Myanmar in EU–ASEAN relations

The aim of this paper is to discuss and examine the regional projects of institutionalism in Europe and Southeast Asia. The main focus is on Myanmar, a regional ‘outcast’ whose membership in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations in 1997 has helped it to gain international legitimacy and be able to stand relatively strong against Western sanctions. The military regime is riding on the wave of ASEAN norms and a communitarian culture. The question remains as to how long the country can continue to do so. A rather skeptical view is emphasized on the ‘ASEAN Way’ in dealing with the military regime, and for the overall political dialogue with the European Union. Many ambitious objectives such as sovereign equality in institutionalism are widely questioned, and the European Union has gone against many of its treaties in order to keep its relationship with Southeast Asia. The paper puts prominence on the political and security relationship rather than on the economic aspect, which has been far more successful. The role of values and the human rights debate will be highlighted and described as the greatest obstacle for any future political cooperation.

---

Voluntary organizations and society–military relations in contemporary Russia

The 2014 crisis in Ukraine has refocused attention on Russia as a European security actor. Despite showing renewed military capability, compared to the post-Soviet period, Russian society–military relations have remained the same. This relationship (between society and the security organs) provides the key context for assessing security. Analysis of everyday militarization and the role of voluntary organizations (such as DOSAAF [Dobrovol'noe obshchestvo sodeistviya armii, aviatsii i flotu] and Nashi [Molodezhnoe demokraticheskoe antifashistskoe dvizheni]) in supporting the military can provide an important insight into Russian behaviour as a security actor. These organizations generate a pro-military outlook and at the same time provide training and activities, thus contributing to military effectiveness by developing the competency of young people prior to military service as well as increasing public knowledge of military affairs. However, strong support for the military, a lack of independent information, and an absence of a shared vision on how society–military relations should be developed and also represent political challenges in terms of everyday militarization. This dynamic is important for understanding both Russia's security posture and wider security implications for Europe.     

Managing the conceptual gap on sovereignty in China–EU relations

While, historically, sovereignty is what Europeans invented and what the Chinese were forced to accept, today it is what Europeans try to bury and what the Chinese hold dear. A conceptual gap on sovereignty clearly exists between China and Europe which more often than not exerts a negative impact on their relationship. It breeds misunderstandings and disputes, makes it more difficult to reach agreements on many bilateral issues, and complicates China–Europe cooperation in third countries. But the conceptual gap on sovereignty does not prevent China and Europe from building a strategic partnership. Given that strengthening or weakening national sovereignty means totally different things to China and Europe, the two parties should jointly and proactively manage their divergence on sovereignty issues by mutual avoidance, mutual assurance, and mutual accommodation, in order to unlock sovereignty-related impasses in China–Europe relations.     

EU–Korea relations in a changing world project: main results and recommendations

The paper provides an overview of the most important results of a project on EU–Korea economic and regulatory relations funded by the European Commission. The paper first outlines the emergence and development of EU–Korea relations. In the second part, the paper presents the main findings clustered in three thematic areas. A first thematic area focuses on a discussion of the EU–Korea Free Trade Agreement. The second cluster analyzes EU–Korea cooperation on regulatory policies with a main focus on cooperation in the policy areas of security (arms trade and control), chemical regulation, environmental regulation, education, development cooperation and industrial policy. The third part focuses on EU–Korea cooperation concerning regional and international issues. In the third part, the paper presents the main recommendations which were formulated on the basis of the project.     

Whose legitimacy? The EU and Russia in contest for the eastern neighbourhood

The impact of external actors on political change in the European neighbourhood has mostly been examined through the prism of elite empowerment through externally offered incentives. The legitimacy of external policies has received less scrutiny, both with regard to liberal powers promoting democracy and illiberal powers preventing democracy. This article investigates the conflicting notions of legitimate political governance that underpin the contest between the European Union (EU) and Russia in the Eastern neighbourhood. It proposes four mechanisms of external soft influence that take into account the EU’s and Russia’s actorness and the structural power of their norms of political governance, and consider their effects on domestic actors and societal understandings of appropriate forms of political authority. It finally traces the EU’s and Russia’s soft influence on political governance in Ukraine. It maintains that through shaping the domestic understandings of legitimate political authority and reinforcing the domestic political competition, the EU and Russia have both left a durable imprint on Ukraine’s uneven political path.     

EU–Russia Security Relations and the Survey of Russian Federation Foreign Policy: One Year On

Abstract

The Kremlin's change of leadership on 7 May 2008 and growing international fears of Russia's resurgence, especially in the aftermath of the Georgian conflict, make this an interesting time to reflect upon EU–Russia security relations. This article does so by examining closely the Survey of Russian Federation Foreign Policy and, one year on from its approval, drawing upon subsequent developments as preliminary corollary or otherwise of its bearing on policy. On balance, it seems that the Kremlin's evolving perception of Russia and international relations has encouraged revised priorities and objectives and a more forceful foreign policy that not only slow progress in filling the Common Spaces, but also increase the likelihood of Russia–EU competition especially in their shared neighbourhood.     

EU–Australia relations: a strategic partnership in all but name?

Any consideration of classifying the relationship between the European Union (EU) and Australia as a strategic partnership would not have entered the lexicon of either partner in past decades. This article traces the development and maturing of this relationship from decades of tension and recrimination to mutual understanding and engagement on issues of common interest. It illustrates that although the relationship cannot be regarded as a strategic partnership, there is evidence of increasing common ground as the two interlocutors are no longer worlds apart. There is less perception of the tyranny of distance and the burden of memory. The relationship may not be a strategic partnership, but it is a partnership that has elements that are comprehensive, reciprocal, empathetic, long-term oriented, regional and global.     

The Russia–EU Energy Relationship: Getting it Right

The problems of Russia's energy sector, the part of the economy most broadly linked with Russia's prosperity and revived international influence, have been emphasized by the global financial crisis. Yet it remains an open question whether this, as well as various other factors, including the beginning of a genuine gas market and China's methodical advances in Central Asia, could encourage Russia to take the difficult decisions needed to make the energy sector more responsive and competitive. For its part, the EU has the potential to influence Russia, but if it continues to define itself by its divisions, it will not be able to use the influence it has gained. Without a strategic and coordinated approach, the EU is unlikely to be able to overcome its security dilemma and could find that the future is determined by other actors.     

The EU–Russia Energy Approach under the Prism of Interdependence

Abstract

This essay aims to analyse and interpret the EU–Russia approach in the energy sector under the prism of interdependence. It seeks to account for both the increasing cooperation among EU member-states and Russia as far as security of supplies is concerned, but also provides a sound explanation for the steady clashes between the two sides. For this reason, we use the terms sensitivity and vulnerability to refer to the position that each side holds on bilateral energy matters and, accordingly, to the actions it is capable of taking to resolve its problems. This model of interdependence provides a profound understanding of the bifurcated relationship between the EU and Russia and interprets both its cooperative and conflictive elements.     

Discourse and violence: the friend–enemy conjunction in contemporary Iranian–American relations

Iranian–American relations have been beset by mistrust and occasional outbreaks of vitriol and violence for the past three decades. In this article I attempt to map, theoretically and empirically, the ‘discursive field’ in which relations between Iran and the United States reveal themselves. I am interested in representations of Iran and the United States, and how the fundamental friend–enemy distinction setting the two countries politically apart has come about. I take as a starting point the fact that discourse has a real and present impact on policy and that a lot of what is happening in world politics can be adequately contextualised with an appreciation of the linkages between ‘utterance’ and ‘action’.     

EU Diplomacy and the EU–China strategic relationship: framing,negotiation and management

This article focuses on the development of the EU’s strategic relationship with China, by exploring the balance amongst three key mechanisms mobilized by the EU: framing, negotiation and management. The article outlines these issues in general, relating them to relevant conceptual and theoretical concerns, and then applies them to the EU–China strategic relationship. Through an examination of the framing ideas embodied in key documents, the development of an EU–China “negotiated order”, and the management of cooperation and competition in sectoral and institutional contexts, the article identifies a number of key tensions and requirements for effective coordination, which affect the potential development of an effective EU strategy.     

The Baltic predicament in the shadow of Russia’s war in Ukraine

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has once again reinvigorated the debate about the likelihood of conflict spreading into NATO’s frontline states, namely the Baltic republics. This article argues that somewhat paradoxically, the Baltics currently find themselves in both the best of times and the worst of times. On the one hand, with each “turn of the screw”—Georgia in 2008, Ukraine in 2014 and 2022—Moscow has ensured a greater allied presence across the Baltics. Still, despite this and Russia’s substantial losses incurred in the war, the Baltic lawmakers will not write off Russia as a military threat any time soon.     

Interpreting EU–Israel relations: a contextual analysis of the EU’s Special Privileged Partnership proposal

This article analyses the background, content and implications of the EU proposal for ‘Special Privileged Partnership’ status to be granted to Israel and the future state of Palestine in the event of a successful conclusion to the peace process. It employs a sociological institutionalist perspective to assess the diplomatic manoeuvring in the broader context of EU–Israel relations. The analysis offers an identification and categorization of the constitutive components of the EU–Israel relationship into formal and social elements. It argues that differences in threat perception, Israel’s highly securitized ethos and different interpretations of the security versus legality equation are social, constitutive elements of the relationship that cannot be efficiently changed by a mere upgrade of the formal institutional setting, even if the economic incentives to do so were attractive. In other words, the sources of tension between the EU and Israel observed in recent decades are not likely to be overcome by a discursive or institutional upgrade around the concept of partnership.     

EU–China relations in financial governance: cooperation,convergence or competition?

The global financial crisis (GFC) and subsequent Eurozone sovereign debt crisis (ESDC) have made reform of the global financial governance regime a priority for governments around the world. Prior to the crisis, neoliberal policies agreed between the European Union and the USA created a financial governance regime based on the principle of free operation of the market through the norms of market self-regulation, equal access to the market, and stability via institutional supervision. How will global financial governance look like after these crises? And what role can the EU and China play in shaping this regime? This article argues that as a result of the GFC and the ESDC, stability is becoming a second principle of global financial governance, along with the free operation of the market. Meanwhile, European and Chinese views regarding the norms, rules, and decision-making procedures designed to implement those principles do not differ as much as they used to. Thanks to interactions at the bilateral and multilateral levels, the EU and China now have knowledge regarding how the other understands the role and characteristics that financial governance should have. This is leading to convergence in some areas and cooperation in others. Concurrently, there are also areas of competition. Analysing all of these is essential to understand how global financial governance might evolve, given the central role that the EU and China now play in this regime.     

Culture,knowledge and diplomacy in contemporary EU–China relations—reflections on the legacies of Matteo Ricci

The worlds that Matteo Ricci lived in—early modern Europe, Ming China and the pre-Westphalian international order—are vastly different from the world of the 21^st century, when accelerated globalization binds China and Europe together as never before and when global international society is moving decisively beyond Westphalia. How much are the legacies of Matteo Ricci still relevant, 400 years on, to enriching the relationship between China and Europe in the 21^st century? This paper starts with a brief overview of the civilizational encounters between China and Europe and the unfolding of their turbulent and often troubled relationship over the last four centuries of wars, collapse of empires, internal convulsions, nation-state building, scientific and industrial revolutions and great economic transformations. Against this historical narrative is the discussion of Matteo Ricci as a cultural agent, a knowledge broker and a practitioner of public diplomacy in fostering Sino–European relations in its nascent years. The paper argues that even in an increasingly globalized world, Matteo Ricci’s conception of culture, his wisdom about the power of knowledge and his practice of people-to-people diplomacy remain valuable in informing both China and the EU, two aspiring global players, in their search for a viable China–EU strategic partnership.     

The EU,Russia and the potential for dialogue – different readings of the crisis in Ukraine

Recent developments in European security have shown the growing need for a better understanding of the security dynamics on the European continent. This article presents an analysis of differing Russian and European perceptions of European security in general, and concerning the crisis in Ukraine in particular. As much of the literature on these issues has been normatively driven, we aim to provide an impartial presentation and analysis of the dominant Russian and EU discourses. This we see as essential for investigating the potential for constructive dialogue between Russia and the EU. If simplistic assumptions about the motivations and intentions of other actors take hold in the public debate and policy analyses, the main actors may be drawn into a logic that is ultimately dangerous or counterproductive. With this article we offer a modest contribution towards discouraging such a development in Russia–EU relations. After presenting an analysis of the differing EU and Russian perceptions, we discuss the potential for dialogue between such different worldviews, and reflect on potential implications for European security. As the article shows, there are tendencies of a certain adjustment in the Union’s approach that may make a partial rapprochement between the two sides more likely.     

Conflict and the Cosmopolitan Liberalism of the “World Society” Perspective

The “world society” perspective aspired to occupy a distinctive paradigmatic position, in opposition to realism and structuralism. Its primary focus was the understanding of conflict and the formation of an “activist” agenda that promoted the conflict researcher as facilitator of conflict resolution. This article argues that the perspective remained largely that, though expressive of a normative commitment to what the article suggests is a form of cosmopolitan liberalism committed to an individualist rationalist ontology. The absence of engagement beyond Burton’s with core questions in social and political thought led to the diminution of the perspective’s intellectual standing and, more seriously, to a certain de-politicisation of the conflicts the activists sought to transform. Nevertheless, there was the impetus to innovate and to create a new language in International Relations, one that placed interdisciplinary research on conflict and its resolution at its core. It is this latter aspect that is the lasting legacy of Burton, Groom and colleagues.     

The rocky road of interregionalism: EU sanctions against human rights-violating Myanmar and repercussions on ASEAN–EU relations*

From 1991 until 2012, the European Union (EU) applied sanctions on Myanmar with the purpose of promoting democracy and human rights. In addition, the EU called on the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) to exert pressure on Myanmar. This paper analyses, in the context of Myanmar’s 1997 accession to ASEAN, how the EU’s sanctions approach towards Myanmar was perceived within ASEAN and related repercussions of this approach on ASEAN–EU interregional relations. With the accession of Myanmar as the base story, it is argued that a regional organizations membership concept implies specific dealings with normative ideas such as democracy and human rights as well as strategies of punishment such as sanctions. The differing membership concepts of ASEAN and the EU explain ASEAN’s critical perception of the EU’s sanctions on Myanmar. Further, the conceptual difference in membership also explains that the EU’s pressure on ASEAN has severely impaired the interregional relations.