DOCSLIB.ORG

Foreign Policy 2020

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Foreign Policy 2020 UKRAINIANУКРАЇНСЬКА PRISM: ПРИЗМА: FOREIGNЗОВНІШНЯ POLICY ПОЛІТИКА УДК 327(477)”2020”(048.83)=111 Editors: Nadiia Bureiko, PhD, Hennadiy Maksak, Hanna Shelest, PhD Ukrainian Prism: Foreign Policy 2020. Analytical study // Foreign Policy Council “Ukrainian Prism”, Friedrich Ebert Foundation, Office in Ukraine – Kyiv, 2021. – 332 p. ISBN 978-617-7574-30-8 This analytical study represents a systematic and comprehensive analysis of the Ukrainian foreign policy in 2020. Fifty one directions were analysed – from cooperation with key partners and international organizations to public diplomacy and COVID-19 pandemic consequences. Five evaluation criteria – indicators, based on the new model of research methodology, were applied. The experts have studied and assessed activities of the President, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine, the Parliamentary Committee on Foreign Affairs, and other governmental institutions and parliamentary committees involved in the development and implementation of the foreign policy of Ukraine. This book is the sixth annual study. Previous years’ analysis can be found at prismua.org The reference to the author and the analytical study is obligatory in the cases of complete or partial use of its materials. © Friedrich Ebert Foundation, Office in Ukraine, 2021. © Foreign Policy Council “Ukrainian Prism,” 2021. Content Introduction ................................................................................................................................................ 5 Methodology of Research ..................................................................................................................... 6 Foreign Policy of Ukraine in 2020 ..................................................................................................... 16 1. G -7 Countries Cooperation ............................................................................................................. 30 1.1. United Kingdom ................................................................................................................................. 32 1.2. Italy ....................................................................................................................................................... 37 1.3. Canada .................................................................................................................................................. 42 1.4. Germany .............................................................................................................................................. 48 1.5. USA ........................................................................................................................................................ 53 1.6. France ................................................................................................................................................... 58 1.7. Japan ..................................................................................................................................................... 62 2. European Integration ....................................................................................................................... 66 2.1. European Union ................................................................................................................................. 68 Political dialogue ................................................................................................................................ 69 Economic cooperation ....................................................................................................................... 72 2.2. Eastern Partnership ......................................................................................................................... 77 2.3. European Energy Community ...................................................................................................... 81 3. Euro-Atlantic Integration ................................................................................................................ 86 4. Bilateral Relations ............................................................................................................................. 94 4.1. Belarus .................................................................................................................................................. 96 4.2. Georgia ...............................................................................................................................................100 4.3. Israel ...................................................................................................................................................106 4.4. Iran ......................................................................................................................................................111 4.5. China ...................................................................................................................................................115 4.6. Lithuania ...........................................................................................................................................119 4.7. Moldova .............................................................................................................................................123 4.8. Poland .................................................................................................................................................127 4 4.9. Romania .............................................................................................................................................133 4.10. Slovakia ............................................................................................................................................137 4.11. Turkey ..............................................................................................................................................141 4.12. Hungary ...........................................................................................................................................146 4.13. Czech Republic ...............................................................................................................................150 4.14. Russia ...............................................................................................................................................154 Political relations ...........................................................................................................................155 Economic relations.........................................................................................................................159 Energy relations ..............................................................................................................................162 5. Regional Cooperation .....................................................................................................................166 5.1. Asia-Pacific Region ..........................................................................................................................168 5.2. Middle East ........................................................................................................................................173 5.3. Western Balkans ..............................................................................................................................179 5.4. Baltic States .......................................................................................................................................185 5.5. Visegrad Four ...................................................................................................................................190 5.6. Latin America ...................................................................................................................................194 5.7. Northern Europe .............................................................................................................................202 5.8. South Asia ..........................................................................................................................................207 5.9. Sub-Saharan Africa .........................................................................................................................212 5.10. Central Asia .....................................................................................................................................218 5.11. Black Sea Region ............................................................................................................................224 6. International Organizations ........................................................................................................230 6.1. OSCE ....................................................................................................................................................232 6.2. United Nations .................................................................................................................................238 6.3. Council of Europe ...........................................................................................................................245 7. Multilateral Initiatives ..................................................................................................................252 7.1. Human Rights ..................................................................................................................................254
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Globalisation, Democratisation and Nation-Building As Competing
    Nation-Building, Democratization and Globalization as Competing Priorities in Ukraine’s Education System Summary: This article examines how consecutive governments in Ukraine have reconciled the different demands that nation-building, democratization and globalization pose on the national education system. It argues that nation-building conflicts with democratization and with globalization and engages in a review of Ukraine‘s educational policies from Perestroika to the present to illustrate this argument. It shows that nation building in post-Soviet Ukraine was primarily a language project aimed at the ukrainianization of schools and institutes of higher education. It further observes that nation-building was given priority over democratization and globalization in shaping the education system in the first decade following independence. From 2000, however, globalization has become an increasingly important discourse in education removing nation-building from the top of the political agenda. 1. Introduction One of the greatest challenges currently facing the new states in Central and Eastern Europe is educational reform. After obtaining independence in the early 1990s, these states were confronted with the immense task of transforming an outdated centralized education system, which was aimed at delivering a loyal communist workforce, into a modern system that would be much more responsive to consumer demands and would recognize and further individual talent. The immensity of the undertaking lies in the fact that three prerequisites make simultaneous demands on the education system: nation-building, democratization and globalization. The need for nation-building is felt particularly strong in those new states which derive their legitimacy from former minority nations. The political elites of these states consider nation-building a vital tool for the resuscitation of languages and cultures that have 1 played a subordinate role under the past communist regime.
    [Show full text]
  • The Ukrainian Weekly 2011, No.34
    www.ukrweekly.com INSIDE: Yushchenko testifi es against Tymoshenko – page 3 Diaspora leaders comment on today’s Ukraine – page 4 Experts/scholars on independent Ukraine at 20 – page 8 THEPublished U by theKRAINIAN Ukrainian National Association Inc., a fraternal W non-profit associationEEKLY Vol. LXXIX No. 34 THE UKRAINIAN WEEKLY SUNDAY, AUGUST 21, 2011 $1/$2 in Ukraine Chrystyna Lapychak/The Ukrainian Weekly August 24, 1991: The scene inside the Verkhovna Rada after the vote for Ukraine’s independence. Members of the democratic bloc carry in a huge Ukrainian flag, which had been draped over one of the tanks protecting the Russian Parliament building at the time of the attempted coup in the Soviet Union. Movers and shakers comment on Ukraine at 20 by Mark Raczkiewycz Some submissions metaphorically com- entered college, had become the boxing dated Soviet model. This is one of the rea- Special to The Ukrainian Weekly pared to Ukraine to an adolescent entering champion of Ukraine, had travelled abroad sons that for 20 years of independence we his teens, albeit with stunted growth. and had tasted life different from that in the have not achieved the same success in KYIV – To mark the 20th anniversary of Others emphasized the unique opportu- Soviet Union. Therefore, I, like many building a state, as the Baltic states or the the re-establishment of Ukraine’s indepen- nity and potential that Ukraine has to Ukrainians, perceived the political events Georgians, our former neighbors in the dence, The Ukrainian Weekly asked some become a geopolitical player in Europe, but of the early ‘90s optimistically because we Soviet Union, who have been independent of Ukraine’s political, civic and cultural lamented that the country has taken every had a chance to start a new life.
    [Show full text]
  • “Crush Zone”: Geopolitical Games in Post-Cold War Eastern Europe
    Ordering the “Crush Zone”: Geopolitical Games in Post-Cold War Eastern Europe John O’Loughlin1 Institute of Behavioral Science University of Colorado Campus Box 487 Boulder, CO. 80309-0487 Email: [email protected] Word count: 8357 Biography John O’Loughlin is Director of the “Globalization and Democracy” graduate training program, funded by the National Science Foundation, in the Institute of Behavioral Science at the University of Colorado, Boulder. His research interests are in the diffusion of democracy, the relationship between economic and political transitions in Russia and Ukraine, and the changing identities of the peoples of the post-Soviet states. He is editor of Political Geography. 1 Abstract In the aftermath of the Cold War, no consensus has emerged in American political circles on a replacement for the containment geopolitical code of the 1945-1990 era. Various geopolitical paradigms are on offer, each emanating from a world-view that is heavily coloured by domestic political ideologies. Seven of these paradigms are described and considered in light of the momentous geopolitical decision in 1998 to expand NATO into Eastern Europe. Eastern Europe has been considered a “crush zone” by political geographers for over a century and the region has been intimately connected with the geopolitical re-orderings of this century. Strenuous avoidance of geopolitical issues, including long-term relations with Russia, was notable during the NATO expansion debates. The stark contrast of “chaos” (Russia and its neighbours in the former Soviet Union) to “ cosmos” (the European Union and three new central members of NATO) dominated the NATO enlargement debate. The end-consequence of recent NATO and U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Launching an Effective Anti- Corruption Court: Lessons from Ukraine
    U4 Practice Insight 2021:1 Launching an effective anti- corruption court: Lessons from Ukraine By David Vaughn and Olha Nikolaieva Series editor: Sofie Arjon Schütte Disclaimer All views in this text are the author(s)’, and may differ from the U4 partner agencies’ policies. Partner agencies German Corporation for International Cooperation – GIZ German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development – BMZ Global Affairs Canada Ministry for Foreign Affairs of Finland Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Denmark / Danish International Development Assistance – Danida Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency – Sida Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation – SDC The Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation – Norad UK Aid – Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office About U4 U4 is a team of anti-corruption advisers working to share research and evidence to help international development actors get sustainable results. The work involves dialogue, publications, online training, workshops, helpdesk, and innovation. U4 is a permanent centre at the Chr. Michelsen Institute (CMI) in Norway. CMI is a non-profit, multi-disciplinary research institute with social scientists specialising in development studies. www.U4.no [email protected] Cover photo High Anti-Corruption Court (CC copyrighted) Keywords justice sector - anti-corruption courts - judges - vetting - Ukraine - Eastern Europe Publication type U4 Practice Insight Creative commons This work is licenced under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International licence (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) Ukraine’s High Anti-Corruption Court was created in response to immense public demand to hold government officials and judges accountable for corruption. Making the court operational, however, required more than adopting legislation. It meant selecting and preparing judges, recruiting qualified court personnel, and setting up administrative and organisational structures, including courthouse facilities, security, IT infrastructure, and communications systems.
    [Show full text]
  • An Overview of Russian Foreign Policy
    02-4498-6 ch1.qxd 3/25/02 2:58 PM Page 7 1 AN OVERVIEW OF RUSSIAN FOREIGN POLICY Forging a New Foreign Policy Concept for Russia Russia’s entry into the new millennium was accompanied by qualitative changes in both domestic and foreign policy. After the stormy events of the early 1990s, the gradual process of consolidating society around a strengthened democratic gov- ernment took hold as people began to recognize this as a requirement if the ongoing political and socioeconomic transformation of the country was to be successful. The for- mation of a new Duma after the December 1999 parliamen- tary elections, and Vladimir Putin’s election as president of Russia in 2000, laid the groundwork for an extended period of political stability, which has allowed us to undertake the devel- opment of a long-term strategic development plan for the nation. Russia’s foreign policy course is an integral part of this strategic plan. President Putin himself has emphasized that “foreign policy is both an indicator and a determining factor for the condition of internal state affairs. Here we should have no illusions. The competence, skill, and effectiveness with 02-4498-6 ch1.qxd 3/25/02 2:58 PM Page 8 which we use our diplomatic resources determines not only the prestige of our country in the eyes of the world, but also the political and eco- nomic situation inside Russia itself.”1 Until recently, the view prevalent in our academic and mainstream press was that post-Soviet Russia had not yet fully charted its national course for development.
    [Show full text]
  • Tuesday, November 15, 2016 Global Trumpism Why Trump's Victory Was
    11/21/2016 Global Trumpism Home > Global Trumpism Tuesday, November 15, 2016 Global Trumpism Why Trump’s Victory Was 30 Years in the Making and Why It Won’t Stop Here Mark Blyth Mark Blyth is Eastman Professor of Political Economy at Brown University. Trump’s victory was predictable [1], and was predicted [2], but not by looking at polls. Polling has taken a beating recently having failed to predict the victory of David Cameron’s Conservative Party in the British general elections [3], then Brexit [4], and now the election of Donald Trump [5]. One can argue about what’s wrong with the methods involved, but more fundamentally what polls do is to treat these phenomena as isolated events when they are in fact the product of a common set of causes 30 years in the making. There are two issues at play here. The first is known as Galton’s problem, after Sir Francis Galton, the inventor of much of modern statistics. Galton’s problem is that when we treat cases as independent—the British election, Brexit, the U.S. election—they may not actually be independent. There may be links between the cases—think of Brexit’s Nigel Farage showing up at Trump's rallies [6]—and there could be subtler contagion [7] or mimicry [8] effects in play as information from one case “infects” the other, changing the dynamics of the system as a whole. Could there then be a higher set of drivers in the global economy [9] pushing the world in a direction where Trump is really just one part of a more global pattern of events? Consider that there are many Trumpets blowing around the developed world, on both the right and the left.
    [Show full text]
  • REQUIEM for DONBAS Three Essays on the Costs of War in Ukraine
    JOHANNES KEPLER UNIVERSITY LINZ Altenberger Str. 69 4040 Linz, Austria www.jku.at, DVR 0093696 REQUIEM FOR DONBAS Three Essays on the Costs of War in Ukraine By Artem Kochnev A Doctoral Thesis submitted at Department of Economics to obtain the academic degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Doctoral Program “PhD Program in Economics” Supervisor and First Examiner Second Examiner em. Univ-Prof. Dr. Michael Landesmann Dr. habil. rer. soc. oec. Robert Stehrer May 2020 Abstract The thesis investigates short- and long-term effects of war on the economy of Ukraine. Specifically, it discusses the impact of separatists’ control and subsequent adverse trade policies on the real economy, responses of stock market investors to battle events, and the effect of conflict intensity on reform progress and institutional change in Ukraine. The thesis finds that the impact of war on the economy is most pronounced on the real economy of the war-torn regions. Whereas separatists’ control caused a decline in economic activity by at least 38%, the thesis does not find evidence supporting that the impact of conflict intensity on asset prices and institutional change in Ukraine was linear in parameters. The thesis explains the lack of the linear relationship between asset price move- ments and conflict intensity by investors’ inattention caused by information overload during the early stages of the conflict. Regarding the possible relationship between con- flict and institutional change, the thesis argues that it was electoral competition, not the conflict dynamics, that had an impact on the decision-making process of the policymak- ers in Ukraine.
    [Show full text]
  • THE ANALYSIS of EXPORT TRADE BETWEEN UKRAINE and VISEGRAD COUNTRIES Ľudmila Nagyová, Monika Horáková, Serhiy Moroz, Elena Horská, Zuzana Poláková
    Marketing and Trade THE ANALYSIS OF EXPORT TRADE BETWEEN UKRAINE AND VISEGRAD COUNTRIES Ľudmila Nagyová, Monika Horáková, Serhiy Moroz, Elena Horská, Zuzana Poláková Introduction analyze the impact of EU-funds on small and The dynamic development of foreign trade medium-sized enterprises (SME) in Poland. On is important for the stable economic position the contrary, Vojtovič (2016) points out the use of each country. It can be considered as of Structural Funds for SMEs in Slovakia. a confi rmation of the actual effi ciency of Nevertheless, being part of a larger the national economy and its ability to be economic or political group does not always competitive in the global economic system. The mean a positive economic impact on a particular growth of this trade is particularly essential for country or region. Zdražil and Applová (2016) Ukraine, taking into account the crisis situation present in their study the disparity of benefi ts in the country. In this paper, we analyze main when individual V4 regions enter the EU. The tendencies of export trade of Ukraine with fi nal GDP indicator per capita refl ected the initial Visegrad countries (Czech Republic, Hungary, negative results in the areas of productivity Poland and Slovak Republic) and examine and employment. That is the reason why the whether there is a relationship between the Ukraine-EU Deep and Comprehensive Free level of GDP and the volume of export activities Trade Agreement (DCFTA) regulate many between these countries. aspects of business cooperation between the It should be noted that various agreements countries. SMEs in Ukraine even have access were concluded between Ukraine and each to the fi nancial support of € 200 million from country of the V4 group regarding economic EU grants thanks to this agreement (European and trade relations.
    [Show full text]
  • Socio-Economic Transformations in Ukraine Towards the Sustainable Development of Agriculture
    sustainability Article Socio-Economic Transformations in Ukraine towards the Sustainable Development of Agriculture Olha Kravchenko 1 , Anatolii Kucher 2 , Maria Hełdak 3,* , Lesia Kucher 4 and Joanna Wysmułek 3 1 Department of Economics and Marketing, Kharkiv Petro Vasylenko National Technical University of Agriculture, Alchevskih 44, 61002 Kharkiv, Ukraine; [email protected] 2 Department of Ecology and Neoecology, V. N. Karazin Kharkiv National University, Svobody 6, 61022 Kharkiv, Ukraine; [email protected] 3 Institute of Spatial Economy, Wroclaw University of Environmental and Life Sciences, Norwida 25, 50-375 Wrocław, Poland; [email protected] 4 Department of Applied Economics and International Economic Relations, Kharkiv National Agrarian University named after V. V. Dokuchayev, educ. campus KNAU, 62483 Kharkiv, Ukraine; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 5 June 2020; Accepted: 29 June 2020; Published: 6 July 2020 Abstract: The social and economic conditions of all market participants are incentives and constraining factors influencing the levels of food, social, economic and ecologic security. The purpose of the article lies in the presentation of the author’s concept of the social and economic conditions where the transformation of economic relations between agrofood market participants is happening—in particular, the livestock products market of Ukraine—and the assessment of the state of food security of the country, as well as a comparison, by the same criteria, of the conditions of agrofood market participants in Ukraine and in four European countries: Germany, France, Italy, and Poland. This research was based on the application of empirical knowledge methods: observation, comparison, description, measurement, statistic methods, etc.
    [Show full text]
  • Ukraine at the Crossroad in Post-Communist Europe: Policymaking and the Role of Foreign Actors Ryan Barrett [email protected]
    University of Missouri, St. Louis IRL @ UMSL Dissertations UMSL Graduate Works 1-20-2018 Ukraine at the Crossroad in Post-Communist Europe: Policymaking and the Role of Foreign Actors Ryan Barrett [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://irl.umsl.edu/dissertation Part of the Comparative Politics Commons, and the International Relations Commons Recommended Citation Barrett, Ryan, "Ukraine at the Crossroad in Post-Communist Europe: Policymaking and the Role of Foreign Actors" (2018). Dissertations. 725. https://irl.umsl.edu/dissertation/725 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the UMSL Graduate Works at IRL @ UMSL. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations by an authorized administrator of IRL @ UMSL. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Ukraine at the Crossroad in Post-Communist Europe: Policymaking and the Role of Foreign Actors Ryan Barrett M.A. Political Science, The University of Missouri - Saint Louis, 2015 M.A. International Relations, Webster University, 2010 B.A. International Studies, 2006 A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate School at the The University of Missouri - Saint Louis in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Doctor Philosophy in Political Science May 2018 Advisory Committee: Joyce Mushaben, Ph.D. Jeanne Wilson, PhD. Kenny Thomas, Ph.D. David Kimball, Ph.D. Contents Introduction 1 Chapter I. Policy Formulation 30 Chapter II. Reform Initiatives 84 Chapter III. Economic Policy 122 Chapter IV. Energy Policy 169 Chapter V. Security and Defense Policy 199 Conclusion 237 Appendix 246 Bibliography 248 To the Pat Tillman Foundation for graciously sponsoring this important research Introduction: Ukraine at a Crossroads Ukraine, like many European countries, has experienced a complex history and occupies a unique geographic position that places it in a peculiar situation be- tween its liberal future and communist past; it also finds itself tugged in two opposing directions by the gravitational forces of Russia and the West.
    [Show full text]
  • The July 2020 Clashes on the Armenia-Azerbaijan Border And
    INSTITUTE FOR SECURITY POLICY (ISP) WORKING PAPER THE JULY 2020 CLASHES ON THE ARMENIA – AZERBAIJAN BORDER AND IMPLICATIONS FOR THE OLD CONFLICT by Vasif HUSEYNOV Center of Analysis of International Relations VIENNA 2020 The COVID-19 pandemic: impact for the post-Soviet space and Russia’s aspirations TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 3 II. THE JULY CLASHES .......................................................................................................... 7 III. REACTION OF EXTERNAL POWERS ............................................................................. 12 IV. NEW DIMENSIONS OF THE OLD CONFLICT ................................................................. 17 V. CONCLUDING REMARKS ............................................................................................... 19 1 ABOUT THE AUTHOR Dr. Vasif Huseynov studied International Relations, Political Economy, and Political Science in Baku, Kassel, and Göttingen. Since 2018, he has been a Research Fellow at the Centre for Strategic Studies, Lecturer in Politics at the Khazar University at Baku and Senior Advisor at the Center of Analysis of International Relations. His articles have appeared in, among other outlets, Caucasus International, CES Working Papers, and Eastern Journal of European Studies. Author of the book “Geopolitical Rivalries in the ‘Common Neighborhood’: Russia’s Conflict with the West, Soft Power, and Neoclassical Realism”. 2 I.
    [Show full text]
  • Ukraine Doesn't Need Aid. It Needs Land Reform
    Received by NSD/FARA Registration Unit 11/18/2019 11:28:22AM tit cl m * V, 25 .r November 17, 2019 Topic: Security Region: Eurasia Tags: Ukraine, Weapons, War, Aid, Russia Ukraine Doesn't Need Aid. It Needs Land Reform. Ukraine remains one of six nations in the world where selling land is forbidden. It shares this dubious distinction with North Korea, Cuba, Venezuela, Tajikistan, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo. by Andriy Radchenko By using this website, you agree to our use of cookies. This use includes personalization of content and ads, and traffic analytics. Received by NSD/FARA Registration Unit 11/18/2019 11:28:22AM Received by NSD/FARA Registration Unit 11/18/2019 11:28:22 AM W v h © 15,238 Votes Does Donald Trump deserve 4 more years? Yes No I'm not sure Promoted Content ince the 2014 Maidan Revolution and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the United States and its partners have provided billions of dollars of financial aid to Ukraine. SBut Ukraine doesn’t need more money from the United States. It’s a wealthy country. What Ukraine needs is America’s assistance in unleashing its own natural wealth, much of which is currently locked up in the country’s land. Ukraine remains one of six nations in the world where selling land is forbidden. It shares this dubious distinction with North Korea, Cuba, Venezuela, Tajikistan, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo. As newly inaugurated President Volodymyr Zelensky identifies priorities for his administration, the United States has an opportunity to support reforming Ukraine’s land ownership system.
    [Show full text]