I-BRIDGE's blog (Link Campus University's Research Centre on Global Affairs) - editor, Marco Emanuele - Critical thinking, complexity, international relations (Twitter, @Glob_Eye - Facebook, https://www.facebook.com/marco.emanuele.50)
Showing posts with label SWP. Show all posts
Showing posts with label SWP. Show all posts
Thursday, 17 March 2016
The Future of the Minsk Agreements (Susan Stewart, SWP)
The Minsk agreements are currently the principal instrument for achieving a lasting settlement in the occupied regions of eastern Ukraine. Moscow and Kyiv, however, are showing little enthusiasm for implementing the associated package of measures. Unless this changes by the summer, the European Union would be ill-advised to lift or relax its economic sanctions against Russia. As well as harming the Union’s political credibility, such a step would encourage Russia both to expand its influence in the post-Soviet space and to continue its attempts at dividing the EU.
http://www.swp-berlin.org/en/publications/swp-comments-en/swp-aktuelle-details/article/the_future_of_the_minsk_agreements.html
http://www.swp-berlin.org/en/publications/swp-comments-en/swp-aktuelle-details/article/the_future_of_the_minsk_agreements.html
Nordic-Baltic Security, Germany and NATO (Claudia Major, Alicia von Voß, SWP)
The countries around the Baltic Sea are among Europe’s frontline states affected by the conflict between Russia and western Europe. The Baltics and Nordics share a common concern about a revisionist, aggressive, and rearming Russia: Since the onset of the crisis in and around Ukraine in 2014, these countries have felt increasingly exposed to Russian military and non-military intimidation. Currently, they can neither defend nor maintain regional security by themselves: Their capacities are limited and their memberships in different security institutions (EU and NATO) complicate a common assessment and response, as do their diverging security policies. They depend on the deterrence and defence efforts of their partners and NATO. This has turned the regional Nordic–Baltic security challenge into a European and transatlantic one. NATO’s credibility depends on whether it can guarantee the security of those countries. Germany, as one of the largest and most capable countries bordering the Baltic Sea, should contribute towards improving regional security by supporting regional cooperation, and by sharpening the Nordic–Baltic dimension of its security policy.
http://www.swp-berlin.org/en/publications/swp-comments-en/swp-aktuelle-details/article/nordic_baltic_security_germany_and_nato.html
http://www.swp-berlin.org/en/publications/swp-comments-en/swp-aktuelle-details/article/nordic_baltic_security_germany_and_nato.html
The Future of the WTO after the Nairobi Ministerial Conference (Bettina Rudloff, Evita Schmieg, SWP)
The WTO’s 10th ministerial conference took place shortly before Christmas 2015, the first to be held in Africa. Verdicts on its outcomes range from “the death of the Doha Round” to WTO Director-General Roberto Azevêdo’s praise for a “historic” package. A more measured assessment reveals a mixed picture. While a number of important decisions were reached in Nairobi, most of the controversial questions were not even on the agenda. And it is less clear than ever where the talks should go from here. A consistent and ongoing shared interest in the global public good of a strong world trade system should persuade the member-states to find constructive new approaches.
http://www.swp-berlin.org/en/publications/swp-comments-en/swp-aktuelle-details/article/wto_after_the_nairobi_ministerial_conference.html
http://www.swp-berlin.org/en/publications/swp-comments-en/swp-aktuelle-details/article/wto_after_the_nairobi_ministerial_conference.html
Monday, 22 February 2016
Offshore Hydrocarbon Resources in the Arctic (Maria Morgunova, Kirsten Westphal, SWP)
The Arctic region has been an area of low tension since the end of the Cold War. This observation is important because the run on hydrocarbons in the Arctic has not resulted in increased rivalries as expected. The outcomes have been international joint ventures in oil and gas project on the economic side and a strengthening of Arctic governance in the political realm. Since 2014, the situation has changed rapidly. Economic interests in hydrocarbon development are increasingly diverging between the five Arctic coastal states. The geopolitical situation between Russia and the West after the annexation of Crimea and military conflict in Ukraine affect the Arctic. There is the danger of falling back to old times when the Arctic was a highly strategic and militarised zone. The sanctions on Russian offshore oil development in the Arctic add to that. Potential long-lead effects of the sanctions, coinciding with relatively low oil prices, can seriously harm the long-term development of oil and gas fields in the Arctic. Joint energy projects had been a stabilising factor in the past.
The paper discusses the increasing levels of instability in both economics and politics in the Arctic and the mutually reinforcing effects on international politics. We come to the conclusion that a “loss of a cooperative spirit” can be observed. We argue that these dynamics challenge stable and predictable relations, which work against a sustainable Arctic development that takes the global commons, the environment and the climate into consideration.
From a German and EU perspective, there are far-reaching future implications for the security of energy supply, as two of its major suppliers, Norway and Russia, have their resource bases in the Arctic.
http://www.swp-berlin.org/en/publications/swp-research-papers/swp-research-paper-detail/article/offshore_hydrocarbon_resources_in_the_arctic.html
The paper discusses the increasing levels of instability in both economics and politics in the Arctic and the mutually reinforcing effects on international politics. We come to the conclusion that a “loss of a cooperative spirit” can be observed. We argue that these dynamics challenge stable and predictable relations, which work against a sustainable Arctic development that takes the global commons, the environment and the climate into consideration.
From a German and EU perspective, there are far-reaching future implications for the security of energy supply, as two of its major suppliers, Norway and Russia, have their resource bases in the Arctic.
http://www.swp-berlin.org/en/publications/swp-research-papers/swp-research-paper-detail/article/offshore_hydrocarbon_resources_in_the_arctic.html
Wednesday, 3 February 2016
A Common Energy Market in the Eurasian Economic Union (Maria Pastukhova, Kirsten Westphal, SWP)
To the east of the European Union a regional energy market is taking shape under the auspices of the Eurasian Economic Union (EEU). Even if the interests of the participating states diverge and the ultimate shape of the market remains unclear, the development is likely to be substantial. On the one hand, it threatens to deepen the fragmentation of energy markets in Europe and Asia, on the other the process could generate new opportunities for cooperation and larger spheres of integration. It is thus worth exploring at this early stage the extent to which the emerging energy market is compatible with the European Union and the European Energy Community. It is especially important to track the effects in the common neighbourhood, above all Ukraine, in order to avoid renewed geopolitical disruption.
Thursday, 17 December 2015
Monday, 12 October 2015
Monday, 14 September 2015
Wednesday, 2 September 2015
Monday, 24 August 2015
Monday, 10 August 2015
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)