission of the European Union. The stakes are historic for the Hungarian side. Hungary formally applied for full membership in the European Union on March 31, 1994, the first country to announce such intentions among the successor states of the former Soviet bloc. Two years later, the Commission sent a lengthy questionnaire about the “state of the applicant” to all—by then, ten—central and east European applicant states. The Hungarian side filed its comprehensive response three months after the receipt of the questionnaire. The Commission waited until all responses were in and acknowledged the Hungarian answer in a document, issued another year later, whose purpose was to determine whether to recommend that the EU Council should start negotiations with the individual candidate countries about full membership.


In this issue of the Contemporary Military Challenges, we focus on the relations between the European Union and NATO in the field of security. On 1 June 2021, NATO Foreign Ministers met in Brussels to discuss the details of the NATO Summit to be held on 14 June 2021 in Brussels, Belgium; the period, which coincides with the publication of this thematic issue. Twenty foreign ministers represented NATO member states, which are also EU members, making an event such as the NATO summit all the more important for the future of European security. Many topics were mentioned at the ministerial, such as Afghanistan, Belarus, Russia and China. In general, however, the emphasis was put on the fact that NATO should adapt to new challenges, security settings in a highly competitive environment. As mentioned by NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg, we are presented with a number of challenges to our security that we need to tackle together, because no country and no continent can deal with them alone. This includes strengthening the existing partnerships and building new ones, including in the Asia-Pacific, Africa, and Latin America. The participants also discussed the stepping up of training and capability building for partners, as well as work to address the security impact of climate change. In the conclusion, the ministers broadly agreed that it was important to start work on NATO's next Strategic Concept, because our strategic environment has significantly changed since 2010. Secretary General underlined that NATO’s future adaptation would require Allies to continue investing in defence, and to invest more together, as a force multiplier and a strong message of unity and resolve. During Donald Trump’s mandate as President of the United States, the fact that the European Union or its Member States pay too little attention and thus resources for their own defence has often been a hot topic of political debate. In 2016, a year before the US President Trump took office, the European Union adopted a Global Strategy which envisaged several options to strengthen the Common Security and Defence Policy, which we will discuss in further detail in the next issue of the Contemporary Security Challenges. The Global Strategy provided that the European Defence Fund, the Permanent Structured Cooperation, the Coordinated Annual Review on Defence, and other existing and new mechanisms would operate in such a way that activities, resources and capabilities would not duplicate with NATO’s, but would complement each other. True enough that, within the Common Security and Defence Policy, the European Union has already foreseen many activities at its meetings and in the adopted documents in terms of strengthening this policy, but later implemented little. Has anything changed in this area in the past four years, or will perhaps something change at the time of the conference on the European future? Just as the Alliance is planning a new strategic concept, the European Union is announcing a Strategic Compass, which will set new directions for future cooperation, also in the field of security. In this issue, the authors present how the cooperation between the European Union and NATO is taking place in 2021 in some areas of security. The article titled EU-NATO cooperation and the Slovenian presidency of the Council of the European Union by Marko Mahnič presents an interesting thesis on whether obstacles to the coherent functioning of the European Union and North Atlantic Treaty Organization in the field of common security and defence are of a purely technical nature, or are there maybe differences in the policies, bilateral relations and national ambitions of certain countries. Damjan Štrucl writes about the EU-NATO partnership and ensuring information security and cybersecurity: theory and practice. According to him, the development of information and communication technology and new challenges of the modern security environment have led to the signing of the Joint Declaration on deepening the strategic partnership between both organizations in 2016. The author provides an analysis of the EU-NATO strategic partnership in ensuring security and defence in the modern security environment. Defence initiatives to strengthen the security of the European Union motivated Gregor Garb to write an article presenting what the 2016 European Union Global Strategy contributed to the EU’s strategic defence autonomy. Initially, in a theoretical sense, and after five years in a practical sense. All of course, given the fact that the European Union will continue to maintain strong relations and cooperation with the North Atlantic Alliance. David Humar and Nina Raduha present the process of creating the Military Strategy of the Republic of Slovenia in the Slovenian Armed Forces. Changes in the international environment have initiated security-related strategic considerations of NATO and the European Union. Slovenia as a member of both organizations also needs a strategic consideration in both military and security fields. Their article provides more details about the The process of devising the Military Strategy of the Republic of Slovenia. Tackling irregular migration in Europe is a topic addressed by Miklós Böröcz. Ever since 2015, the then mass illegal migration has posed a major problem for Europe and the European Union. The mass refugee crisis has gradually transformed into illegal migrations of individuals and small groups, who have maintained and strengthened contact with everybody along the way, who take part in this and ensure that the migration flow with of illegal character does not subside. The author provides some solutions to this problem.


2019 ◽  
Vol 71 (1) ◽  
pp. 26-49
Author(s):  
Maja Kovacevic

The European Union (EU) is a unique player in the Western Balkans, where it has employed a wide array of foreign policy instruments since the 1990s such as diplomacy, trade, financial assistance, civilian missions, military missions, and enlargement, which is the EU?s most successful foreign policy tool. The region is an inspiring case for studying the EU?s transformative power. The undeniable success of the EU?s Enlargement Policy in influencing transitions of Central and Eastern Europe countries has inspired research of the Europeanization, or the EU?s transformative power in relation to candidate countries, and its impact on their political and economic reforms during the accession process. Since then, the EU?s global transformative power has been in crisis. The European Neighbourhood Policy was reviewed in 2015, aiming not any more towards the transformation of neighbouring states, but rather at fostering their resilience. Similarly, the 2016 Global Strategy for the European Union?s Foreign and Security Policy set the principled pragmatism as a guideline. Moreover, the EU?s transformative power towards member states is questioned after two initiatives to trigger Article 7 TEU procedures against Poland and Hungary. What about the Europeanization of the Western Balkans? Despite the fact that the EU has been the main driver of change, the Europeanization of this post-conflict region has been slow. According to Freedom House, after substantial progress from 2004 to 2010, the Western Balkans has declined six years in a row, and its average Democracy Score in 2016 is the same as it was in 2004. With the exception of Albania, the scores of all countries are declining, not improving. The EU?s security-democratisation dilemma strongly affects its transformative power in the Western Balkans. By prioritising effective government rather than democratic governance, the EU has helped stabilise non-democratic and corrupt regimes rather than transforming them, legitimising Balkan "stabilitocrats".


2018 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 181-191
Author(s):  
Christopher Walsch

Abstract This article explores whether a new east‑west divide exists in the enlarged European Union by analysing national discourses on European integration in the Visegrad Four (V4) states. Two V4 foreign policy legacies form the basis of analysis: the “Return to Europe” discourse and the discourses around the reconstruction of the historical self. The article gives evidence that the V4 countries share sovereignty in external policies and thus have a distinct European orientation. V4 national‑conservative governments hold sovereigntist positions, however, in policy areas that they consider falling exclusively within the realm of the member state. Comparison with Western European member states gives evidence that the post-1945 paradigm changes were more profound than those of post-1989 ones of Eastern Europe. This historic legacy can explain the more integrationist orientations in Western Europe. The article concludes that behaviour of the individual V4 state seems to be of greater importance for each member than collective V4 group action. Finally, the article gives an outlook on ways in which solidarity between the Western and Eastern halves of the EU can be exercised in an ideologically diverging Union.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document