DOCSLIB.ORG

Transatlantic Relations and Security Governance

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Transatlantic Relations and Security Governance THE TRANSATLANTIC RELATIONSHIP AND THE FUTURE GLOBAL GOVERNANCE ISSN 2281-5252 WORKING PAPER 41 | OCTOBER 2014 Historically, the system designed to ensure largely as a consequence of Europe’s modest international security has its roots in the evo- hard power and lack of strategic cohesion. On lution of the European-centred the contrary, if centripetal dynamics balance of power into the prevail, the Europeans can make transatlantic-promoted use not only of their indi- liberal order. Because vidual assets to address the liberal order functional threats is so depend- such as terrorism ent on Western and regional crises (US) power, but also exploit the emerging Transatlantic Relations the soft power multipolar- potential of the ity undeni- and Security Governance EU, whereby ably poses a US power gains challenge to greater out- it. Yet, even reach and im- the most res- pact. Because US tive among power is still so the non-West- Riccardo Alcaro and strong and the US- ern powers such European partnership as China and Rus- Ondrej Ditrych still enduring, the capac- sia have a stake in its ity of transatlantic relations endurance, meaning that to shape security governance multipolarity is not intrinsically in- has not vanished. Multipolarity has compatible with the liberal order. If centrifu- made the use of that capacity a more compli- gal dynamics prevail, the transatlantic ability cated exercise, but not necessarily a less effec- to shape security governance will diminish, tive one. THIS PROJECT HAS RECEIVED FUNDING FROM THE EUROPEAN UNION’S SEVENTH FRAMEWORK PROGRAMME FOR RESEARCH, TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENT AND DEMONSTRATION UNDER GRANT AGREEMENT NO 612782 Transatlantic Relations and Security Governance Riccardo Alcaro and Ondrej Ditrych* EU US Governance International security Multipolarity Introduction “Governance” is a term of recent conceptualisation. Partly because of that, it is not entirely free of indeterminacy. The term refers to a complex web of political interactions unfolding on multiple levels – institutionalised and informal, governmental and non-governmental, global and regional, public and private, etc. – and displaying both fragmenting and centralising dynamics (Peterson and Müftüler-Baç 2014). The co-existence of these conflicting trends derives from the fact that governance is a system of rules and practices which is as much characterised by the absence of a formal hierarchy as it is by the interdependence of the interacting units. In keeping with this broad formal definition, a study of a system of governance is primarily concerned with detailing and illustrating the various mechanisms set up by the units to organise collective action and address systemic problems. This is however only a first step. A study of a governance system cannot but extend to analysing the specific kind of interaction in which the units are involved, whereby the position occupied by the units in the system, as well as the degree to which they depend on one another to make the system work, emerge as fundamental research questions. This is particularly the case when the object of the analysis is the governance of international security, a dimension in which the extreme differentiation of the units in terms of preferences and resources is in itself a systemic problem. It follows that an analysis of international security governance is first and foremost an analysis of how the interacting units manage their own relations – governance mechanisms look quite different if such relations are based on cooperation or on competition. Competition or cooperation patterns are structurally linked to the converging or diverging preferences of the units as well as to the capacity of the units to satisfy those preferences. Each unit occupies a structurally different position in the security system because preferences and capacities of the units vary in the most extreme fashion. Hence, the system emerges from the interaction not so much of all units but of its most resourceful or, to use a term more in line with security studies, most powerful ones. * Riccardo Alcaro is Senior Fellow at IAI’s Transatlantic Programme and Visiting Fellow at the Brookings Institution of Washington. Ondrej Ditrych is Senior Research Fellow at the Institute of International Relations Prague and assistant professor at Charles University in Prague. Mr. Alcaro has co-authored the introduction and authored sections 2-4 and the conclusions. Prof. Ditrych has co-authored the introduction and authored section 1. 2 WORKING PAPER 41 Since the middle of the last century, and especially following the end of the Cold War, the United States (US) has been at the epicentre of international security – its vast political, economic and military resources (still) unmatched. Hence, the set-up of today’s security governance reflects to a great extent US preferences as well as its relations with those countries that possess resources large enough to impact its action. These other countries include rivals but also partners and allies, through which US power expands and endures. Thus far, no partnership has been more important for the US than the one with European countries, whereby today’s security governance complex is largely a result of transatlantic cooperation. Illustrating how this relationship has played out historically and analysing how it can continue to shape security governance in a world in which non-Western powers are on the rise is the goal of this paper. The paper is divided into four sections. We first provide a historical account of how institutions in the transatlantic area and its parts (Europe) evolved from mechanisms of conflict management, against the background of the emergence of the modern state, to regimes with globalising ambitions taking the form of international organisation. In the second part, we turn to strategies pursued by the US and Europe – in cooperation with one another or independently – to shape regional and global security governance after the end of the Cold War. We identify prevalent patterns of multilateral or unilateral and formal or informal solutions to security problems, and attempt to trace them back to their strategic and normative premises. In the third part, we identify the elements of tension, emanating from the transatlantic partners themselves as well as from rising non-Western powers, which threaten the functioning of today’s security governance. In the fourth section, we finally attempt to determine how the transatlantic relationship can still contribute to security governance in the changed circumstances brought about by the incipient multipolarity. 1. From Continental Balance of Power to a Threshold of Global Hegemony From the advent of modernity until the 20th century when, in Zbigniew Brzezinski’s words, Europe changed from subject to object of global international relations (Brzezinski 1997:5), European powers imposed a “diagram” on world politics as a certain form of knowledge that made exercise of their power both intelligible and possible. German philosopher Carl Schmitt famously conceptualised this diagram as a nomos, a territorial order in which the “new world” (i.e., non-European) was rendered a space where brutal wars for control over land could take place, but in Europe, where war also remained an important instrument of change, it would be a “bracketed” war. In other words, recognising that war was inevitable, its bracketing under what Schmitt describes – and certainly to some extent idealises (Koskenniemi 2004) – as jus publicum Europeanum rationalised the war by limiting the legitimate authority that could wage it to the state (Schmitt 2003, Odysseos and Petito 2007). It was this basic norm that had conditioned the emergence and functioning of a balance of power, the “best and most solid foundation of a neutral friendship,” in the words of the Treaty of Utrecht (1713) that contributed to ending the War of the Spanish Succession. A metaphor borrowed from statics and accounting, balance of power made a discursive entrée in the late 15th century with regard to Italian city states, and soon developed into a regulative ideal that sought not to prevent war, but to protect sovereignty and political survival of the recognised European powers (Haslam 2002). The balance of power at this time, therefore, stood for an informal configuration regulating interactions in the multipolar regional (continental) environment, even as war among European powers was steadily becoming more frequent, lasted longer, involved more men and gained a global dimension (Parker 2005). Needless to say, the protection of sovereignty that the balance of powers was meant 3 WORKING PAPER 41 to guarantee would only be extended to selected actors, the great powers. The regulative ideal of the balance of power would remain internalised in European powers’ foreign policies until the latter part of the 19th century when the continental map was redrawn following in particular the unification of Germany. The main exception to this state of play was Napoleon’s bid for hegemony. In the aftermath of the Napoleonic wars (1803-1815), European powers attempted to institutionalise the balance of power in terms of a cooperative great power condominium (“concert”) with the added element of solidarity in preserving their regimes’ internal stability.1 For a (short) while, the idea of the concert of powers seemed to enjoy support from all the great powers; however, after the demise of Lord Castlereagh (1822), the main supporter of the concert of power in the British government,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Laboratorio Sulla Qualità Delle Istituzioni Universitarie
    Laboratorio sulla qualità delle istituzioni universitarie Rapporto per la Fondazione Cariplo a cura di Marino Regini Università degli Studi di Milano Dipartimento di Studi del Lavoro e del Welfare (DSLW) e Italian Centre for Research on Universities & HE Systems (UNIRES) Contributi di: Gabriele Ballarino, Sabrina Colombo, Fiammetta Corradi, Loris Perotti INDICE 1. Introduzione 2. Internazionalizzazione: le strategie adottate in Europa e le soluzioni praticabili in Lombardia 3. Formazione alla ricerca: l’organizzazione del livello post-graduate in Europa e il caso lombardo 4. Regno Unito: strategie di internazionalizzazione e formazione alla ricerca 5. Germania: strategie di internazionalizzazione e formazione alla ricerca 6. Olanda: strategie di internazionalizzazione e formazione alla ricerca Appendice I: i nove atenei studiati A. University of Warwick B. University of Manchester C. University of Liverpool D. Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg E. Albert-Ludwig Universität Freiburg F. Konstanz Universität G. Universiteit van Amsterdam H. Universiteit Utrecht I. Universiteit Leiden Appendice II: le schede per la rilevazione dei dati Riferimenti bibliografici NOTA. Il presente rapporto di ricerca dal titolo “Laboratorio sulla qualità delle istituzioni universitarie” fa parte di un progetto più ampio su “La qualità del sistema d’istruzione lombardo. Misurazioni, confronti internazionali e proposte”, commissionato al Dipartimento di Studi del Lavoro e del Welfare (DSLW) e al Centro Interdipartimentale di ricerca su Lavoro, Formazione e Welfare (WTW) dell’Università di Milano, che comprende anche i sotto-progetti su: 1) Valore di segnalazione del voto di diploma e grading standard nelle scuole secondarie superiori; 2) La produttività e l’eccellenza scientifica delle università lombarde; 3) Fondazioni e promozione dell’eccellenza nel sistema educativo: esperienze di successo nel Regno Unito e negli USA.
    [Show full text]
  • Transatlantic Relations: the Usa and Canada
    TRANSATLANTIC RELATIONS: THE USA AND CANADA The EU, the US and Canada share the values of democracy, human rights, the rule of law, and economic and political freedom, and have overlapping foreign policy and security concerns. Close cooperation and strategic relations with the US and Canada remain a priority for the EU. EU-US FOREIGN POLICY RELATIONS The close cooperation and strategic relations between the European Union and its Member States and the United States are built on common history and a shared set of democratic values. These are key to both partners’ security and prosperity. The EU and the US closely cooperate in a number of foreign policy areas and geographical contexts, such as counter-terrorism, security cooperation, energy cooperation, Russia, Ukraine and the Western Balkans. With the new Biden administration in office since 20 January 2021, new perspectives are opening up, as illustrated in the joint communication from the Commission and the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy of December 2020 on a new transatlantic agenda for global change. This agenda provides an opportunity for a renewed EU-US partnership based on greater engagement, coordination and cooperation in both a multilateral and bilateral context. It will seek to address current foreign affairs and security challenges, such as the global pandemic, economic recession, climate change, trade irritants, the rise of China, the digital transformation and growing technological competition, as well as defend democracy and human rights. INTERPARLIAMENTARY DIALOGUE – THE TRANSATLANTIC LEGISLATORS’ DIALOGUE (TLD) PROCESS Relations between Parliament and the US Congress date back to 1972.
    [Show full text]
  • Stop Mass Atrocities. Advancing EU Cooperation with Other
    ISSN 2239-2122 7 The cooperation between the European Union and the United Nations, as well as other S IAI Research Papers regional organizations, is assuming an increasingly important role in the prevention of TOP The IAI Research Papers are brief monographs written by one or mass atrocities and implementation of the Responsibility to Protect (R2P). The present M more authors (IAI or external experts) on current problems of inter- N. 1 European Security and the Future of Transatlantic Relations, TOP ASS TROCITIES ASS S M A report, which is the result of a joint eort between the IAI in Rome and the EUISS in national politics and international relations. The aim is to promote edited by Riccardo Alcaro and Erik Jones, 2011 A greater and more up to date knowledge of emerging issues and Paris, has been conceived as a mapping exercise of the EU's ongoing and potential TROCITIES DVANCING OOPERATION WITH N. 2 Democracy in the EU after the Lisbon Treaty, partnerships with other international organizations (namely the United Nations, the A EU C trends and help prompt public debate. edited by Raaello Matarazzo, 2011 North Atlantic Treaty Organization, the Organization for Security and Co-operation in OTHER INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS Europe, the Council of Europe, the African Union, the Arab League, the Association of N. 3 The Challenges of State Sustainability in the Mediterranean, South-East Asian Nations and the Organization of American States) in these elds. The A non-prot organization, IAI was founded in 1965 by Altiero Spinelli, edited by Silvia Colombo and Nathalie Tocci, 2011 aim of the report is to assess both best practices and gaps, including areas that have not its rst director.
    [Show full text]
  • Transition in Afghanistan 2012
    TRANSITION IN AFGHANISTAN 2011-2014 Five Parliamentary Studies NATO Parliamentary Assembly Founded in 1955, the NATO Parliamentary Assembly (NATO PA) serves as the consultative inter-parliamentary organisation for the North Atlantic Alliance. Bringing together members of parliaments throughout the Atlantic Alliance, the NATO PA provides an essential link between NATO and the parliaments of its member nations, helping to build parliamentary and public consensus in support of Alliance policies. At the same time, it facilitates parliamentary awareness and understanding of key security issues and contributes to a greater transparency of NATO policies. Crucially, it helps maintain and strengthen the transatlantic relationship, which underpins the Atlantic Alliance. Since the end of the Cold War the Assembly has assumed a new role by integrating into its work parliamentarians from those countries in Central and Eastern Europe and beyond who seek a closer association with NATO. This integration has provided both political and practical assistance and has contributed to the strengthening of parliamentary democracy throughout the Euro-Atlantic region, thereby complementing and reinforcing NATO’s own programme of partnership and co-operation. The headquarters of the Assembly’s 30-strong International Secretariat staff members is located in central Brussels. 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Declaration 392 on Supporting Transition in Afghanistan presented by Hugh Bayley 7 Governance Challenges in Afghanistan: An Update by Vitalino Canas 13 Transition in Afghanistan: Assessing the Security Effort by Sven Mikser Finding Workable Solutions in Afghanistan: the Work of the International Community in Building a Functioning Economy and Society by Jeppe Kofod 95 Afghanistan – The Regional Context by John Dyrby Paulsen 139 Countering the Afghan Insurgency: Low-Tech Threats, High-Tech Solutions by Sen.
    [Show full text]
  • Arria-Formula Meetings, 1992-2019
    Arria-Formula Meetings, 1992-2019 This table has been jointly compiled by Sam Daws and Loraine Sievers, as co-authors of The Procedure of the UN Security Council, and the staff of Security Council Report. The support extended by the Security Council Affairs Division in the compilation of the list is hereby recognised and greatly appreciated. ARRIA-FORMULA MEETINGS, 1992-2019 DATE SUBJECT/DOCUMENT IN WHICH INVITEE(S) ORGANISER(S) THE MEETING WAS MENTIONED Mar. 1992 Bosnia and Herzegovina; S/1999/286; Fra Jozo Zovko (Bosnia and Herzegovina) Venezuela ST/PSCA/1/Add.12 18 Dec. 1992 Persecution of Shiite ‘Marsh Arabs’ M.P. Emma Nicholson (UK) Venezuela, Hungary in Iraq 3 Mar. 1993 Bosnia and Herzegovina Alija Izetbegović, President of Bosnia and Herzegovina 24 Mar. 1993 Former Yugoslavia David Owen and Cyrus Vance, Co-Chairs of the International Conference on the Former Yugoslavia 15 Apr. 1993 South Africa Richard Goldstone, Chair of the Commission of Inquiry regarding Venezuela the Prevention of Public Violence and Intimidation in South Africa 25 June 1993 Bosnia and Herzegovina Contact Group of the Organization of the Islamic Conference 12 Aug. 1993 Bosnia and Herzegovina Organization of the Islamic Conference ministerial mission 6 Sept. 1993 Bosnia and Herzegovina Alija Izetbegović, President of Bosnia and Herzegovina 28 Sept. 1993 Croatia Permanent Representative of Croatia 2 Mar. 1994 Georgia Eduard Shevardnadze, President of Georgia Czech Republic 18 Mar. 1994 Croatia Franjo Tudjman, President of Croatia 11 Apr. 1994 Bosnia and Herzegovina Vice President of Bosnia and Herzegovina 26 May 1994 Central America Alfredo Cristiani, President of El Salvador 6 July 1994 Haiti Permanent Representative of the Dominican Republic 17 Nov.
    [Show full text]
  • International Students Pursuing Higher Education
    DEPARTAMENTO DE EDUCACIÓN COMPARADA E HISTORIA DE LA EDUCACIÓN FACULTAD DE FILOSOFÍAY CIENCIAS DE LA EDUCACIÓN UNIVERSIDAD DE VALENCIA INTERNATIONALISATION IN HIGHER EDUCATION: A COMPARATIVE VIEW OF CROSS-BORDER TYPES 1 & 2 EDUCATION AND THEIR IMPACT ON DEVELOPING AND DEVELOPED COUNTRIES Jacqueline M. Taylor Trabajo de Investigación del Programa de Doctorado 120F. Director: Dr. Luis Miguel Lázaro Lorente Valencia, mayo de 2014 2 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT The journey has been longer than initially anticipated, and certainly a memorable one. Embarking on this journey was made possible when the Department of Comparative Education and the History of Education accepted my letter of application. Thus, I express my gratitude for having had the opportunity to pursue my studies within the department and by extension, the University of Valencia. The journey has been both challenging and very rewarding due to all the persons who have made this a worthwhile experience. I begin by expressing thanks to Dr. Luis Miguel Lázaro Lorente for having accepted to be director of my Doctoral thesis. His ongoing encouragement to publish articles and to co-author a chapter, as well as his administrative assistance in providing the necessary documents required of the department for the renewal of my student visa annually is greatly appreciated. I am also grateful for the interest in my progress shown by each person in the Secretary Office of the department, Dr. Joan Marie Senet and Dr. Maria Jesús Martinez Usarralde throughout the years. I also wish to thank all my classmates, especially Ana Garcia, who has enriched my international student experience. I would like to thank my all friends who have encouraged me along this trajectory; but special thanks to Noemi Martinez, Loida Sanchez, Danny Moreno and David Guaita who have been with me on this journey from the beginning and who have been most encouraging and very supportive when I needed it most.
    [Show full text]
  • The U.S. South Caucasus Strategy and Azerbaijan
    THE U.S. SOUTH CAUCASUS STRATEGY AND AZERBAIJAN This article analyzes the evolution of U.S. foreign policy in the South Cauca- sus through three concepts, “soft power”, “hard power” and “smart power” which have been developed under the administrations of Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and Barack Obama respectively. The authors also aim to identify how the US strategy towards this region has been perceived in Azerbaijan, which, due to its geographical position, energy resources and geopolitical environment, is one of the “geopolitical pivots of Eurasia”. Inessa Baban & Zaur Shiriyev* * Inessa Baban is a Ph.D candidate in geopolitics at Paris-Sorbonne University of France. She is a former visiting scholar at Center for Strategic Studies under the President of Azerbaijan. Zaur Shiriyev is a foreign policy analyst at the same think tank. The views expressed in this article are entirely personal. 93 VOLUME 9 NUMBER 2 INESSA BABAN & ZAUR SHIRIYEV he U.S. strategy towards the South Caucasus has become one of the most controversial issues of American foreign policy under the Obama administration. Most American experts argue that because of the current priorities of the U.S. government, the South Caucasus region does not get the attention that it merits. Even if they admit that none of U.S.’ interests in the Caucasus “fall under the vital category”1 there is a realization that Washington must reconsider its policy towards this region which matters geopolitically, economically and strategically. The South Caucasus, also referred as Transcaucasia, is located between the Black Sea and the Caspian Sea, neighboring Central Asia to the east, the Middle East to the south, and Eastern Europe to the west, hence connecting Europe to Asia.
    [Show full text]
  • Jagiellonian University
    NJUsletter ISSN: 1689-037X TWO PRESIDENTIAL VISITS 69 SPRING/ SUMMER RECTORIAL ELECTIONS 2020 IN RESPONSE TO COVID-19 JAGIELLONIAN UNIVERSITY Faculty of Law and Administration Faculty of Philosophy Faculty of History Faculty of Philology Faculty of Polish Studies Faculty of Physics, Astronomy and Applied Computer Science Faculty of Mathematics and Computer Science Faculty of Chemistry Faculty of Biology Faculty of Geography and Geology Faculty of Biochemistry, Biophysics and Biotechnology Faculty of Management and Social Communication Faculty of International and Political Studies Faculty of Medicine Faculty of Pharmacy Faculty of Health Sciences Founded in 1364 3 16 faculties campuses 35,922 students, including 4,743 international, over 90 nationalities PhD students Each = 2,000 students = International students 2,356 94 158 8,342 study specialities employees, including programmes 4,509 academics USOS data as of 31.07.2020 In this issue... UNIVERSITY NEWS 2 French President Emmanuel Macron visits the Jagiellonian University Editor: 4 Education means being a complete person JU International 2 Relations Office – Maltese President lecturing at JU 4 6 New JU authorities © Dział Współpracy 7 100th Anniversary of Pope John Paul II’s Międzynarodowej UJ, 2020 birth Publications Officer: FEATURES Agnieszka Kołodziejska-Skrobek 9 JU in touch with the world 10 Coimbra Group 3-Minute Thesis Language consultant: 11 UNA.TEN Maja Nowak-Bończa 6 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS Design: Dział Współpracy 14 UNA EUROPA 1Europe kick-off meeting Międzynarodowej UJ 16 International Students 2020 Gala 17 Polish-Brazilian botanical co-operation Translation: 19 DIGIPASS in Amsterdam Agnieszka Kołodziejska-Skrobek 20 From an ex-native speaker: On Becoming Polish 11 Edited in Poland by: Towarzystwo Słowaków STUDENT LIFE w Polsce www.tsp.org.pl 21 Bonjour – Hi.
    [Show full text]
  • A Strategy for EU Foreign Policy
    European European Union Union Institute for Institute for Security Studies Security Studies A strategy for EU foreign policy Report N° 7 June 2010 EditEd by Álvaro de Vasconcelos coNtRibUtoRs Esra bulut Nicola casarini sabine Fischer Giovanni Grevi damien Helly Juha Jokela daniel Keohane Erwan Lannon Rouzbeh Parsi Luis Peral Jacques Rupnik Álvaro de Vasconcelos Paulo Wrobel Marcin Zaborowski Jean Pascal Zanders European Union Institute for Security Studies www.iss.europa.eu • [email protected] This multi-author publication, edited by Álvaro de Vasconcelos, presents EUISS forecasts and perspectives on the European Union’s foreign policy strategy in the post-Lisbon Treaty context. A comprehensive range of topics affecting EU foreign policy are analysed by the EUISS research team as well as several external contributors. The geographical topics covered include: Afghanistan, Pakistan and India (Luis Peral); Africa (Damien Helly); the Balkans (Jacques Rupnik); Brazil (Paulo Wrobel); China (Nicola Casarini); Iran (Rouz- beh Parsi); the Middle East (Esra Bulut); Russia and the Eastern Neighbourhood (Sabine Fischer) and EU policy in the Mediterranean (Erwan Lannon). Broader questions as they impact on EU foreign policy that are examined in this report include: the values and principles that should guide the EU’s external action (Álvaro de Vasconcelos); CSDP (Daniel Keohane); global governance (Giovanni Grevi); institutional coherence after the Lisbon Treaty (Damien Helly); effective multilateralism and regional issues, international peace (Luis Peral); transatlantic relations and the EU’s strategic partnerships (Marcin Zaborowski); disarmament and non-proliferation (Jean Pascal Zanders) and climate change (Juha Jokela). Institute for Security Studies European Union 43 avenue du Président Wilson 75775 Paris cedex 16 tel.: +33 (0)1 56 89 19 30 fax: +33 (0)1 56 89 19 31 [email protected] http://www.iss.europa.eu Director: Álvaro de Vasconcelos © EU Institute for Security Studies 2010.
    [Show full text]
  • The European Union's Transatlantic Relationship
    The European Union’s Transatlantic Relationship EU Diplomacy Papers 2 / 2006 Günter Burghardt Department of EU International Relations and Diplomacy Studies www.coleurope.eu Department of EU International Relations and Diplomacy Studies EU Diplomacy Papers 2/2006 The European Union's Transatlantic Relationship Günter Burghardt © Günter Burghardt 2006 Dijver 11 | BE-8000 Bruges, Belgium | Tel. +32 (0)50 477 251 | Fax +32 (0)50 477 250 | E-mail [email protected] | www.coleurope.eu/ird Günter Burghardt About the Author Dr. Günter Burghardt served as the European Union’s Ambassador in Washington, DC, from 1999 to 2004. Earlier, he had held positions at the European Commission as Political Director and Director General for External Relations as well as Deputy Chief of Staff of Commission President Jacques Delors. Dr. Burghardt teaches as a guest professor at the College of Europe in Bruges and at the European Institute of the Law Faculty of Ghent University. He joined the transatlantic law firm of Mayer, Brown, Rowe & Maw LLP as a Senior Counsel. Editorial Team: Nike Bönnen, Mathieu Briens, Sieglinde Gstöhl, Dieter Mahncke, Kevin O'Connell Dijver 11 | BE-8000 Bruges, Belgium | Tel. +32 (0)50 477 251 | Fax +32 (0)50 477 250 | E-mail [email protected] | www.coleurope.eu/ird Views expressed in the EU Diplomacy Papers are those of the authors only and do not necessarily reflect positions of either the series editors or the College of Europe. 2 EU Diplomacy Papers 2/2006 Abstract Since its inception post-World War II, the European unification process has been embedded within a strong transatlantic dimension [Marshall-Plan, Truman/ EisenhowerMonnet, Kennedy/Hallstein].
    [Show full text]
  • EU – US Risk Policy in the European Neighborhood: the Cases of Moldova and Georgia
    EU – US Risk Policy in the European Neighborhood: The cases of Moldova and Georgia Ingo Peters and Jan Bittner Center for Transatlantic Foreign and Security Policy Studies Department of Politics and Social Sciences Freie Universität Berlin [email protected] forthcoming in: Kari Möttöla (ed.), Transatlantic Relations and Global Governance. Washington DC: Johns Hopkins University, SAIS, Center for Transatlantic Relations Introduction 1 1. Risks and Risk Policy in the European Neighborhood 2 1.1 Risks in the Post-Soviet Space 2 The Question of Ethnicity and Citizenship 3 Economic Spaces 3 The Role of Russia 4 1.2 Transatlantic Risk Perception and Risk Policy 4 The EU Approach 5 The US Approach 6 2. Case A: Moldova 7 2.1 The Risks of Weak Statehood 8 Transnistrian Conflict 9 Russian Troops in Transnistria 9 2.2 EU Policy towards Moldova 10 Following a Structure-centered Approach 11 Actor-centered Elements 12 2.3 US Policy towards Moldova – Structure-centered Approach 13 Actor-centered Elements 14 3. Case B: Georgia 15 3.1 The Risks of Weak Statehood 15 Conflicts in South Ossetia and Abkhazia 16 Russian presence in Georgia 17 3.2 EU Policy towards Georgia 18 Structure-centered Approach 18 Actor-centered Elements 19 3.3 The US Policy 20 Actor-centered Elements 21 4. Conclusions 21 Introduction The security environment of the transatlantic community has changed dramatically since the end of the East-West conflict. The main security challenges are no longer the threat of major wars waged by hostile states, but security risks posed by non-state actors.
    [Show full text]
  • Participation of Students with an Immigrant Background in European Higher Education
    Participation of students with an immigrant background in European Higher Education Contents Chapter 1 Introduction .........................................................................................................................................1 1.1 The EQUNET report in context ......................................................................................................................... 2 1.2 A focus on immigration .................................................................................................................................... 3 Chapter 2 Factors influencing the chances of immigrant and non-immigrant groups to access Higher Education in the EU countries ................................................................................................................................5 2.1 Language .......................................................................................................................................................... 7 2.2 Social background ............................................................................................................................................ 9 2.3 Educational aspirations .................................................................................................................................. 11 2.4 Legal status ..................................................................................................................................................... 13 2.5 Gender ...........................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]