DOCSLIB.ORG

Turkey 2005 Progress Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Turkey 2005 Progress Report EUROPEAN COMMISSION Brussels, 9 November 2005 SEC (2005) 1426 Turkey 2005 Progress Report {COM (2005) 561 final} 1 A. INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................................... 3 1. PREFACE.................................................................................................................................................... 3 2. RELATIONS BETWEEN THE EU AND TURKEY ............................................................................................. 4 B. CRITERIA FOR MEMBERSHIP ............................................................................................................. 9 1. ENHANCED POLITICAL DIALOGUE AND POLITICAL CRITERIA ..................................................................... 9 1.1 Democracy and the rule of law ..................................................................................................... 10 1.2 Human rights and the protection of minorities ............................................................................. 18 1.3 Regional issues.............................................................................................................................. 40 1.4 General evaluation........................................................................................................................ 41 2. ECONOMIC SITUATION ............................................................................................................................. 43 2.1 Recent economic developments..................................................................................................... 43 2.2 Assessment in terms of the Copenhagen criteria........................................................................... 45 2.3 General evaluation........................................................................................................................ 54 3. ABILITY TO ASSUME THE OBLIGATIONS OF MEMBERSHIP......................................................................... 55 3.1 Chapters of the acquis................................................................................................................... 55 Chapter 1: Free movement of goods .........................................................................................................................55 Chapter 2: Freedom of movement for workers .........................................................................................................59 Chapter 3: Right of establishment and freedom to provide services .........................................................................60 Chapter 4: Free movement of capital ........................................................................................................................61 Chapter 5: Public procurement..................................................................................................................................63 Chapter 6: Company law...........................................................................................................................................64 Chapter 7: Intellectual property law..........................................................................................................................66 Chapter 8: Competition Policy..................................................................................................................................68 Chapter 9: Financial Services....................................................................................................................................70 Chapter 10: Information society and media ..............................................................................................................74 Chapter 11: Agriculture and rural development........................................................................................................77 Chapter 12: Food safety, veterinary and phytosanitary policy ..................................................................................79 Chapter 13: Fisheries ................................................................................................................................................82 Chapter 14: Transport policy ....................................................................................................................................83 Chapter 15: Energy ...................................................................................................................................................85 Chapter 16: Taxation.................................................................................................................................................89 Chapter 17: Economic and monetary policy .............................................................................................................90 Chapter 18: Statistics ................................................................................................................................................92 Chapter 19: Social policy and employment...............................................................................................................94 Chapter 20: Enterprise and industrial policy.............................................................................................................97 Chapter 21: Trans-European networks....................................................................................................................100 Chapter 22: Regional policy and coordination of structural instruments ................................................................101 Chapter 23: Judiciary and fundamental rights.........................................................................................................103 Chapter 24: Justice, freedom and security...............................................................................................................110 Chapter 25: Science and research............................................................................................................................114 Chapter 26: Education and culture..........................................................................................................................116 Chapter 27: Environment ........................................................................................................................................118 Chapter 28: Consumer and health protection ..........................................................................................................121 Chapter 29: Customs union.....................................................................................................................................124 Chapter 30: External relations.................................................................................................................................126 Chapter 31: Foreign, security and defence policy ...................................................................................................127 Chapter 32: Financial control..................................................................................................................................131 Chapter 33: Financial and budgetary provisions.....................................................................................................133 3.2 General evaluation...................................................................................................................... 134 C. ACCESSION PARTNERSHIP: OVERALL ASSESSMENT ............................................................. 137 STATISTICAL ANNEX................................................................................................................................... 141 2 A. INTRODUCTION 1. Preface Following the conclusions of the Luxembourg European Council in December 1997, the Commission has reported regularly to the Council and the Parliament on progress made by the candidate states in preparing for membership. This Progress Report succeeds the reports that the Commission has published on Turkey during the years 1998 to 2004. In December 2004, the European Council stated that: “The European Council welcomes the decisive progress made by Turkey in its far- reaching reform process and expressed its confidence that Turkey will sustain that process of reform[…]. Turkey sufficiently fulfils the Copenhagen criteria to open accession negotiations [...]. The European Council invites the Commission to present to the Council a proposal for a framework for negotiations with Turkey with a view to opening negotiations on 3 October 2005.” The European Council in June 2005 referred to its conclusions on enlargement of December 2004 and highlighted the need to implement them fully. On 3 October 2005 accession negotiations were opened with Turkey. When opening the negotiations the EU asserted that: “The advancement of the negotiations will be guided by Turkey’s progress in preparing for accession, within a framework of economic and social convergence. […]Progress will continue to be closely monitored by the Commission, which is invited to continue to report regularly on it to the Council.” The Commission has drafted the report in the light of this most recent confirmation of its reporting mandate The structure of the report is largely the same as that used in previous years. The report: –describes the relations between Turkey and the Union; –analyses the situation in respect of the political criteria for
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Global Turkey in Europe. Political, Economic, and Foreign Policy
    ISSN 2239-2122 9 IAI Research Papers The EU is changing, Turkey too, and - above all - there is systemic change and crisis all G round, ranging from economics, the spread of democratic norms and foreign policy. LOBAL The IAI Research Papers are brief monographs written by one or N.1 European Security and the Future of Transatlantic Relations, This research paper explores how the EU and Turkey can enhance their cooperation in more authors (IAI or external experts) on current problems of inter- T edited by Riccardo Alcaro and Erik Jones, 2011 URKEY GLOBAL TURKEY national politics and international relations. The aim is to promote the political, economic, and foreign policy domains and how they can find a way out of the stalemate EU-Turkey relations have reached with the lack of progress in accession greater and more up to date knowledge of emerging issues and N. 2 Democracy in the EU after the Lisbon Treaty, IN trends and help prompt public debate. edited by Raaello Matarazzo, 2011 negotiations and the increasing uncertainty over both the future of the European project E after the Eurozone crisis and Turkey’s role in it. UROPE IN EUROPE N. 3 The Challenges of State Sustainability in the Mediterranean, edited by Silvia Colombo and Nathalie Tocci, 2011 A non-profit organization, IAI was founded in 1965 by Altiero Spinel- li, its first director. N. 4 Re-thinking Western Policies in Light of the Arab Uprisings, SENEM AYDIN-DÜZGIT is Assistant Professor at the Istanbul Bilgi University and Senior POLITICAL, ECONOMIC, AND FOREIGN POLICY edited by Riccardo Alcaro and Miguel Haubrich-Seco, 2012 Research Affiliate of the Istanbul Policy Centre (IPC).
    [Show full text]
  • Analyzing the Telecoms Privatization in Greece from a ‘Discursive Institutionalist’ Perspective
    Privatization in the Name of ‘Europe’: analyzing the telecoms privatization in Greece from a ‘discursive institutionalist’ perspective Christos Dimas GreeSE Paper No 41 Hellenic Observatory Papers on Greece and Southeast Europe NoveNovembermber 2010 All views expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the Hellenic Observatory or the LSE © Christos Dimas _ Table of Contents ABSTRACT ______________________________________________________ iii 1. Introduction______________________________________________________ 1 2. Theoretical Background ____________________________________________ 4 2.1. Discursive institutionalism _______________________________________ 4 2.2. Europe as a legitimating factor ___________________________________ 6 3. The case-study ___________________________________________________ 10 3.1. The pro and anti European politics in Greece during the 1970s and 1980s 10 3.2. The Greek disjointed corporatist system ____________________________ 15 3.3. OTE as a case study ___________________________________________ 17 4. Empirical Analysis _______________________________________________ 19 4.1. The Mitsotakis government 1990-1993 ____________________________ 19 4.2. Papandreou governments 1993-1996 ______________________________ 24 4.3. The Simitis governments 1996-2004 ______________________________ 32 4.4. The Karamanlis governments 2004-2009 __________________________ 37 5. Conclusion______________________________________________________ 41 References ________________________________________________________
    [Show full text]
  • Kazakhstan Regulatory and Procedural Barriers to Trade in Kazakhstan
    UNECE UNITED NATIONS ECONOMIC COMMISSION FOR EUROPE Regulatory and procedural barriers to trade in Kazakhstan Regulatory and procedural barriers to trade in Kazakhstan - Needs Needs Assessment Assessment Information Service United Nations Economic Commission for Europe Palais des Nations UNITED NA CH - 1211 Geneva 10, Switzerland Telephone: +41(0)22 917 44 44 Fax: +41(0)22 917 05 05 E-mail: [email protected] Website: http://www.unece.org TIONS Printed at United Nations, Geneva GE.14-22004–May 2014–150 UNITED NATIONS ECE/TRADE/407 UNITED NATIONS ECONOMIC COMMISSION FOR EUROPE Regulatory and procedural barriers to trade in Kazakhstan Needs Assessment United Nations New York and Geneva, 2014 2 Regulatory and procedural barriers to trade in Kazakhstan Needs Assessment Note The designation employed and the presentation of the material in this publication do not imply the ex- pression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Secretariat of the United Nations concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area, or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers of boundaries. This study is issued in English and Russian. ECE/TRADE/407 Copyright © 2014 United Nations and International Trade Centre All rights reserved Foreword 3 Foreword The International Trade Center (ITC) and the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) are pleased to present the needs assessment study of regulatory and procedural barriers to trade in the Republic of Kazakhstan. We would also like to express our appreciation to Kazakhstan’s Centre for Trade Policy Development under the Ministry of Economic Development, which cooperated with both ITC and UNECE in preparing the study.
    [Show full text]
  • A 10-Year Story: the Water for Life Decade 2005
    A 10 YEAR STORY THE WATER FOR LIFE DECADE 2005-2015 AND BEYOND FOREWORD Josefina Maestu 2 INTRODUCTION 6 DRINKING WATER SUPPLY AND SANITATION, WOMEN´S PARTICIPATION AND LOCAL COOPERATION 10 INTEGRATED WATER RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AND TRANSBOUNDARY WATER COOPERATION 28 THE ROLE OF GLOBAL PROCESSES AND ACTORS 44 THE CONTRIBUTION OF THE WATER FOR LIFE 2005-2015 DECADE Looking to the end of the Decade and beyond 64 EPILOGUE: A NEW DECADE FOR ACTION ON WATER AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT 84 A 10 YEAR STORY – THE WATER FOR LIFE DECADE 2005-2015 AND BEYOND - 2015 t Editing and texts-+PTFöOB .BFTUV 6OUVSCF t Production Manager3BNJSP "VSÓO -PQFSB t Editorial Production-.BSUB -ØQF[ 3BVSFMM t Illustrations and Cover- )JSPTIJ,JUBNVSBtLayout and Graphic Production-*OUFSDPN4USBUFHZT4-tPrinting and Binding-(SËöDBT0SUFMMT4-tPublisher-6OJUFE/BUJPOT0óDFUPTVQQPSUUIF *OUFSOBUJPOBM%FDBEFGPS"DUJPOA8BUFSGPS-JGF 6/8BUFS%FDBEF1SPHSBNNFPO"EWPDBDZBOE$PNNVOJDBUJPOtSponsor-"RVBF'PVOEBUJPO FOREWORD As the curtain falls on the Decade it is difficult to avoid feeling frustrated. Since 2005, we have been managing complexity on a global scale; interactions have increased exponentially thanks to social media and the Internet, but we can’t help but regret the missed opportunities. There were many. But now we have a full stop – a time to reflect. What has the Decade achieved? After 10 years, we’re finally approaching the end of the UN Decade for Water 2005-2015, and the office is reviewing, sifting, collating and editing 10 years of action on water into a form where we can report on and present it – all of it. Ten years have passed! For almost as long as we can remember, 2015 has been considered a critical year for the inter- national water and sanitation agenda.
    [Show full text]
  • The Relations of Turkey with the European Union
    Center for European Studies Working Paper Series #167 (2008) The Relations of Turkey with the European Union: Candidate Forever? by Bahri Yilmaz* Visiting Scholar, Center for European Studies at Harvard University EU Jean Monnet Professor and Professor in Economics, Sabanci University/Istanbul [email protected] Phone: (+90) 216 483 92 36 Abstract This paper primarily addresses three aspects of Turkish-EU relations: the first section of the study gives an overview of the history of Turkey’s relations with and the EEC/EC/ EU in the period between 1959 and 2008, focusing on “the Ankara Agreement” of 1964 (or the Association Agreement). With that agreement, which was supplemented and specified by an “Additional Protocol” in 1973, Turkey began what has become one of the longest-lasting association agreements. The second section will elaborate on the diffi–culties and serious disputes that have arisen between Turkey and the EU, and particu–larly on the current discussion of Turkey’s membership. Finally, in light of the remark–able political and economic changes taking place in the international and the European arena, we will draw some lessons from the past in order to make some predictions about the path Turkish-EU relations may follow in the future. Key words: Turkey, European Union. *The author would like to thank EU Jean Monnet Professor Geoffrey R. Edwards from the Centre for International Studies at Cambridge University and EU Jean Monnet Professor Ulrich Brückner from Stanford University for their critical comments. An earlier version of this paper was presented at a public conference (SOAS, University of Lon– don, February 29, 2008).
    [Show full text]
  • Why Doesn't the United States Have a European-Style Welfare State?
    0332-04-Alesina 1/3/02 15:31 Page 187 ALBERTO ALESINA Harvard University EDWARD GLAESER Harvard University BRUCE SACERDOTE Dartmouth College Why Doesn’t the United States Have a European-Style Welfare State? EUROPEAN GOVERNMENTS REDISTRIBUTE income among their citizens on a much larger scale than does the U.S. government. European social pro- grams are more generous and reach a larger share of citizens. European tax systems are more progressive. European regulations designed to protect the poor are more intrusive. In this paper we try to understand why. The literature on the size of government is rich and varied. However, here we do not focus on the size of government as such, but rather on the redistributive side of government policies. Thus our goal is in one sense narrower than answering the question, “What explains the size of govern- ment?” since we focus on a single, but increasingly important, role of fis- cal policy. Yet in another sense our focus is broader, because redistributive policies go beyond the government budget—think, for instance, of labor market policies. We consider economic, political, and behavioral explanations for these differences between the United States and Europe. Economic explanations focus on the variance of income and the skewness of the income distribu- tion before taxes and transfers, the social costs of taxation, the volatility of income, and expected changes in income for the median voter. We con- clude that most of these theories cannot explain the observed differences. We are grateful to our discussants for very useful suggestions. We also thank William Easterly, Benjamin Friedman, Michael Mandler, Casey Mulligan, Roberto Perotti, Andrei Shleifer, Theda Skocpol, and a large number of conference participants for very useful com- ments.
    [Show full text]
  • Highlights on Health in Norway
    HIGHLIGHTS ON HEALTH IN NORWAY Country Highlights give an overview of the health and health-related situation in a given coun- try and compare, where possible, its position in relation with other countries in the WHO Euro- pean Region. The Highlights have been developed in collaboration with Member States for op- erational purposes and do not constitute a formal statistical publication. They are based on in- formation provided by Member States and other sources as listed. CONTENTS OVERVIEW............................................................................1 THE COUNTRY AND ITS PEOPLE ............................................2 HEALTH STATUS...................................................................6 LIFESTYLES........................................................................23 ENVIRONMENT AND HEALTH................................................29 HEALTH CARE SYSTEM.......................................................31 REFERENCES......................................................................36 HIGHLIGHTS ON HEALTH IN NORWAY DECEMBER 1999 E72501 TECHNICAL NOTES Highlights on Health provide an overview of the health of a country’s population and the main factors related to it. When possible, comparisons are made with other countries in the WHO European Region as one means of assessing the comparative strengths and weaknesses, what has been achieved so far and what could be improved in the future, similarly to the approach and ra- tionale used for setting the 21 targets in HEALTH21, the health for all policy framework for the WHO European Region (WHO Regional Office for Europe, 1999). The country groups used for comparison are called reference countries and are chosen based on: similar health and socioeco- nomic trends or development and/or geopolitical groups such as the European Union (EU), the newly independent states, the central Asian republics or the candidate countries for EU accession. For Norway, the reference countries are the 15 EU countries as well as Iceland, Israel, Malta, and Switzerland.
    [Show full text]
  • Turkey's Convergence Tale: Market Pressures, Membership Conditionality and EU Accession
    Market Pressures, Membership Conditionality, and EU Accession: Turkey’s Convergence Tale Iain Hardie School of Social and Political Studies University of Edinburgh [email protected] Layna Mosley Dept. of Political Science University of North Carolina [email protected] January 2007 Abstract: This article investigates the incentives for policy changes generated by the prospect of European Union (EU) accession. Specifically, we focus on the role played by private investors in the exercise of membership conditionality by international institutions. Focusing on the case of Turkey, we argue that, even though accession is a distant and uncertain prospect, bond market actors already have begun to reward the Turkish government for its moves toward membership. As such, these actors reinforce the EU’s use of membership conditionality, in which accession governments pursue a variety of policy changes in order to improve their membership prospects. We identify several important trends in the market for Turkish bonds; in general, foreign investors have increased their investments in Turkish public debt. As a result, the Turkish government benefits from reduced borrowing costs and a longer term perspective on the part of investors. We discuss the implications of bond market behavior vis-à-vis Turkey, in terms of its implications regarding the joint importance of international institutions and private markets as influences on governments’ behavior, and in terms of the consequences for Turkey, both in the short-run (positive) and in the long run (depending on the outcome of EU accession negotiations, positive or negative). For comments on previous versions, we thank Mark Aspinwall, James Clunie, Roland Dannreuther, Liesbet Hooghe, David Howarth, Erik Jones, and John Peterson.
    [Show full text]
  • Neonicotinoid Restrictions in Eu Miss Target of Protecting Bees
    BEEINFOrmed N° 4_2017 THE BAYER BEE CARE POSITION NEONICOTINOID RESTRICTIONS IN EU MISS TARGET OF PROTECTING BEES It has been four years now since the introduction of the neonicotinoid restrictions in the EU, driven by the desire to KEY TAKE-AWAYS protect bees from potential risks related to these substances. A period of time which does not, perhaps, allow for an • So far, the neonicotinoid restrictions in the EU extensive and solid assessment of the long-term impacts of have not led to measurable improvements of this policy, yet is long enough to carry out a first assessment. bee health in Europe. This to see if the measures taken had any measurable positive impact on bee health. This is something one would • Honey bee colony numbers are continuously expect after the European Commission’s radical step of on the rise in Europe – as was the case before restricting some of the most widespread uses of three of the restrictions were put in place. the most important insecticides used by farmers for pest management in European crops. Bearing in mind that the • Bee poisoning incidents have been relatively restrictions were brought in to avert an allegedly substantial rare for many years and there is no visible threat to bee health. trend for a further reduction of cases since the restrictions began. In Regulation (EU) No. 485/2013, in which the restrictions were stipulated, it was foreseen that there should be a review after • The restrictions are having a heavy economic two years of all newly available scientific data. However, a impact on agronomic productivity in Europe review to evaluate the impact of the restrictions on the health and have negative consequences for the of honey bee populations in Europe was, surprisingly, not environment (increased water consumption and envisaged by the European Commission.
    [Show full text]
  • Legal Doping
    1/2016 Magazine for graduates of všb-tuo LEGAL DOPING Graduate support for development of the region North Moravia-Silesia A place of great potential Tomáš Buchwaldek Addicted to subsidies The graduate card is full of benefits And waiting for you to pick it up! COLOURS_2016_VSB_205x94_KVETEN.indd 1 10.05.16 16:13 MYŠLENKY BEZ HRANIC IDEAS WITHOUT BORDERS MEZINÁRODNÍ FÓRUM / INTERNATIONAL FORUM 10 SCÉN 100 HOSTŮ 19 ZEMÍ / 10 STAGES 100 SPEAKERS 19 COUNTRIES DOLNÍ VÍTKOVICE, OSTRAVA 12/7 – 13/7 MELTINGPOT SCIENCE & ACADEMY @ HLUBINA 14/7 – 17/7 GLOBAL FORUM @ COLOURS OF OSTRAVA Bjørn LomBorg / Chris hedges Leonard mLodinow / TimoThy snyder roBerT FuLghum / CLemens KuBy / dan sheChTman 8–9/7/2016 OSTRAVA CENTRUM POZOR! JAROSLAV UHLÍŘ / VOXEL LETOS NOVĚ JUMPING DRUMS / PAVEL CALLTA O VÍKENDU GENERÁLNÍ PARTNER: MANON MEURT / KALLE / DALEKKO / MICHAL ŠEPS ASTRONAUTALIS [USA] THE FREEBORN BROTHERS [PL] HLAVNÍ PARTNEŘI: A DALŠÍ UMĚLCI Z KOREJE, ALŽÍRSKA, FRANCIE, USA A ŠPANĚLSKA VSTUP DIVADLA / WORKSHOPY / HRY / GEOCACHING / SPORT ZA PODPORY: ZDARMA! STÁNKY / AKTIVITY PRO RODINY S DĚTMI PARTNER: MEDIÁLNÍ PARTNEŘI: ZA PODPORY: OFICIÁLNÍ TISKÁRNA: www.festivalvulicich.cz inzerce VŠB - Alumni, 205 x 28093 mm mm - -3.indd celá strana.indd 1 1 13.11. 5. 2016 10:21:0017:35:01 Alumni 1/2016 Magazine for graduates VŠB-TU Ostrava Vice-rector‘s Published by: VSB - Technical editorial University of Ostrava Department of Vice-Rector for Inter- national Relations and Social Affairs ALUMNI – care of graduates 17 November 15/2172 708 33 Ostrava-Poruba Phone: +420 597 324 398 Email: [email protected] Web: alumni.vsb.cz Editor in chief Lucie Holešinská‘09 Editorial staff Lucie Holešinská ‘09 Petra Polesová‘16 Karolína Ondrušková ‘15 Language editing Simon Johnson Dear graduates, dear readers, Having the card means I identify my- Graphic design and production: self more with the university, but even Ivana Kunová hey, I’m going to let you know what I without it I shall always be a patriot have in my wallet.
    [Show full text]
  • Remaking Europe: the New Manufacturing As an Engine for Growth
    BLUEPRINT SERIES 26 REMAKING EUROPE: THE NEW MANUFACTURING AS AN ENGINE FOR GROWTH Reinhilde Veugelers, editor BRUEGEL BLUEPRINT SERIES VOLUME XXVI Remaking Europe: the new manufacturing as an engine for growth Reinhilde Veugelers, editor Editorial coordination: Stephen Gardner Production: Alessandro Borsello © Bruegel 2017. All rights reserved. Short sections of text, not to exceed two paragraphs, may be quoted in the original language without explicit permission provided that the source is acknowledged. Opinions expressed in this publication are those of the author alone. Bruegel 33 rue de la Charité, Box 4 1210 Brussels, Belgium www.bruegel.org ISBN: 978-9-078910-44-2 Contents Foreword 11 1. Introduction: Europe and the new manufacturing 13 2. European and global manufacturing: trends,challenges 24 and the way ahead 3. The competitiveness of European industry in the digital era 53 4. Firm growth dynamics and productivity in Europe 79 5. A revival of manufacturing in Europe? Recent evidence 102 about reshoring 6. Manufacturing in central and eastern Europe 125 7. Europe’s comparative advantage in low-carbon technology 149 8. From big oil to big data? Perspectives on the European 177 energy industry of the future 9. Fintech in Europe: challenges and opportunities. 197 10. Strengthening cross-border e-commerce in the European Union 217 About the authors Carlo Altomonte is a professor of economics of European inte- gration at Bocconi University, Italy. His main areas of research are international trade and investment, the political economy of globali- sation and the process of European integration. He is as consultant for a number of international institutions, including the United Nations (UNCTAD), the European Parliament, the European Commission and the European Central Bank, analysing international trade and invest- ment and their implications for competitiveness.
    [Show full text]
  • Russian Strategic Intentions
    APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE Russian Strategic Intentions A Strategic Multilayer Assessment (SMA) White Paper May 2019 Contributing Authors: Dr. John Arquilla (Naval Postgraduate School), Ms. Anna Borshchevskaya (The Washington Institute for Near East Policy), Dr. Belinda Bragg (NSI, Inc.), Mr. Pavel Devyatkin (The Arctic Institute), MAJ Adam Dyet (U.S. Army, J5-Policy USCENTCOM), Dr. R. Evan Ellis (U.S. Army War College Strategic Studies Institute), Mr. Daniel J. Flynn (Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI)), Dr. Daniel Goure (Lexington Institute), Ms. Abigail C. Kamp (National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism (START)), Dr. Roger Kangas (National Defense University), Dr. Mark N. Katz (George Mason University, Schar School of Policy and Government), Dr. Barnett S. Koven (National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism (START)), Dr. Jeremy W. Lamoreaux (Brigham Young University- Idaho), Dr. Marlene Laruelle (George Washington University), Dr. Christopher Marsh (Special Operations Research Association), Dr. Robert Person (United States Military Academy, West Point), Mr. Roman “Comrade” Pyatkov (HAF/A3K CHECKMATE), Dr. John Schindler (The Locarno Group), Ms. Malin Severin (UK Ministry of Defence Development, Concepts and Doctrine Centre (DCDC)), Dr. Thomas Sherlock (United States Military Academy, West Point), Dr. Joseph Siegle (Africa Center for Strategic Studies, National Defense University), Dr. Robert Spalding III (U.S. Air Force), Dr. Richard Weitz (Center for Political-Military Analysis at the Hudson Institute), Mr. Jason Werchan (USEUCOM Strategy Division & Russia Strategic Initiative (RSI)) Prefaces Provided By: RDML Jeffrey J. Czerewko (Joint Staff, J39), Mr. Jason Werchan (USEUCOM Strategy Division & Russia Strategic Initiative (RSI)) Editor: Ms.
    [Show full text]