By George Niculescu,
Director of Programs, Centre for East European and Asian Studies Bucharest,
Affiliated Expert, European Geopolitical Forum Brussels

Historically, the roots of the phrase "Euro-Atlantic security" stem from the revolutionary shift towards cooperative relations between NATO and its former adversaries from the Warsaw Treaty Organization promoted through the North Atlantic Cooperation Council and the Partnership for Peace (PfP). From an institutional point of view, since 1997, the Euro- Atlantic security is tightly linked with the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council (EAPC) which has been created jointly by the NATO members and PfP countries (including Russia, Ukraine, and the other independent republics emerging from the dissolution of the former Soviet Union) as a forum enabling an "expanded political dimension of partnership and practical cooperation under the PfP" [Basic Document of the EAPC]. The EAPC was meant to complement the respective activities of the OSCE, the European Union, and the Council of Europe. READ MORE

Dr Beniamin Poghosyan
Deputy Director, Institute for National Strategic Studies, MOD, Armenia
Executive Director, Political Science Association of Armenia

The Karabakh conflict negotiation process is in an obvious stalemate after the apparent failure of the Kazan summit which took place last June. Three-years of mediation efforts by Russian President Dmitry Medvedev accompanied by efforts of the Minsk Group’s two other Co-chair-state-leaders have delivered no results. The much anticipated breakthrough which should have taken place at the Kazan trilateral summit was transformed into a half page statement with no concrete steps and decisions. President Medvedev’s further efforts to move the process through bilateral meetings with Azerbaijani and Armenian Presidents did not bring any meaningful results. Meanwhile, the situation in the front line is deteriorating mainly due to Azerbaijani snipers deadly attacks and retaliatory actions of Karabakh Armed Forces. READ MORE

Prof. Alla A.Yazkova,
Institute of Europe RAS, Moscow

Over the two decades that passed after the USSR disintegration the previously rather calm and in a way peripheral South Caucasus region has become a crossroad of internal contradictions and geopolitical competition. In the subsequent years this relatively small area was gradually turned into a hotbed of numerous conflicts involving not only Southern Caucasus countries but also European and global actors. Interference from the late 1990-s of world powers, first of all the United States and European Union, substantially aggravated situation. The US interest not only in creation of an energy transportation route, but also in barring Russian monopoly domination entailed growth of contradictions that in one or another way involved regional powers – Turkey and in the recent times Iran. READ MORE

by Marat Terterov,
EGF Director

Although 2011 is still far from over, it is already likely to go down in history as the year of the so called ‘Arab Spring’. 2011 will be remembered as the year when Arab populations threw down the gauntlet to their stagnating regimes, revising their traditional authoritarian power model and at long last commencing the transition to democracy. So too it is time to consider revising the European Union’s relationship with Russia, which has stagnated rather badly in recent years. Since the “big bang” enlargement of the EU in 2004, Moscow’s relations with Brussels have been increasingly characterised by tension (if not crisis) in their energy ties and failure to reach agreement in many areas of common strategic interest. In June of this year, the bi-annual EU-Russia Summit, held in Nizhny Novgorod, was dubbed as the ‘Vegetable Summit’ in the international press as Moscow and Brussels exchanged blows over the Russian ban on vegetable imports from the EU following the E.coli health scare in Germany. READ MORE

By Deniz Altinbas,
Assistant Professor, Ahi Evran University, Turkey,
EGF Affiliated Expert

A History of Turkey’s European Aspirations in Brief

Contrary to conventional opinion, Turkey’s interest in being part of the Western world did not start with its application to the European Economic Community (EEC). In fact, Turkey’s European orientation, diminishing as it is at present, began with the Rescript of Gulhane of 1839 (Tanzimat Fermani) and the Reform Edict of 1856 (Islahat Fermani). Among many other reasons, the major aim of the 19^th century effort was the building of a Western model of state and society in wake of the declining power of the Ottoman Empire. READ MORE

Key Points for Policy Makers:

• The crisis in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) is demonstrating that it is high time for Brussels to re- think its strategy towards the countries of the south bank of the Mediterranean
• EU political initiatives in MENA have often focused on democratisation capacity building, when most of the grievances which sparked this year’s revolts on the Arab street have been predominantly socio-economic in character
• Brussels needs to devise effective mechanisms to overcome divisiveness in the narrow priorities of individual member states if it is to become a credible force in the sphere of international crisis management. It also needs to improve its early warning crisis prevention and detection instruments – or develop such capacities
• MENA remains clouded by substantial uncertainty. There is no guarantee that democracy will emerge in the recently “liberated” MENA countries. However, Turkey might be able to offer such countries a credible model of democratic growth.
• Any major disruption in the supply of energy from the Middle East to international markets, as a result of the ongoing protests and civil conflict in the region, is unlikely
• A general realignment may be starting to take place in the Caspian and Central Asian energy markets: Russian may be losing its grip over the region

Click here to enter the discussion