Justifying the EU’s interests in the region: energy security

Author(s):  
Beatrix Futák-Campbell

Building on the three previous chapters’ findings on collective ‘European’ identity, norms and moral concerns, this chapter turns to collective EU interest formulations. There are numerous collective interests such as terrorism, hybrid threats, economic volatility, climate change and energy security that have been identified by the EU Global Strategy (EU HR/VP 2016). These interests not only bind EU member states into acting together, but also signify to other, non-EU states what the EU is focusing on. The practitioners who participated in the study also identified migration, the environment, organised crime and transport as collective EU interests. Unsurprisingly they identified energy security as the most pressing common security interest that unites EU member states. Three main patterns emerge from the corpus. First, practitioners’ constructions of energy interests are examined. The second pattern reveals practitioners’ accounts of future plans to manage the collective EU concern over energy supplies. In the third and final pattern, practitioners offer justifications of EU interests in the eastern region, beyond the collective interests in energy supplies, and again through invoking moral concerns and the vocation attributes the EU has for the eastern neighbours.

2012 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 39-64 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gönül Oğuz

Human trafficking lies at the heart of international organised crime. It is concerned with profits in terms of the exploitation of human beings. It is an abuse of basic rights. The enormous interest and concern for trafficking and human struggling is factual evidence. In the EU, policy on irregular migration is driven by the perception that the member states risk being overwhelmed by large numbers of irregular migrants thought to constitute a threat to national security. This has implications for policy measures designed to combat trafficking and human smuggling, which may not work without international cooperation. In most cases, victims are brought to the EU member states from abroad. This creates a demand for international obligations for cooperation and related instruments for combating human smuggling and trafficking. Therefore, the member states and their law enforcement agencies cannot tackle human trafficking alone. A question arises as to whether Turkey can be a vital partner, based on the facts that it is a transit country, with a strong border and assuming that it has a role to play, through its expertise and its commitment to dealing with the effects of trafficking. Unfortunately, these facts are still overlooked, while disproportionately intensive efforts are expended on dealing with questions of national security by the member states. Combating illegal immigration and reducing and controlling migration are frequently seen through the magnifying glass of the struggle against human trafficking. This article focuses on the international factors involved and how the wider international community might be able to play an effective role in helping to tackle human trafficking. It argues that continued coordination and collaboration across the countries is vital. The article reviews the empirical evidence from Turkey, as non-EU/candidate countries' cooperation and assistance in human trafficking may have an important dimension.


2020 ◽  
Vol 18 (54) ◽  
pp. 223-246
Author(s):  
Hana N. Hlaváčková ◽  

The European security environment has changed and the EU has become more independent in its security policy. New threats faced by the EU in 2014 (the migration crises) and other remaining threats (such as terrorism, organised crime, piracy) need solving by its greater involvement in the region. One problem that the EU tries to solve is the inconsistency of member states in security issues. In this article, we focus on the V4 group and their opinions towards EU security. This article examines strategies adopted by small/new EU member states to protect European borders and European territories and regions outside the EU that affect their security. For a long time, the V4 countries only participated sporadically in EU missions. The article shows what changes took place and what were the reasons for the decision to participate or not in the EU activities. The article raises the question of whether the show-the-flag strategy adopted by the V4 countries and their participation in EU missions is relevant for ensuring European security nowadays.


This chapter focuses on the creation of a collateral transaction. It looks at two issues: (i) which formalities must be fulfilled in order to create a collateral transaction, or, more specifically, to validly provide collateral? And (ii) to what extent must the collateral taker have 'possession' or 'control' for a valid provision of collateral? These two issues seem to be especially problematical in the jurisdictions of the EU Member States. The problems follow from the implementation of the Collateral Directive into EU Member States laws, where both issues required derogations of, or at least amendments of, their national (property) laws. More specifically, the Collateral Directive aims to dis-apply formal requirements for collateral transactions to be validly created, i.e. for collateral to be validly provided. Examples of such formal requirements are the registration of a security interest with a public register and the execution of a specific document in a mandatory way. Meanwhile, general US property law requires the collateral taker to be in control of the collateralized assets as a means of perfecting a security interest.


2008 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 70-89
Author(s):  
Michal Natorski ◽  
Anna Herranz Surrallés

In 2006, debates about ‘energy security’ reached the top of the EU’s political agenda. A conjunction of political and economic factors seemed to be critically affecting the security of supply in most EU member states. A wide range of actors called for the establishment of a ‘Common Energy Policy,’ based on a fully operational Internal Energy Market and equipped with an external dimension enabling the EU to speak with one voice in the world. The results of this heated debate, however, fell short of these objectives. Informed by securitisation approaches, this article explores the debate over energy security that unfolded between 2005 and 2007. It aims to provide an understanding about why the framing of energy as a security issue did not mobilise enough support in favour of ground-breaking measures to tackle what was unanimously presented as a unique and especially hazardous situation. Specifically, the article will argue that those attempts to frame energy as a security issue in order to gain support for a Common Energy Policy have been of limited effect, precisely because the security framing contributed to the further legitimisation of EU member states’ reluctance to cede sovereignty in the energy domain.


Author(s):  
Irina PILVERE ◽  
Aleksejs NIPERS ◽  
Bartosz MICKIEWICZ

Europe 2020 Strategy highlights bioeconomy as a key element for smart and green growth in Europe. Bioeconomy in this case includes agriculture, forestry, fisheries, food and pulp and paper production, parts of chemical, biotechnological and energy industries and plays an important role in the EU’s economy. The growth of key industries of bioeconomy – agriculture and forestry – highly depends on an efficient and productive use of land as a production resource. The overall aim of this paper is to evaluate opportunities for development of the main sectors of bioeconomy (agriculture and forestry) in the EU based on the available resources of land. To achieve this aim, several methods were used – monographic, analysis and synthesis, induction and deduction, statistical analysis methods. The findings show that it is possible to improve the use of land in the EU Member States. If all the Member States reached the average EU level, agricultural products worth EUR 77 bln would be annually additionally produced, which is 19 % more than in 2014, and an extra 5 billion m3 volume of forest growing stock would be gained, which is 20 % more than in 2010.


2015 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 634-638
Author(s):  
Joanna Szwacka Mokrzycka

The objective of this article is to present the standard of living of households in Poland in comparison with other EU member states. The starting point for analysis was the economic condition of Poland against the background of other EU member states. The next step consisted of assessment of the standard of living of inhabitants of individual EU member states on the basis of financial condition of households and the structure of consumption expenditure. It was found that the differences within the EU in terms of economic development and the standard of living of households still remain substantial.


2020 ◽  
pp. 97-105
Author(s):  
Aleksandra Kusztykiewicz-Fedurek

Political security is very often considered through the prism of individual states. In the scholar literature in-depth analyses of this kind of security are rarely encountered in the context of international entities that these countries integrate. The purpose of this article is to draw attention to key aspects of political security in the European Union (EU) Member States. The EU as a supranational organisation, gathering Member States first, ensures the stability of the EU as a whole, and secondly, it ensures that Member States respect common values and principles. Additionally, the EU institutions focus on ensuring the proper functioning of the Eurozone (also called officially “euro area” in EU regulations). Actions that may have a negative impact on the level of the EU’s political security include the boycott of establishing new institutions conducive to the peaceful coexistence and development of states. These threats seem to have a significant impact on the situation in the EU in the face of the proposed (and not accepted by Member States not belonging to the Eurogroup) Eurozone reforms concerning, inter alia, appointment of the Minister of Economy and Finance and the creation of a new institution - the European Monetary Fund.


2020 ◽  
pp. 102-111
Author(s):  
Svitlana Shults ◽  
Olena Lutskiv

Technological development of society is of unequal cyclic nature and is characterized by changing periods of economic growth, stagnation phases, and technological crises. The new wave of technological changes and new technological basis corresponding to the technological paradigm boost the role of innovations and displace the traditional factors of economic growth. Currently, intellectual and scientific-technical capacity are the main economic development resources. The use of innovation and new knowledge change the technological structure of the economy, increase the elements of the innovative economy, knowledge economy, and digital economy, i.e. the new technological paradigm is formed. The paper aims to research the basic determinants of technological paradigms’ forming and development, and determining their key features, as well as to analyze social transformations of the EU Member States and Ukraine. The paper focuses attention on the research of the features of social transformations. The structural transformations are analyzed based on the Bertelsmann Transformation Index that estimates the quality of democracy, market economy, and political governance. The transformation processes are assessed on the example of the EU Member States and Ukraine. The authors argue that social transformations and structural changes in the economy are related to the change of technological paradigms that boost the economic modernization and gradual progressive development of humanity in general. The nature and main determinants of 5 industrial and 2 post-industrial technological paradigms are outlined. Their general features and main areas of basic technologies implementation emerging in the realization of a certain technological paradigm are explained. The conclusions regarding the fact that innovative technologies and available scientific-technological resources define the main vector of economic development are made. The new emerging technological paradigm is of strategic importance for society development.


2019 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 79-99
Author(s):  
Justyna Misiągiewicz

Nowadays, energy security is a growing concern in state foreignpolicy. Interdependency in the energy field is a very important dimensionof contemporary relations between states and transnational corporations.Energy security is becoming a key issue for the European Union (EU). TheUnion is one of the world’s fastest-growing energy markets and the biggestimporter of energy resources. For the foreseeable future, Europe’s energydependence will probably increase. Facing a shortage of energy, Europe isdependent on imports and the EU member states need to diversify their energysupplies. The Caspian region contains some of the largest undevelopedoil and gas reserves in the world. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, thenewly independent Caspian states became open to foreign investment. Thegrowing energy needs have given the EU a strong interest in developing tieswith energy-producing states in the Caspian region to build the necessarypipeline infrastructure. In this analysis, the pipeline infrastructure that exists orwill be built in the near future will be presented. The analysis will concentrateon routes transporting gas from the Caspian region and the most importantproblems and solutions in designing the midstream energy system in the region.The key aim of the article is to analyse the Southern Gas Corridor (SGC)infrastructure project, which will inevitably contribute to the EU’s energy securityinterest.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document