Reactive Regionalism
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Reactive Regionalism: A Comparative Historical Analysis of Russia-EU Interaction within the Black Sea Geopolitical Environment, 2003-2012 Mihai Cocoru PhD University of York Politics October 2014 Abstract Recent events within the Black Sea geopolitical environment reveal that Russia is taking extreme measures to retain its ‘strategic glacis’. Meanwhile, the EU maintains its vocal promotion of a neighbourhood that should be conflict-free, prosperous and well governed. Even if it is feasible to envision the potential for achieving the EU’s goal of promoting a ring of well governed countries to the East with which it can enjoy close and cooperative relations, in addition to a Russia-loyal near abroad comprised of countries which have ‘space’ as a main characteristic, this thesis argues that the two outcomes are mutually exclusive. Black Sea state leaders have become acutely aware that the nature of the EU makes balancing Russia both possible and impossible at the same time. Positioned within intersecting spheres of influence of a traditional and a modern great power, Black Sea small states are caught in a pragmatic limbo regarding their foreign policy orientation. Borrowing insights from Buzan and Waever (2003) and Neumann’s (2003) region-building approaches, this thesis finds that between 2003 and 2012 the Black Sea geopolitical environment has shifted from an environment sharing a ‘regional security’ logic to a (potentially transitory) ‘region’ per se. Through the case studies of Moldova and Georgia between 2003 and 2012, the thesis makes a cross-sectional historical comparison to put forth an ‘integrated approach’ to understanding how conflict, economic dependence, and foreign policy orientation serve as ‘triggers’ of change in the Black Sea geopolitical environment. The thesis concludes that the Black Sea has generated a new form of regionalism, a ‘reactive regionalism’ characterized by pragmatic responses to traditional and aggressive (albeit predictable) Moscow and the extremely appealing European model, which, however, provides no substantial geopolitical backing. 2 List of contents Abstract .............................................................................................................................................. 2 List of contents .................................................................................................................................. 3 List of tables....................................................................................................................................... 8 List of illustrations .......................................................................................................................... 10 Preface .............................................................................................................................................. 11 Acknowledgements ......................................................................................................................... 12 Author’s declaration ....................................................................................................................... 13 1. The Topic ................................................................................................................................. 14 1.1. Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 14 1.2. Premises and approach ...................................................................................................... 15 1.3. Introducing the investigation triggers and the investigation ............................................. 21 1.4. Deconstructing the question .............................................................................................. 22 1.5. The subject’s intellectual location ..................................................................................... 24 1.6. Structure, perspectives and scope ..................................................................................... 27 1.7. Why the US is not considered a ‘littoral presence’ ........................................................... 30 1.8. Relevance of the subject ................................................................................................... 30 SECTION I - Setting the scene 2. The geopolitical determinants arising from the nature of the European Union (EU) ...... 33 2.1. Background ....................................................................................................................... 33 2.2. Models of Europeanisation ............................................................................................... 34 2.3. External Governance/Domestic Impact ............................................................................ 35 2.4. External Governance Evaluation Framework ................................................................... 36 2.5. EU at the Black Sea – Cooperation Programmes and Initiatives ...................................... 39 2.6. EU as a Conditionality-Imposing Agent ........................................................................... 41 2.7. EU as a Normative Agent ................................................................................................. 43 2.8. The Importance of the Domestic Context ......................................................................... 44 2.9. Conclusion ........................................................................................................................ 45 3. The geopolitical determinants resulting from the policies of the Russian Federation ...... 47 3.1. Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 47 3.2. Russia’s historical determinants in the Black Sea ............................................................. 48 3.3. Russia’s key interests in the Black Sea and the methods used to achieve them ............... 52 3.4. Russia as appraiser of loyalty in its near abroad ............................................................... 54 3.5. Russia as coercer of loyalty in its near abroad .................................................................. 55 3 3.6. Russia’s failure at instrumenting ‘soft power’ .................................................................. 61 3.7. Timeline of escalation (or timeline of confidence) ........................................................... 64 3.8. Russia’s great power rhetoric in the international arena ................................................... 65 3.9. Conclusion: Russia the traditional power in the Black Sea geopolitical environment ..... 67 4. Black Sea Regionalism ............................................................................................................ 69 4.1. Old Regionalism vs New Regionalism ............................................................................. 69 4.2. The Region-Building Approach ........................................................................................ 72 4.3. Regional Security Complex Theory .................................................................................. 73 4.4. Theoretical Framework ..................................................................................................... 74 4.5. A Black Sea region? .......................................................................................................... 76 4.6. RSC potential and actors’ perception ................................................................................ 78 4.7. The type of region being constructed ................................................................................ 85 4.8. Conclusion ........................................................................................................................ 85 5. ‘The Integrated Approach’ .................................................................................................... 87 5.1. Review of premises ........................................................................................................... 87 5.2. Key terms .......................................................................................................................... 89 5.3. Causality and the Integrated Approach ............................................................................. 91 5.4. Case studies ....................................................................................................................... 92 5.5. Making use of comparative-historical procedural assets .................................................. 93 6. The variables of the Integrated Approach ............................................................................ 99 6.1. Declared Foreign Policy Orientation .............................................................................. 101 6.2. Economic dependence..................................................................................................... 105 6.3. Conflict ........................................................................................................................... 106 SECTION II - Analysis 7. Moldova – The Black Sea state ............................................................................................ 110 7.1. The methodological motivation in understanding pre-2003 Moldova ............................ 111 7.2. Moldova’s path to independence ...................................................................................