Search

This booklet includes articles on four ethnic groups or minorities - Roma, Qists, Assyrians, Ezids – in Georgia today. This South Caucasus country is today a multiethnic country where different national and ethnic minorities live side by side, and it can hardly be understood without knowledge of their minorities. The preservation of national-historical originality and ethnic self-identification of these groups, while keeping their culture, traditions, history and language is the key issue and a noble task of minorities today as well as the state. The paper serves as first entrance, mainly for non-Georgians, but also for Georgians to be aware of the culture, traditions, history and customs of people living next to the majority population. The importance of the paper is in indicating and identifying key points characterizing the precise ethnic or minorities groups. The paper may become, after all, a useful contribution for European minority research. By different kind of analysis the originality of each group should be highlighted. While the contribution on Roma is a genuine social science research work, with high empirical content, it states that there are significant differences between the obligations Georgia has signed for in European conventions and the de facto treatment of Roma, for which Dea Elibegova sets up an ambitious – but also self-evident – checklist for the state. She works as Chief Specialist in the Department of Minorities of the Ministry for Reintegration in Tbilisi/Georgia. Her co-author and colleague Meqa Khangoshvili describes the history and mentality of the Qists, a Chechen minority in Georgia, who always were friends of the Georgians throughout their history. Also the other chapters are more culturally and historically oriented, first about the Assyrians, written by Sergey Osipov and Eka Bitkash, both very active in Assyrian organizations, in the case of Sergey Osipov as Deputy Chairman of the World Assyrians Association, in the case of Eka Bitkash as chairperson of the Young Assyrians in Tbilisi. The Ezidism chapter by Dimitry Pirbari also includes specific religious criteria and gives an excellent overview about the habits and customs of Ezidism. After all, this booklet brings valuable insights and an interesting picture of life in Georgia.

The Publication Iran is currently celebrating the 30th anniversary of the Islamic Revolution. This event not only heralded enormous changes within Iran itself but also resulted in a clear break with the United States, formerly a close ally. Since 1979 bilateral relations between these two countries have veered from crisis to crisis. Occasionally, however, there have been times where improved US-Iran ties just seemed possible. 2009 might just be such a turning point in this fraught relationship. President Obama's more conciliatory approach to relations with Iran and the upcoming elections in Iran in June - with many hoping a reformist candidate, possibly Moussavi, might be elected - could be the last chance to avoid another, potentially extremely dangerous, confrontation between the two states. Certainly one lesson can be drawn from the bilateral confrontations of the last thirty years: using and threatening to use force has not aided either country in their respective quests to achieve regional and global foreign policy goals. This paper examines US-Iran relations since 1979 under international law aspects, focussing on their most dangerous aspect: the repeated use of force. Despite influential circles in both Iran and the USA openly questioning the existence of any legal rules in international affairs both states have always sought to justify their forcible actions under international law. The story of US-Iran relations in international law since 1979 is thus also a story of ever expanding concepts of self-defence. Three major crises in the US-Iran relationship resulting or possibly still going to result in forcible action will be dealt with in this paper. The hostage crisis of 1979-1981 will serve as a starting point. Iran's justification of its actions and the legality of the American attempt, in 1980, to rescue its nationals will be examined in detail. Then the focus will turn to the Iran-Iraq War and the US attacks on Iranian oil platforms. It will be considered whether these actions were justified on the grounds of self-defence. Following that the current crisis surrounding Iran's nuclear programme will be discussed. Iran's obligations under the Non-Proliferation Treaty and America's controversial doctrine of “pre-emptive” self-defence will be examined in some detail. It will be concluded that the US-Iran relationship – characterized by an intense competition for power and influence in the Middle East - is in practical terms already living up to the ideals espoused by neoconservatives and nationalists in Washington and radicals in Tehran: a foreign policy freed from the shackles of international law. Not one of the forcible actions undertaken by either Iran or the United States, it is argued, was legal under international law. Far from helping these two states pursue their national interests and achieve their regional and global goals – as American and Iranian radicals had hoped - this strategy has, however, resulted in abysmal failure for both. It remains to be seen whether this lesson has really been learned allowing new administrations in both states to pursue more successful policies in future. The paper is based on the dissertation submitted by the author to the University of Kent for the degree of LL.M. in September 2008 (Prof. Mansell), but has been updated since.

Now the OSCE has 57 participating states from Europe, Central Asia, and North America, and its area spans from Vancouver to Vladivostok. 1st August, 2015 marked the 40th anniversary of the Helsinki Final Act. Since the signing of this agreement, the relevance of the OSCE in the European security architecture has only increased. That being said, the current paper seeks to picture how it functions, how it is perceived today by the participating states and what their key issues with regard to the organization are. It describes the various institutions within the OSCE, but also its political emancipatation. The most provoking part may be a forecast about its future and the gaps to be filled. The text is complemented with some official documents.

To read, to inform, to learn - this is the purpose of this new LIBERTAS Paper, which can be used for university studies, by students, scientists, and above all by everybody who wants to inform him/herself about the European Union. It contains articles about EU Foreign and Defence Policy, with many examples of also external aspects of traditional domestic policies, and it shows that the EU needs more common foreign policy than less. Another article covers the OCTs - the overseas countries and territories (spread over the globe and held by France, Denmark, Netherlands and the United Kingdom). The author shows an incredible multitude of communities - from Wallis & Futuna in the South Pacific until Aruba in the Caribbean. The Arctic region and its integration and relation to the EU is another chapter which becomes very topical in the moment. A second part of the booklet deals with methodological approaches for external soft power. with an overview on plurinational attempts in the EU and their'export capacity'(e.g. Latin America), participatory democracy, and the role of non-State actors ensuring human security - with the example of South Sudan.

Daskalovski, among the most promising political scientists from Skopje/Macedonia, also running a think-tank in this country (Centre for Research and Policy Making – CRPM), presents in this paper the background, the theatre, the action and the actors of the Macedonian conflict of 2001 between Macedonians and Macedonian Albanians. It describes excellently the role of the European Union, which for the first time had an application case of Common Foreign Policy, and of the United States, as well as of the OSCE, and the interaction between all of them. Also, the Macedonian protagonists are well painted, who finally managed to settle the conflict by changing the Constitution.This Paper is an excellent case study for all who want to become aware of conflict backgrounds in the Balkan, and a way to settle them, not only in Macedonia, but also in Kosovo, Bosnia and Herzegovina as well as in Albania. Furthermore, it is a sometimes thrilling attempt to write present history about a conflict which is only some few years ago.

This study, based on a Master thesis at the American University of Armenia, deals with a model of the Turkish-American economist Acemoglu, and tries answers on questions like'Under which circumstances democracy can prevail?'in the former Soviet Union countries (FSU). Six of them have been selected for this'detective story'among the descriptions of transition: Armenia, Belarus, Kyrgyzstan, Moldova, Russia, Ukraine. But the models of public institutions and private groups'behaviour are different from country to country, and the effects of transition sometimes contraproductive - be it under the'big bang'or under'gradualism'. Gohar Yeranyan investigates systematically the functions of the elite, the oligarchs, the interest groups, the system-immanent changes, inequality, the revolutionary potential (end the evolutionary possibilities). the wealth distribution - and the persistence of political institutions. In this context, she discusses different paths of political developments in the FSU reality, possible reasons of democratization, as well as the dynamic model by D. Acemoglu - one of the most promising economists today, as well as the role of incentives for the political and economic change in former Soviet Union countries, before giving an overview of economic development paths of the FSU countries (shock therapy versus gradualism). She is clearly pleading for a EU-approached democracy which is more likely than any other system to keep the different interest groups balanced, and can create more GDP and popular wealth which is not only restricted to an oligarchy. This includes also that the different dates should also follow an outspoken social policy. A very refreshing book (from the EU or a US perspective, for example) - and a very necessary one (from the FSU states'view), and a very adequate one in view of the latest discussions in the EU's Eastern Partnership countries.

Every European or US consultant for the Kyrgyz government or civil society should read this book - and also those for other Central Asian states, as many social and government fabrics are very close. This book opens the eyes about the Rule of Law, as it was and is still understood by Kyrgyz society, and it opens also ways far from the'teacher's'role of the consultant of the past. The concept of the Ruke of Law is explained in detail, as it was before, during and after communist time, the election of local government past and today, the role of gifts in elections, the role of clans and families during parliamentary elections, and that it will take a certain time until the Central Asian countries can be called a beacon of democracy in the Western sense. However, there is hope, as good consultants will also let the people keep their traditions which are not too ineffective - here the author spreads an optimistic impression about the future of her country. This can be confirmed objectively, some years after March 2006, the third president later, after another revolution and in view of other Central Asian countries. Kyrgyzstan is the only country in Central Asia which tries to have a really pluralistic parliament from which emerges a certain discussion culture, and it disposes today of a relatively free press compared to most other countries of the region. However, there is still a long way to go. As the knowledge about the country in Europe and North America is very restricted, this text may serve to counter this. The author also describes the more and more authoritarian changes in the presidential elections; the manuscript stops in the first time of the Bakiev government, but it is topical until now. A Glossary crowns the book which, short and concise, is a brilliant piece of legal description for Central Asia.

As this book shall maintain, Russia's Balkan policy lines mostly displayed aspects of continuity after the Cold War, although moments of deviation were also allowed. In such a context, part II provides an overview of Russian foreign policy-making after 1990s by outlining the political currents that left their imprint in Russian domestic and foreign policy understanding in the past two decades. The political currents inevitably imply a number of policy tenets most articulated by Russia in the concerned period, which are considered to apply to Russian foreign policy rhetoric as regards the post-Cold War Balkans, in both peaceful and conflict times. The trajectory of the developments in the Balkans, particularly during the twin crises of 1992-1995 and 1999, revealed at least four policy pillars which prioritized Russia's role as a great power, emphasized the centrality of the UN in international relations, opposed NATO expansion and stressed the significance of multipolarity in international relations. Part III provides an account on the evolution of Russia's Balkan links since the Tsarist times with a view to putting into perspective the trials and tribulations of the Tsarist and Soviet states in the Balkans. Not surprisingly, the Balkans mattered for Russia during these periods as Russia's expansionist moves towards the region signified. The Tsarist period revealed the centrality of balance of power, emphasis on Russia's great power role, and Panslavism. The Communist era policies, on the other hand, sustained the balance of power rhetoric, accompanied by ideology. Part IV takes up the issue of war in Bosnia, and the Russian attitude before, during and after the war. Russia's participation in the multinational peace-keeping process in Bosnia is examined in a separate topic as this qualifies as the first Russian military involvement in peace-keeping with the West after the Cold War. The role of public opinion and media in Russia during the war is also assessed briefly with a view to understanding whether the change of system in the country had helped create a political environment in which public opinion and media mattered in the decision-making process. In part V, analysis centers on the war in Kosovo and how Russian responses to it evolved. Russian participation in KFOR and the role of public opinion and media are also examined. This part also explores the contours of Russia's Kosovo policy from the end of the war to date. Given that Russia has a significant leverage in the field of energy in the Balkans as elsewhere in the resource-poor areas in the world, Russia's energy policies towards the region are evaluated in part VI. Russia's current and prospective views as to the energy outlook of the region, its main allies in the field, and some of the concrete projects in which it is involved enable us have a better understanding of its broader Balkan policies. Relations between Russia and the former Yugoslav states are assessed briefly in Part VII. Some of the current issues of concern between Russia and these individual regional states relate to the Euro-Atlantic orientations of these states and in what ways Russia has come to respond to this orientation so far, as well as a number of bilateral issues brought to the forefront after the disintegration of the Soviet Union. Similarly, Part VIII provides an overview of Russia's post-Cold War relations with Bulgaria, Romania and Albania as independent Communist states of the Cold War. The final section is an overall endorsement of the findings of the preceding sections, emphasizing once more that Russia's Balkan policy throughout the past two decades rests on more aspects of continuity than those of change and it is likely to remain unchanged for some time.

Contents - Inhalt Ist ein Beitritt Armeniens zur Europäischen Union denkbar? - Versuch eines Szenarios Ein möglicher EU-Beitritt und sein Zeitplan ENP – ein erster Schritt auf die armenische EU-Mitgliedschaft? Ein mögliches Beitritts-Szenario Rechtliche Beitrittskriterien Ist Armenien ein “europäischer Staat”? Die Kriterien von Kopenhagen Die Bewerbung an den Rat Stellungnahme der Kommission Rats- und Parlamentsvoten sowie Ratifizierungen Argumente gegen einen EU-Beitritt Einige wirtschaftliche und politische Fragen eines Beitritts Die Problematik eines türkischen EU-Beitritts Die Beziehungen mit Russland Alternativen zum Beitritt Armeniens Schlussfolgerungen und Empfehlungen European Union – Armenia - Russia: A Triangle of Interests in the South Caucasus Background 1. South Caucasus: General Views 2. Armenia and its Foreign Policy: Challenges Armenian Foreign Policy and “Complementarity” Immediate Neighbors Foreign Policy Challenges Nagorno-Karabakh Security Systems and Armenian Choice Arenas of Armenian Problems and Possible Solutions 3. Armenia: Dealing with the Regional Hegemony Russia as Leader of the CIS Armenian Dependency Russian Perceptions of the Region and Armenians Russian External Policies towards Post-Soviet Space Russian Foreign Policies towards Armenia 4. Armenia in the Process of EU Rapprochement 5. EU and Russia: Sharing Regional Interests Conflict Management and Security in the Caucasus Overview Sources of Ethnic Conflict Fear and Ethnic Conflict The Collapse of the Soviet Union Caucasus Challenges for the Caucasus: Interests of Major Powers and Geo-political Consequences United States policy in Caucasus and in the Caspian Region Chechnya Internal Ethno-Political Violence: Nature of Conflicts Consequences of the Empire: New Challenges Geo- strategic and economic interests

The general purpose of this guide is to provide a popular interpretation of the principal provisions of the Partnership and Cooperation Agreement signed between the EU and the Kyrgyz Republic on February 9 1995 in Brussels by the President of Kyrgyzstan Askar Akaev and the President of the European Commission Jacques Santer (further referred to as the PCA or the Agreement). This publication is an attempt to describe the implications for cooperation under the PCA and familiarize the reader with the political, legal and economic context of the agreement. The layout of the guide is organised around the main clauses of the PCA to ensure thorough coverage of all titles of the Agreement. All references made to specific “Titles” or “Articles” in this guide correspond to the titles and articles in the PCA, unless otherwise indicated.

A la veille du XXIème siècle, l'Union Européenne subit une mutation profonde. La naissance de la monnaie unique, le 1er janvier 1999, l'Agenda 2000 ou l'élargissement aux pays d'Europe centrale et orientale (PECO) en sont les manifestations les plus tangibles. Il en est d'autres qui ont une signification plus que symbolique: Berlin, nouvelle capitale de l'Allemagne, la perspective d'un engagement plus européen du Royaume-Uni et le développement d'une politique européenne de l'emploi. L'Union Européenne se voit progressivement amenée à réfléchir sur son rôle international et sur le choix de son futur mode de fonctionnement. Elle est un des acteurs majeurs de la globalisation. Elle doit s'y affirmer vis à vis de l'Aléna et du bloc Japon-Asie du Sud-Est. Elle a redéfini ses positions vis à vis du Tiers-Monde lors de la négociation de Lomé V et plus particulièrement avec les Pays du Sud et de l'Est de la Méditerranée. Ces derniers forment un ensemble géopolitique qui regroupe 235 millions d'habitants. Ils seront 500 millions vers 2040-2050. L'Union Européenne ne peut négliger la présence à ses portes d'un ensemble de pays unis par des liens religieux et culturels, disposant de ressources en hydrocarbures et représentant un formidable marché potentiel. Elle se trouve confrontée à un véritable défi. Elle n'a aucun intérêt à voir s'aggraver leur situation économique dont la dégradation créerait des conditions favorables au développement du fondamentalisme religieux. L'Union Européenne a apporté une première réponse avec le partenariat euro-méditerranéen (1995) qui a pour objectif la création d'une zone de libre échange en 2010. Le Maghreb occupe une situation stratégique au coeur des pays du sud et de l'est méditerranéen par sa proximité géographique et les nombreux liens humains, économiques et politiques tissés par l'Histoire, en particulier la France. L'instabilité de l'Algérie retarde le renforcement d'une coopération que le Maroc et la Tunisie ont engagée. Cet ouvrage a l'ambition de montrer: 1) l'origine des relations entre l'Union Européenne et le Maghreb où la France a joué un rôle moteur. 2) l'état de la coopération de l'Union Européenne et du Maghreb et la place du partenariat euro-méditerranéen. 3) La situation politique et économique du MAROC, de l'ALGERIE, de la TUNISIE, de la LIBYE et de la MAURITANIE. Nous avons insisté particulièrement sur le MAROC et la TUNISIE. L'Algérie a été surtout traitée sur les plans religieux, politique et social. La Libye et la Mauritanie sont développées dans le contexte de l'Union du Maghreb Arabe (U.M.A) La constitution d'une entité euro-méditerranéenne est la réponse principale à un monde où l'Europe ne représentera plus que 4,8% de la population en 2025 contre 6,5% actuellement et d'où émergeront deux puissances montantes avant la Chine et l'Inde.

The book is devoted to the theoretical and methodological fundamentals and practical issues of economic security in Russia and its regions. The authors review threats and measures to ensure economic security, deliver analysis technique for revealing propensity for corruption in the regulations and management decisions. They examine the strategy of economic security of Russia, some indicators that characterize the economic security of the state, the conception of regional economic security as a component of Russia's economic security, external and internal threats to the economic security of the region and economic security as a comprehensive evaluation of socio-economic development of the region. Particular attention is paid to identification of the ways ensuring the economic security of Russia at the federal and regional levels. The book is helpful for all interested in the field of national, economic and other types of security, state-owned and municipal governance, management of corporations and enterprises, economists, sociologists and marketing experts.

An enlarged version of a Master thesis for a M. A. degree in European Studies (University of Flensburg / Germany, International Institute of Management and European Studies), this book based on a lot of sources, interviews and other empirical research shows a thorough scientific depth. Besides it is the first book in the literature landscape by any - in this case Armenian - author pleading openly for an Armenian membership in the European Union. When writing this study, the author wanted originally to describe a more or less slow changeover of Armenia towards the EU, when not only she was surprised by the announcement of the Armenian Government to join the Russia-led Eurasian Customs Union on 3rd September, 2013. This has already induced furies within Armenian politics and above all civil society, and the result at present - before the Vilnius Summit of the Eastern Partnership at the end of November 2013 - is open. But one thing is for sure: If Armenia would go indeed into the Customs Union and later into the Eurasian Union, the results, the economic benefits, the neglecting of necessary reforms, the treatment of matters and of personnel will create a backlash in Armenia (and the EU) which will be the basis of more solidarity than ever with the legitimate security interests of Armenia, possibly with the support of the EU. This backlash will endorse a future, new approach towards the EU. Ofelya Sargsyan writes why: Armenia is well-anchored in Europe, since almost 2000 years, and it had more to do with European capitals like Paris, London, Brussels etc. in the 2nd half of the 19th century than people think. Of course, it would be a European border region, but together with Georgia - which also strives into the EU - it could be just this. The book deals with geographic, political, economic and cultural reasons, why Armenia should follow a clear foreign policy towards Europe - which has not at all to collide with special and privileged relations to Russia. The impressive history of the country's relations to the Council of Europe and the EU is well described, as well as the EU's perception of its hypothetic move. But also the positions of Turkey, Azerbaijan, Nagorno Karabakh and Iran as well as of Russia and of course Georgia are described as those of neighbours interested in the regional integration orientation of Armenia. The author, belonging otherwise to an'impatient'young generation, knows perfectly, that the EU membership takes a lot of time, but she pleads - in an outspoken, but never'pushy'way, for a sustainable change in Armenia's foreign policy - a change which since more than 20 years of Armenian independence would not have to be a real change, after all.

Modern Macedonia emerged in 1945 as one of six constitutive republics of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (SFRY). When Yugoslavia disintegrated in the second half of 1991, Macedonia chose to assert its own independence rather than remain in a truncated Yugoslav state likely to be dominated by Serbia without the counterbalancing influences of Croatia and Slovenia. Macedonia declared independence on 8 September 1991, and today is a democratic multiparty state with a population of around 2 million. According to the 2002 census results, Macedonians make up 64% of the total population, while Albanians are the biggest ethnic minority with 25%. Macedonia's reforms in the last 15 years have been focused simultaneously on three issues: state building, democratic development and establishment of a functioning market economy. During the 1990s Macedonian political elites clashed with their ethnic Albanian counterparts over the basic idea behind the concept of the state. Various elements in the constitution, the census taking, laws on education, local self-government, and public display of national minority symbols, the ethnic make-up of the police, army, as well as the public administration, were all contested by ethnic Albanians in this period. pitting ethnic Albanian grievances against Macedonian fears for “their” country's security and integrity. While ethnic Macedonians have insisted on a unitary nation-state, ethnic Albanians have refused to be considered as an ethnic minority in a Macedonian nation-state and have advocated for an official bi-ethnic state system. Political transformation was formulated as a zero-sum game, Armed conflict erupted between Albanian rebels and government forces in 2001 but was quickly ended through an EU- and U.S.-mediated agreement, signed in August of that year. The so-called Ohrid Agreement envisioned a series of political and constitutional reforms, fulfilling much of the demands raised by the Macedonian Albanians throughout the 1990s and introducing some features of power sharing, such as a system of double majorities requiring consent from minorities represented in the parliament to key decisions of parliament, a substantial degree of municipal decentralization, equitable representation in the public administration of the non-majority communities, as well as confidence-building measures to overcome the immediate consequences of the 2001 conflict. Furthermore, the agreement established the principle of achieving equitable and just representation in public administration at the national and local level as the highest priority, a key reform in the public sector. The process of interethnic consolidation based on the Ohrid Agreement is supported by the European Union. The European Union uses the Ohrid Framework Agreement as a key conditionality for further integration of Macedonia. In 2001 Macedonia signed a Stabilization and Association Agreement (SAA) with the European Union that envisaged the successive liberalization of trade and established an institutional framework for cooperation. Since December 2005 Macedonia has been an official candidate for EU membership. This book is an important contribution to the study of the new political history of Macedonia. It deals with a number of important issues since independence including the problem with the Greek objections to the name of the country and the impossibility to brand the nation on the global scale. Issues such as war crimes, the role of international organizations, economic successes and failures, problems of democratization and consolidation are all dealt by the authors of the book. It identifies challenges, failures and successes, but most importantly it also provides important recommendations for the future.

Die Verschiebung der Machtbalancen in Indonesien bezüglich der Haltung zum Westen vollzog sich in den letzten 40 Jahren in einem schleichenden Prozess, Hand in Hand mit den veränderten Machtbalancen auf der globalen, südostasiatischen, nationalen und regionalen Ebene. Dieser Prozess spiegelte sich auch in der Literaturzeitschrift Horison, wo hier für den Verlauf von 30 Jahren ver¬schiedene Etablierten/Außenseiter-Figurationen und divergierende Stigmatisie¬rungsgrade nachgewiesen werden. Diese bestanden hauptsächlich darin, dass eine Gruppe eine andere von Macht- und Statuschancen auf den verschiedenen Ebenen fern hielt: Im Literaturbetrieb geschah dies zwischen den Etablierten- und Außenseiter-Literaten, auf der internationalen Ebene im Verhältnis Indonesiens zum Westen, auf der nationalen Ebene im Verhältnis des Machtzentrums Jakarta zu den Außenregionen und auf der südostasiatischen Ebene unter den Ländern malaiisch-islamischer Prägung selbst und deren Verhältnis zum Westen. Die Antwort auf die Verschiebung der Machtverhältnisse war die Gegenrichtung: von außen nach innen, von der Zukunft in die Vergangenheit, von West nach Ost, vom Materiellen zum Immateriellen, vom Rationalen zum Irrationalen und vom Säkularen zum Religiösen.

Ideas for Europe – not asking what is, but what is not, and why. These are the questions of Olivier Védrine. As for professional reasons he holds a permanent dialogue with young people, it is clear that his ideas and questions reach out for young Europeans. What should happen with the institutions in Europe, with Turkey, Russia, with the climate change, with religious freedom and tolerance – this booklet is a firework of ideas. It is completed with some personal impressions of travelling to Ukraine and Azerbaijan. And it clearly underlines what we all have in Europe – more than a technocratic being, but one of a civilization of many hundred years and one of “unity in diversity”. Olivier Védrine does not expect to be everyone of his opinion – he wants also to challenge opinions, to challenge European citizens to behave like a citoyen.