Tweet
EXPERTS AT UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD DISCUSS 'EUROPE, RUSSIA AND THE CONTESTED NEIGHBOURHOOD'
Georgia Today
March 6 2014
By Nino Sharashidze
The Oxford University Georgian Society together with Ukrainian and
Armenian student societies organized a panel discussion on 'Europe,
Russia and the Contested Neighbourhood' at the European Studies
Centre, University of Oxford on March 4.The discussion covered the
political and economic choices of Georgia, Armenia and Ukraine and
their relations with Russia and the EU.
Panel speakers included professors at University of Oxford: Prof Neil
MacFarlane, a professor of International Relations and a fellow at St.
Anne's College; Prof Roy Allison, a lecturer of International Relations
of Russia at St. Antony's College and Prof Kalypso Nicolaidis a
professor of International Relations and the director of the European
Studies Center at St. Antony's College.
Dr. Roy Allison claimed that Russia has been embroiled in bitter
disputes with major Western powers over high-profile military
interventions - Kosovo (1999), Iraq (2003), Georgia (2008), and even
Libya (2011) which had a UN Security Council mandate. Moscow and
the West reached much greater agreement over the Gulf War (1990) and
intervention in Afghanistan (2001), but these cases are exceptional.
"Moscow's role has puzzling inconsistencies but also intriguing
continuities, reveals a complex interaction between domestic state,
regional, and global political and normative processes. There
exists a decisive relationship between Russian strategic priorities
and normative preferences with respect to international order (CIS
regional and global) and Russian perceptions of order at the domestic
state level," said Dr. Allison.
The embedded experience of the Soviet period in the mindset of
post-Soviet Russian leaders and elites seems to underlie claims for
special rights or 'privileged interests' in defining appropriate
Russian conduct in the CIS regional order. However, a nationally
derived rationale of this kind will not easily translate into wider
international legitimacy for expressed norms. It also poses the risk
of national narratives and claims with other states in situations of
conflictclashing, he continued.
Prof Kalypso Nicolaidis argued that the former Soviet republics in
Eastern Europe and the Caucasus want and need more from the EU in light
of their close relationship with the new Member States, their rising
democratic aspirations, and changing geostrategic maps. If anything,
the recent war in Georgia and the gas crisis between Kiev and Moscow
have demonstrated the precariousness of belonging to the overlapping
neighborhoods of Russia and the EU.
On the other hand, she noted, ENP promises access to the Union's
internal market and institutions in exchange for fulfilling conditions
related to human rights, political institutions and, especially
economic governance.
According to Prof Nicolaidis, geostrategic considerations might
dictate closer ties with some countries in spite of a lack of some
elements of functional convergence - for instance Turkey - while
they might dictate looser ties in spite of functional convergence,
possibly relevant one day in Russia's neighborhood.
"Moving beyond the sub-regional and regional environments, Georgia is
peripheral to the vital interests of major European and Euro-Atlantic
states, and their institutions (the EU and NATO), except to the extent
that events in Georgia can complicate Western relations with Russia.
Georgia's marginality in the strategic calculations of Western
states and their sensitivity to Russia limit Georgia's capacity to
use cooperation with the West to balance against Russia," said Prof
Neil Macfarlane.
This opinion led to a debate about Russia's motivation and ability
to influence the political situation in the neighborhood that has
been underestimated by the EU, moreover, the EU considered Eastern
Partnership countries as vacant and building a policy where one size
fits all in the neighborhood area.
The audience also discussed the Customs Union and its perspectives,
which showed that joining the Customs Union would not change the
picture for Georgia and Armenia; it can be beneficial economically,
as Russia unlike the EU does not have high economic and institutional
standards for new members.
The issue of Ukraine remained a prominent topic for discussion,
and professors explained why Ukraine overestimated the ability and
the motivation of the EU to stabilize the situation, that the policy
endorsed by the EU does not express the commitment of the EU to the
EaP countries.
According to Tatia Chikhladze, president of Oxford University Georgian
Society, it was very important to organize the panel discussions on
this topic, which covered the political analysis of ENP countries
and their choices toward the EU and Russia. "I am glad that we had
excellent speakers that have presented their opinions and explanations
on the main challenges in the neighborhood area," said Chikhladze.
6.03.2014
http://www.georgiatoday.ge/article_details.php?id=11956
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress
Georgia Today
March 6 2014
By Nino Sharashidze
The Oxford University Georgian Society together with Ukrainian and
Armenian student societies organized a panel discussion on 'Europe,
Russia and the Contested Neighbourhood' at the European Studies
Centre, University of Oxford on March 4.The discussion covered the
political and economic choices of Georgia, Armenia and Ukraine and
their relations with Russia and the EU.
Panel speakers included professors at University of Oxford: Prof Neil
MacFarlane, a professor of International Relations and a fellow at St.
Anne's College; Prof Roy Allison, a lecturer of International Relations
of Russia at St. Antony's College and Prof Kalypso Nicolaidis a
professor of International Relations and the director of the European
Studies Center at St. Antony's College.
Dr. Roy Allison claimed that Russia has been embroiled in bitter
disputes with major Western powers over high-profile military
interventions - Kosovo (1999), Iraq (2003), Georgia (2008), and even
Libya (2011) which had a UN Security Council mandate. Moscow and
the West reached much greater agreement over the Gulf War (1990) and
intervention in Afghanistan (2001), but these cases are exceptional.
"Moscow's role has puzzling inconsistencies but also intriguing
continuities, reveals a complex interaction between domestic state,
regional, and global political and normative processes. There
exists a decisive relationship between Russian strategic priorities
and normative preferences with respect to international order (CIS
regional and global) and Russian perceptions of order at the domestic
state level," said Dr. Allison.
The embedded experience of the Soviet period in the mindset of
post-Soviet Russian leaders and elites seems to underlie claims for
special rights or 'privileged interests' in defining appropriate
Russian conduct in the CIS regional order. However, a nationally
derived rationale of this kind will not easily translate into wider
international legitimacy for expressed norms. It also poses the risk
of national narratives and claims with other states in situations of
conflictclashing, he continued.
Prof Kalypso Nicolaidis argued that the former Soviet republics in
Eastern Europe and the Caucasus want and need more from the EU in light
of their close relationship with the new Member States, their rising
democratic aspirations, and changing geostrategic maps. If anything,
the recent war in Georgia and the gas crisis between Kiev and Moscow
have demonstrated the precariousness of belonging to the overlapping
neighborhoods of Russia and the EU.
On the other hand, she noted, ENP promises access to the Union's
internal market and institutions in exchange for fulfilling conditions
related to human rights, political institutions and, especially
economic governance.
According to Prof Nicolaidis, geostrategic considerations might
dictate closer ties with some countries in spite of a lack of some
elements of functional convergence - for instance Turkey - while
they might dictate looser ties in spite of functional convergence,
possibly relevant one day in Russia's neighborhood.
"Moving beyond the sub-regional and regional environments, Georgia is
peripheral to the vital interests of major European and Euro-Atlantic
states, and their institutions (the EU and NATO), except to the extent
that events in Georgia can complicate Western relations with Russia.
Georgia's marginality in the strategic calculations of Western
states and their sensitivity to Russia limit Georgia's capacity to
use cooperation with the West to balance against Russia," said Prof
Neil Macfarlane.
This opinion led to a debate about Russia's motivation and ability
to influence the political situation in the neighborhood that has
been underestimated by the EU, moreover, the EU considered Eastern
Partnership countries as vacant and building a policy where one size
fits all in the neighborhood area.
The audience also discussed the Customs Union and its perspectives,
which showed that joining the Customs Union would not change the
picture for Georgia and Armenia; it can be beneficial economically,
as Russia unlike the EU does not have high economic and institutional
standards for new members.
The issue of Ukraine remained a prominent topic for discussion,
and professors explained why Ukraine overestimated the ability and
the motivation of the EU to stabilize the situation, that the policy
endorsed by the EU does not express the commitment of the EU to the
EaP countries.
According to Tatia Chikhladze, president of Oxford University Georgian
Society, it was very important to organize the panel discussions on
this topic, which covered the political analysis of ENP countries
and their choices toward the EU and Russia. "I am glad that we had
excellent speakers that have presented their opinions and explanations
on the main challenges in the neighborhood area," said Chikhladze.
6.03.2014
http://www.georgiatoday.ge/article_details.php?id=11956
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress