Promoting Democracy through Civil Society: How to Step up the EU’s Policy towards the Eastern Neighbourhood. CEPS Working Documents No. 237, 1 February 2006

The European Union has successfully supported democratisation in its new Eastern member states and candidate countries. Now it needs to become more engaged in those post-communist countries where democratisation is incomplete or stalled. This study argues that civil society should be a more important priority of democracy promotion in the EU’s Eastern neighbourhood and calls for a strategic and differentiated approach designed according to the stage of democratisation in the target country. The paper focuses on three countries that represent three types of cases in the eastern neighbourhood: Ukraine, which has become a ‘re-transition’ country after the Orange Revolution; Moldova, where we can observe a prolonged transition; and Belarus, an outright dictatorship. One of the well-known obstacles to enhancing the EU’s support to civil society in these countries is posed by the bureaucratic procedures of aid programmes. However, even if the rules were substantially reformed, it would still be difficult for the European Commission to work extensively with NGOs in foreign countries for political as well as institutional reasons. Hence, the EU should create new mechanisms of democracy assistance. The German and US foundations set up specifically for this purpose have proved to be a model with many advantages; similar European foundation(s) could be an invaluable tool for supporting pro-democratic forces in authoritarian countries in particular. The paper also examines two other exemplary models for the European neighbourhood policy: the Swedish practice to channel support through domestic NGOs, and the EU’s own policy, which has only been applied in candidate countries so far, to use local civil society development foundations

Finland turns humble as its economic outlook worsens

Over the past few years, when the EU (together with the IMF) has had to rescue several member states from economic collapse, Finland has boasted with self-confidence. No longer. Finns have come back from their lakeside summer cottages to face grim figures about the economyStreets_of_Helsinki,_Finland,_Northern_Europe. While industrial production has returned to small growth in the Eurozone, fresh statistics place Finland at the bottom among EU countries with a 5.7 per cent drop in industrial output between June 2012 and June 2013. Confederation of Finnish Industries, the leading interest organisation of Finnish companies, sees the main reason in a creeping decrease of competitiveness over several years. Finland, it claims, is comparable to Italy these days – one can hope Italians will not be offended. The government is ringing the alarm bells and warning about painful structural reforms ahead

Whose Zeitenwende? Germany Cannot Meet Everyone's Expectations

Russia's full-scale of invasion of Ukraine pushed Germany to fundamentally revise its foreign and security policy, including its assumptions about European security, its relations with major powers, and its role as a mediator of intra-European disputes. The Zeitenwende’s level of ambition entails a profound reckoning of the failure of past policies, and has to be both European and global. Germany bears a special responsibility for strengthening European defense vis à vis Russia, reducing Europe’s vulnerabilities vis à vis China, maintaining a strong transatlantic alliance while also preparing Europe for a possible reduced US commitment in the future, and ensuring a coherent EU

Tackling the Constraints on EU Foreign Policy towards Ukraine: From Strategic Denial to Geopolitical Awakening

This report explores the evolution of EU policy towards Ukraine, with major turning points occurring in 2004, 2014 and February 2022 when Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine started. The dominant constraining factor in the case of Ukraine was multipolar (or rather bipolar) competition between the EU and Russia over the European political, economic and security order, which gradually tightened since 2004. Up to 2022, the EU’s main mitigation tactics in response to such competition was actually a denial of it, but in 2022 this approach became untenable and the EU entered the competition as an emerging geopolitical actor, actively trying to shape the future of European order that was challenged by the war in Ukraine. EU–Ukraine relations were also complicated by regional fragmentation in the post-Soviet space and within Ukraine, but this factor was overshadowed by geopolitical competition. Intra-EU contestation was an important constraining factor in 2004–2014, but after 2014 and especially after 2022 the EU reached an unprecedented level of unity in the face of the most serious geopolitical conflict in post-WWII Europe

The changing global order and its implications for the EU

The forms of global political transition contradict each other. The Western leadership of the world seems to be in decline, with the US political hegemony being challenged by the rise of China and other emerging powers, and with global power structures evolving towards multipolarity. At the same time, however, there are increasing signs of a diffusion of state power. It involves a growing group of non-state actors challenging state power in very different forms and different capacities. This report focuses on the axis of state power considered the most important in terms of its global implications: the relationship between the US and China. This relationship is studied with the aim of assessing how the mutual interdependencies are evolving, and what the goals of the two actors look like in respect of their own global role. The implications of this power transition in the key fields of global governance – also covering the simultaneous diffusion of power to non-state actors – forms another relevant topic under review in the global context. Lastly, the report analyses how the EU contends with these forms of power transition and safeguards its own influence in this changing environment. The project also addresses the international role and influence of one of the northernmost EU members, Finland. It investigates how the changes in the global and regional setting should be understood from the Finnish point of view and how Finland should act in order to consolidate its international role.This publication is part of the implementation of the Government Plan for Analysis, Assessment and Research. (tietokayttoon.fi) The content is the responsibility of the producers of the information and does not necessarily represent the view of the Government

Reunalla vai ytimessä? : Suomen EU-politiikan muutos ja jatkuvuus

Euron kriisistä alkanut EU:n politisoituminen toimi vedenjakajana Suomen Eurooppa-politiikassa. Aiemmin suljettujen ovien takana käydyt keskustelut ovat saaneet tehdä tilaa julkisille puoluepoliittisille vastakkainasetteluille. Samalla hallituksemme liikkumatila Brysselin pöydissä on kaventunut. Suomi on ollut unionin jäsen yli kaksi vuosikymmentä. Olemmeko vielä samanlainen ”mallioppilas” kuin jäsenyyden alkuvuosina? Mitkä jäsenvaltiot ovat Suomen läheisimpiä kumppaneita EU-neuvotteluissa? Miten kansalaiset ja puolueet suhtautuvat unioniin? Reunalla vai ytimessä? tarkastelee Suomen EU-linjan kehitystä politiikan eri alueilla talouspolitiikasta ulko- ja turvallisuuspolitiikkaan. On tärkeää ymmärtää eri jäsenmaiden poliittisia valintoja, sillä vaikka tiedotusvälineet korostavat usein unionia repiviä kiistoja, lopulta EU perustuu jäsentensä vapaaehtoiseen yhteistyöhön.Julkaistu yhteistyössä Gaudeamuksen kanssa. Vertaisarvioitu

Neither Fish nor Fowl. How EU Delegations Challenge the Institution of Diplomacy: The Cases of Moscow and Washington

Summary This article explores European diplomatic cooperation abroad since 2009 by studying diplomatic structures and practices in two key locations: Moscow and Washington, dc. It analyses the functions of European Union (eu) delegations as part of the hybrid eu foreign policy system and their way of engaging with the changing global patterns of diplomatic practice. The empirical analysis draws on extensive semi-structured interviews conducted in Moscow and Washington during 2013-2014. Our cases confirm the deeper institutionalization and intensification of European diplomatic cooperation abroad. The eu delegations increasingly assumed traditional diplomatic tasks and coordinated member states on the ground. The eu delegations’ ability to establish good working relationships with member states as well as the leadership of key individuals (notably eu ambassadors) were key factors in shaping how this new system fell into place, which shows the continued prevalence of hybridity in eu foreign policy-making.</jats:p

The European External Action Service and National Foreign Ministries

info:eu-repo/semantics/publishe