DOCSLIB.ORG

Measuring the Impact of Eastern Partnership on Minorities by Heidrun Ferrari

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Measuring the Impact of Eastern Partnership on Minorities by Heidrun Ferrari policy paper Partnership for all? Measuring the impact of Eastern Partnership on minorities By Heidrun Ferrari YEZIDI CHILDREN IN ARMENIA. PHOTO: MRG Contents Acronyms 1 Executive Summary 2 Introduction 7 1 An Overview of the Eastern Partnership 9 1.1 The evolution of the Eastern Partnership 9 1.2 The Eastern Partnership approach 10 1.2.1 The bilateral dimension 10 1.2.2 The multilateral dimension 11 2 Minorities in the Eastern Partnership Countries 14 2.1 Armenia 14 2.2 Azerbaijan 14 2.3 Belarus 15 2.4 Georgia 16 2.5 Moldova 17 2.6 Ukraine 18 3 Minority Rights in the Policy Process of the Eastern Partnership 20 3.1 The policy process 20 3.1.1 What follows the Vilnius Summit? 20 3.1.2 Minority perceptions on the EU 20 3.2 Objective setting from ENP Action Plans to the 2013 Vilnius Summit Roadmap 22 3.2.1 Action Plans 22 3.2.2 Visa Liberalization Action Plans 22 3.2.3 The 2013 Summit Roadmap 22 3.3 EU monitoring of progress towards the 2013 Vilnius Summit with regard to minorities 23 3.3.1 Country Progress Reports 23 3.3.2 Visa Liberalization Action Plan (VLAP) Progress Reports 24 3.4 Gaps and limitations of EU monitoring of minority rights 25 3.4.1 Minority rights in the education sector 25 3.4.2 Participation of minorities in the public sphere 26 3.4.2 Consideration of specific minority groups 27 4 Participation of Minorities in the EaP 28 4.1 The EaP Civil Society Forum 28 4.2 Inclusion of minorities in the CSF and the National Platforms 29 5 Inclusion of Minorities in EU Financial Instruments available for EaP Countries 32 5.1 Financial support for the Eastern Partnership countries 32 5.2 Mainstreaming of minorities into ENPI sector programmes 33 5.3 Inclusion of minorities in grant programmes – The Civil Society Facility 34 5.4 Inclusion of minorities in grant programmes – The European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights 35 6 Statistical Data and Indicator Setting for Minority Rights 37 6.1 The need for statistical data on minorities 37 6.2 Challenges in disaggregated collection 37 6.3 Rights-based approaches and minority inclusion into programme planning 38 6.4 Minority-specific indicators for programming 39 Conclusions 41 Recommendations 42 Notes 44 PARTNERSHIP FOR ALL? MEASURING THE IMPACT OF EASTERN PARTNERSHIP ON MINORITIES Acronyms AA Association Agreement EURONEST EU-Neighbourhood East Parliamentary CERD Committee on the Elimination of All Forms of Assembly Racial Discrimination FCNM Framework Convention for the Protection of CESCR Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural National Minorities Rights FDP Formerly Deported People CIB Comprehensive Institution Building GGDC Good Governance and Development Contract CoE Council of Europe IDP Internally Displaced People CORLEAP Conference of the Regional and Local IPA Instrument for Pre-Accession Authorities for the Eastern Partnership LGBT Lesbian, Gay, Bi-sexual and Transgender CSF Civil Society Facility MEDA Measures d’accompagnement (accompanying CSFO Civil Society Forum measures) CSO Civil Society Organization NGO Non-Governmental Organization CSP Country Strategy Paper NIP National Indicative Programme CBSS Country-based Support Scheme OSCE Organization for Security and Cooperation in DCFTA Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Europe Agreement OECD Organization for Economic Cooperation and EaP Eastern Partnership Development EaPIC Eastern Partnership Integration and PCA Partnership and Cooperation Agreement Cooperation Programme PRDP Pilot Regional Development Programmes EaPMN Eastern Partnership Minorities Network SRC Sector Reform Contract ECMI European Centre for Minority Issues SBC State Building Contract ECRI European Commission against Racism and TACIS Technical Assistance to the Commonwealth of Intolerance Independent States EIDHR European Instrument for Democracy and USSR Soviet Union Human Rights UNDP United Nations Development Programme ENP European Neighbourhood Policy UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and ENPI European Neighbourhood and Partnership Cultural Organization Instrument VLAP Visa Liberation Action Plan EU European Union PARTNERSHIP FOR ALL? MEASURING THE IMPACT OF EASTERN PARTNERSHIP ON MINORITIES 1 Executive Summary The Eastern Partnership Minority rights in the policy process In 2009 the EU launched the Eastern Partnership (EaP) The 2009 Declaration of the Prague Summit, which encompassing Azerbaijan, Armenia, Belarus, Georgia, launched the Eastern Partnership, does not refer to Moldova and Ukraine. The respective Council Declaration minority rights explicitly but more broadly makes a states that the EaP commits “to the principles of commitment to fundamental values including the respect international law and to fundamental values, including for human rights, confirmed by the 2011 Eastern democracy, the rule of law and the respect for human Partnership Summit in Warsaw.3 Reference to both human rights and fundamental freedoms, as well as to market and minority rights is made in the three sets of documents economy, sustainable development and good governance.”1 outlining the way forward to association with the EU: the The Eastern Partnership seeks to follow a two-track Actions Plans, Visa Liberalization Action Plans (VLAP) approach. The bilateral dimension has three long-term and Country Progress Reports for Ukraine, Moldova and objectives including the Association Agreements (AA) Georgia. The Action Plans refer to actions on common between partner countries and the EU (with the exception values through political dialogue and reform as well as to of Belarus), the Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade actions with regard to economic reform, trade and Agreement (DCFTA) and Visa liberalization. The EaP also alignment of legislation to bring about economic introduced financial initiatives: The Comprehensive integration. All Action Plans contain a standardized Institution Building (CIB) is aimed to support the reference to ensure or to strengthen the “respect for the strengthening of capacities of those institutions in the rights of persons belonging to national minorities”. With partner countries that are key to implementing the new the exception of the Azerbaijan Action Plan, reference is Association Agreements with the EU. The Pilot Regional made to a limited number of steps each country aims to Development Programmes (PRDP), the Eastern take individually. The VLAPs set out two consecutive levels Partnership Civil Society Facility (“Facility”) and the of benchmarks - the policy framework and implementation Eastern Partnership Integration and Cooperation (EaPIC) measures. Citizens’ rights including the protection of programme which constitutes a financial instrument minorities are a specific component of the fourth block of working on the basis of the “more for more” principle. all VLAPs. Finally, all country-specific measures for The EaP multilateral dimension is comprised of Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine bear particular reference to initiatives at three different levels. At the political level, ensuring the rights of minorities.4 Progress on, and gaps in, exchange was established through biannual Summits of the objectives of the European Neighbourhood Policy and Heads of States and annual meetings of Foreign Affairs the EaP are captured in Country Progress Reports to Ministers. At the technical level the introduction of monitor action plans and VLAP Progress Reports on Thematic Platforms aimed to promote cooperation in Ukraine, Moldova and Georgia.5 concrete thematic areas. So-called Flagship Initiatives With the initialing of the Association Agreements with implement multilateral projects. At the participatory level Georgia and Moldova the conclusion can be drawn that with the EU-Neighbourhood East Parliamentary Assembly political commitments with regard to minority rights are (EURONEST) and the Conference of the Regional and by no means intrinsic to the association package due to a Local Authorities for the Eastern Partnership (CORLEAP), number of reasons. These include key concerns regularly exchange platforms were introduced. Finally, the Civil flagged up in the progress reports which are not addressed Society Forum (CSF) aims “to develop and propose by EaP countries; insufficient collection of data and modalities for the establishment of a Civil Society Forum information on minority concerns in relevant sectors; of the Eastern Partnership”.2 conflicting assessments by the EU and government reports; unsystematic reference of minority concerns, particularly in progress reports; and a prioritization, again especially in VLAP reports, on anti-discrimination issues. Most 2 PARTNERSHIP FOR ALL? MEASURING THE IMPACT OF EASTERN PARTNERSHIP ON MINORITIES importantly, the EU has no clear indicators, targets and There are a number of factors that constrain the benchmarks to assess progress. participation of minority CSOs in the National Platforms. This particularly affects the assessment of In their member selections, National Platforms focus on implementation of minority relevant legislation. It is bringing in expertise on those thematic fields that focus straightforward to stipulate progress at a policy level in their engagement, which for the most part do not touch on line with clear benchmarks, such as draft legislation and the rights and concerns of minorities. Moreover, addressing first or second readings. However, the actual language barriers to minority participation seems to be an implementation of legislation is less clear as it usually issue only for some of the National Platforms in the EaP requires the adequate application of a multitude
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Strasbourg, 3 September 2003 MIN-LANG/PR (2003) 7 Initial Periodical Report Presented to the Secretary General of the Council Of
    Strasbourg, 3 September 2003 MIN-LANG/PR (2003) 7 EUROPEAN CHARTER FOR REGIONAL OR MINORITY LANGUAGES Initial Periodical Report presented to the Secretary General of the Council of Europe in accordance with Article 15 of the Charter ARMENIA The First Report of the Republic of Armenia According to Paragraph 1 of Article 15 of European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages June 2003, Yerevan 2 INTRODUCTION The Republic of Armenia signed the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages on May 11, 2001. In respect of Armenia the Charter has come into force since May 1, 2002. The RA introduces the following report according to Paragraph 1 of Article 15 of the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages. This report has been elaborated and developed by the State Language Board at the Ministry of Education and Science based on the information submitted by the relevant ministries NGOs and administrative offices, taking into consideration the remarks and suggestions made by them and all parties interested, while discussing the following report. PART I Historical Outline Being one of the oldest countries in the world, for the first time in its new history Armenia regained its independence on May 28, 1918. The first Republic existed till November 29, 1920, when Armenia after forced sovetalization joined the Soviet Union, becoming on of the 15 republics. As a result of referendum the Republic of Armenia revived its independence on September 21, 1991. Armenia covers an area of 29,8 thousand km2, the population is nearly 32000001. Armenia borders on Iran, Georgia, Azerbaijan and Turkey.
    [Show full text]
  • Special Report No 9/2016 EU External Migration Spending in Southern
    Special Report No 9/2016 (pursuant to Article 287(4), second subparagraph, TFEU) EU external migration spending in Southern Mediterranean and Eastern Neighbourhood countries until 2014 together with the replies of the Commission 12, rue Alcide De Gasperi - L - 1615 Luxembourg T (+352) 4398 – 1 E [email protected] eca.europa.eu 2 CONTENTS Paragraph Abbreviations and acronyms Glossary Executive summary I - V Introduction 1 - 20 EU external migration policy 2 - 20 The policy framework 2 - 5 A global approach to external migration 6 - 8 Priority given to neighbourhood countries 9 Varied institutional and financial instruments 10 - 11 Different sources of the EU's external migration spending 12 - 16 Financing and management arrangements 17 - 20 Audit scope and approach 21 - 26 Coherence of objectives, identification of partner country needs and monitoring instruments need improving 27 - 65 A wide range of policy objectives not always interlinked 27 - 31 Identification of partner countries’ needs requires better attention 32 - 37 Monitoring and assessment instruments need improving 38 - 51 Geographic and thematic priorities were difficult to verify 52 - 60 Intervention spread over a wide geographical area 61 - 65 Weaknesses affected the effectiveness of the EU's external migration spending (TPMA and ENPI) in the Southern Mediterranean and the Eastern Partnership countries 66 - 89 Shortcomings in operational objectives and result indicators made projects’ effectiveness difficult to assess 67 - 69 Factors hindering effectiveness 70 - 73
    [Show full text]
  • Eastern Partnership Policy Beyond 2020: Advances and Omissions in a Vast Agenda
    14 April 2020 Eastern Partnership policy beyond 2020: advances and omissions in a vast agenda Michael Emerson, Steven Blockmans, Denis Cenusa, Tamara Kovziridze and Veronika Movchan The Joint Communication on the Eastern Partnership (EaP)1 published in March offers a broad array of policy orientations but relatively little operational specificity. This drafting is presumably intended to be acceptable to all six EaP states. The lack of reference to the joint request of the three states with Association Agreements (AAs) – Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine – to open a ‘quadrilogue’ with the EU to treat matters of common concern to them, and which are not relevant or plausible in relation to the other EaP states, is a glaring omission that could still be corrected at the EaP summit on 18 June. This summit should also agree on EaP policy beyond 2020, with the partner states, and include the many transnational issues worthy of quadrilateral consultations, such as how revisions of major EU policies (for instance, on energy, climate and competition) may affect the associated states. 1 Communication by the European Commission and High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, “Eastern Partnership policy beyond 2020 – Reinforcing Resilience – an Eastern Partnership that delivers for all”, JOIN(2020)7 final, 18 March 2020. Michael Emerson is Associate Senior Research Fellow at CEPS. Steven Blockmans is Head of the EU Foreign Policy unit at CEPS and Professor of EU External Relations Law and Governance at the University of Amsterdam. Denis Cenusa is a political scientist and Program Director on Energy Security at the independent economic think-tank Expert-Grup, Chisinau, Moldova.
    [Show full text]
  • Motion: Europe Is Worth It – for a Green Recovery Rooted in Solidarity and A
    German Bundestag Printed paper 19/20564 19th electoral term 30 June 2020 version Preliminary Motion tabled by the Members of the Bundestag Agnieszka Brugger, Anja Hajduk, Dr Franziska Brantner, Sven-Christian Kindler, Dr Frithjof Schmidt, Margarete Bause, Kai Gehring, Uwe Kekeritz, Katja Keul, Dr Tobias Lindner, Omid Nouripour, Cem Özdemir, Claudia Roth, Manuel Sarrazin, Jürgen Trittin, Ottmar von Holtz, Luise Amtsberg, Lisa Badum, Danyal Bayaz, Ekin Deligöz, Katja Dörner, Katharina Dröge, Britta Haßelmann, Steffi Lemke, Claudia Müller, Beate Müller-Gemmeke, Erhard Grundl, Dr Kirsten Kappert-Gonther, Maria Klein-Schmeink, Christian Kühn, Stephan Kühn, Stefan Schmidt, Dr Wolfgang Strengmann-Kuhn, Markus Tressel, Lisa Paus, Tabea Rößner, Corinna Rüffer, Margit Stumpp, Dr Konstantin von Notz, Dr Julia Verlinden, Beate Walter-Rosenheimer, Gerhard Zickenheiner and the Alliance 90/The Greens parliamentary group be to Europe is worth it – for a green recovery rooted in solidarity and a strong 2021- 2027 EU budget the by replaced The Bundestag is requested to adopt the following resolution: I. The German Bundestag notes: A strong European Union (EU) built on solidarity which protects its citizens and our livelihoods is the best investment we can make in our future. Our aim is an EU that also and especially proves its worth during these difficult times of the corona pandemic, that fosters democracy, prosperity, equality and health and that resolutely tackles the challenge of the century that is climate protection. We need an EU that bolsters international cooperation on the world stage and does not abandon the weakest on this earth. proofread This requires an EU capable of taking effective action both internally and externally, it requires greater solidarity on our continent and beyond - because no country can effectively combat the climate crisis on its own, no country can stamp out the pandemic on its own.
    [Show full text]
  • 1. Thematic Instruments
    1. Thematic instruments 1.1. Instrument for Nuclear Safety Cooperation (INSC) The Instrument for Nuclear Safety Cooperation (INSC) was established following Council Regulation (Euratom) no 300/2007 of 19 February 2007,1 replacing and widening the TACIS Nuclear Safety Programme,2 which had been established to help prevent nuclear incidents in the former USSR satellite states. The INSC aims to fund actions from a broad range of stakeholders and cover the promotion and development of an effective regulatory framework for nuclear safety (including materials and radiation protection). It also allows for the provision of tech- nical support to nuclear stakeholders in 15 countries (at national, local or regional level with private companies, NGOs, the Joint Research Centre (JRC), EU agencies and international organisations). Adopted following the ordinary legislation procedure3 and based on the multiannu- al strategy programme,4 €524 million have been allocated to the INSC for the 2007- 2013 period. The Instrument is implemented through annual action programmes. A margin of manoeuvre is preserved as it is possible to engage in emergency or sup- port measures without clear prior indications in the multiannual strategy paper. For example, a nuclear incident requires urgent safety measures and cannot be planned explicitly into a multiannual strategic programme. On 25 January 2013, a new cooperation mechanism5 was established between the EU and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).6 Once adopted, the new multian- nual financial framework should have a budget of €560 million for the period 2014- 1. See: Council Regulation n°300/2007 of 19 February 2007 establishing an Instrument for Nuclear Safety Coop- eration: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2007:081:0001:0010:EN:PDF.
    [Show full text]
  • The New Eu Foreign Policy Architecture
    THE NEW EU FOREIGN POLICY ARCHITECTURE REVIEWING THE FIRST TWO YEARS OF THE EEAS NIKLAS HELWIG PAUL IVAN HRANT KOSTANYAN CENTRE FOR EUROPEAN POLICY STUDIES (CEPS) BRUSSELS The Centre for European Policy Studies (CEPS) is an independent policy research institute in Brussels. Its mission is to produce sound policy research leading to constructive solutions to the challenges facing Europe. The views expressed in this book are entirely those of the authors and should not be attributed to CEPS or any other institution with which they are associated or to the European Union. Niklas Helwig is a Marie Curie Researcher of the EXACT network at the University of Edinburgh and Cologne and focuses on the institutional development of EU foreign policy. He worked for the Centre for European Policy Studies and the Finnish Institute of International Affairs. Paul Ivan is a Romanian diplomat. Previously, he worked as a researcher for the Centre for European Policy Studies, where he focused on EU political and institutional issues and the European External Action Service. Hrant Kostanyan is an associate research fellow at CEPS and a PhD candidate at the Centre for EU Studies at Ghent University. He worked as an external expert for International Alert, based in London, in the Eastern Europe and South Caucasus research project. He also worked as an expert on a European Commission-funded project on the EU’s relations with Russia and the Eastern Partnership at the EU Neighbourhood Info Centre. The authors thank Piotr Maciej Kaczyński for his comments on an earlier draft. ISBN 978-94-6138-262-7 © Copyright 2013, Centre for European Policy Studies and the authors.
    [Show full text]
  • ASD-Covert-Foreign-Money.Pdf
    overt C Foreign Covert Money Financial loopholes exploited by AUGUST 2020 authoritarians to fund political interference in democracies AUTHORS: Josh Rudolph and Thomas Morley © 2020 The Alliance for Securing Democracy Please direct inquiries to The Alliance for Securing Democracy at The German Marshall Fund of the United States 1700 18th Street, NW Washington, DC 20009 T 1 202 683 2650 E [email protected] This publication can be downloaded for free at https://securingdemocracy.gmfus.org/covert-foreign-money/. The views expressed in GMF publications and commentary are the views of the authors alone. Cover and map design: Kenny Nguyen Formatting design: Rachael Worthington Alliance for Securing Democracy The Alliance for Securing Democracy (ASD), a bipartisan initiative housed at the German Marshall Fund of the United States, develops comprehensive strategies to deter, defend against, and raise the costs on authoritarian efforts to undermine and interfere in democratic institutions. ASD brings together experts on disinformation, malign finance, emerging technologies, elections integrity, economic coercion, and cybersecurity, as well as regional experts, to collaborate across traditional stovepipes and develop cross-cutting frame- works. Authors Josh Rudolph Fellow for Malign Finance Thomas Morley Research Assistant Contents Executive Summary �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 1 Introduction and Methodology ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������
    [Show full text]
  • The Evolution of a Common EU Foreign, Security and Defence Policy
    Chronology: The Evolution of a Common EU Foreign, Security and Defence Policy March 1948: Belgium, France, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, and the UK sign the Brussels Treaty of mutual defence. April 1949: The US, Canada and ten West European countries sign the North Atlantic Treaty . May 1952: The European Defence Community treaty is agreed by the six ECSC member states. It would have created a common European army, and permitted West Germany’s rearmament. In August 1954, the French National Assembly rejects the treaty. October 1954: The Western European Union (WEU) is created on the basis of the Brussels Treaty, and expanded to include Italy and West Germany. West Germany joins NATO. December 1969: At their summit in The Hague , the EC heads of state or government ask the foreign ministers to study ways to achieve progress in political unification. October 1970: The foreign ministers approve the Luxembourg Report , setting up European Political Cooperation. They will meet every six months, to coordinate their positions on international problems and agree common actions. They will be aided by a committee of the directors of political affairs (the Political Committee ). July 1973: The foreign ministers agree to improve EPC procedures in the Copenhagen Report . They will meet at least four times a year; the Political Committee can meet as often as necessary. European Correspondents and working groups will help prepare the Political Committee’s work. The Commission can contribute its views to proceedings. October 1981: Measures approved in the London Report include the crisis consultation mechanism: any three foreign ministers can convene an emergency EPC meeting within 48 hours.
    [Show full text]
  • Adopted Resolution
    ADOPTED RESOLUTION EPP CONGRESS ZAGREB, 20 – 21 NOVEMBER 2019 Resolution adopted at the EPP Congress, Zagreb (Croatia), 20th - 21th November 2019 EPP Resolution on the 10th anniversary of the Eastern Partnership and its future Bearing in mind that: a) Eastern Partnership is a tailor-made concept of cooperation for all six countries: Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Moldova, Ukraine. Their further progress on the European path is very much dependent on compliance with European values and standards, to which these countries have committed themselves. b) the EU has proved its enormous transformative power through the Enlargement Policy, as confirmed by the success of the Central and Eastern European countries in their development from post-totalitarian regulated economies to European style democracies and social market economies, which was achieved due to the process of integration into the EU, c) this transformative power by enlargement shall be used in the Western Balkans and also in Eastern Partnership countries, willing to join the EU, d) this year marks the 10th anniversary of the Eastern Partnership (the EaP) which was established in 2009 as part of the European Neighborhood Policy and throughout the decade it has proven to be an effective instrument for providing tailored support based on the ‘more for more and less for less’ principle for the EaP countries in their implementation of the European reforms, e) the EPP in its Resolution on Ukraine, Georgia and Moldova, adopted during the EPP Congress in Helsinki on 7-8 November
    [Show full text]
  • The Eastern Partnership After Five Years: Time for Deep Rethinking
    DIRECTORATE-GENERAL FOR EXTERNAL POLICIES OF THE UNION DIRECTORATE B POLICY DEPARTMENT STUDY THE EASTERN PARTNERSHIP AFTER FIVE YEARS: TIME FOR DEEP RETHINKING Abstract The first five years of the Eastern Partnership have witnessed the most challenging period of relations between the EU and its eastern neighbours since the fall of communism in 1991. The year 2014 was a pivotal one, marked by the signing of Association Agreements with the European Union by three partners countries – Ukraine, Republic of Moldova, and Georgia – but also by Russian military intervention in Ukraine, including the annexation of Crimea. The continued aggression of a revanchist and intransigent Russia has altered the political and social landscape, and the original concept of the Eastern Partnership, however well- intentioned and suitable for a previous era, is not adequate to meet the challenges of 2015 and beyond. Therefore, there is a need for the EU to rethink its policy towards the Eastern Partnership countries and Russia, and build new approaches to suit the new reality. More than ever, the EU needs to focus its attention on relations with those Eastern Partner countries that are willing to cooperate more closely and who truly wish to integrate with the Union, politically, economically and socially. Ukraine, Republic of Moldova, and Georgia should be perceived as more than partners, and the ‘more for more’ approach should be strengthened. Such an approach would send a clear political signal to all parties involved, and make for a better use of limited resources. EP/EXPO/B/AFET/FWC/2013-08/Lot1/01 February 2015 PE 536.438 EN Policy Department DG External Policies This study was requested by the European Parliament's Committee on Foreign Affairs.
    [Show full text]
  • The Jews of Simferopol
    BE'H The Jews of Simferopol This article is dedicated to two of our grandsons who are now Israeli soldiers: Daniel Prigozin and Yonaton Inegram. Esther (Herschman) Rechtschafner Kibbutz Ein-Zurim 2019 Table of Contents Page Introduction 1 Basic Information about Simferopol 2 Geography 2 History 3 Jewish History 4 The Community 4 The Holocaust 6 After the Holocaust 8 Conclusion 11 Appendices 12 Maps 12 Photos 14 Bibliography 16 Internet 16 Introduction The story of why I decided to write about the history of Simferopol is as follows. As many know, I have written a few articles and organized a few websites1. All of these are in connection to the places in Eastern Europe that my extend family comes from. A short while ago Professor Jerome Shapiro2,who had previously sent me material about his family for my Sveksna website wrote me an email and mentioned that he would like to have an article written about the place where his wife's family comes from: Simferopol, Crimea. Since I did not know anything about this place, I decided to take this upon myself as a challenge. This meant: 1. researching a place that I am not emotionally attached to 2. finding material about a place that is not well known 3. finding a website for placement of the article With the help of people I know by way of my previous researching3, people I met while looking for information, the internet (and the help of G-d), I felt that I had enough information to write an article. While researching for material for this article, I became acquainted with Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Non-Paper Our Strategy on the Future of Eastern Partnership We
    Trio Strategy 2030 October 2019 Non-paper Our Strategy on the Future of Eastern Partnership We should set the European Trio Process for the most advanced Eastern partners for the next decade, which should be supporting the leading EU Associated/DCFTA countries (Ukraine, Georgia and Moldova) I. A New Flagship Initiative – the Trio Strategy 2030: Our objectives 1) The EU has proved in the history that it has a huge soft transformative potential for neighbouring regions and countries. Since the World War II and especially since the fall of the Berlin Wall, a transformation of economically poor post-totalitarian or post-soviet countries into successful and democratic countries was happening only through the process of EU enlargements. Such a transformation of neighbouring Eastern Partnership countries would be beneficial also for the EU itself because, as the EU Commissioner J. Hahn has said, "We have to become smarter at exporting stability. If not, Europe will keep importing instability". 2) Up until now the EaP dimension, established by the EU in 2009, was very successful in supporting the efforts of a group of EaP countries – Ukraine, Georgia, Moldova, which have each signed the Association Agreement with the EU, including its part on Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area (the EU Associated Trio), in moving more rapidly and effectively with implementation of necessary reforms and speeding-up ahead in the direction of deeper European political and economic integration with the EU. The Eastern Partnership (EaP) strategy, which has also formulated tangible political flagship objectives, such as introduction of a visa-free travel for the citizens of the EU Associated Trio, was a powerful soft-power instrument, which EU has used in order to assist those countries and their ordinary citizens to sustain a high-level political motivation for European type of difficult structural reforms.
    [Show full text]