No abstract

The European Community/Union has always been a controversial issue in the UK. At present, the probability of an in-or-out referendum makes it all the more divisive. Eurosceptics see a brighter future for their country outside the union both in political and economic terms. Pro-Europeans, on the other hand, maintain that British membership brings up benefits that outweigh the costs. Both sides have their arguments. The former seek success through social mobilizations and debates. The latter believe that the anti-EU stance may be costly in economic and political terms. Hence, the public must be convinced before the referendum – if it ever takes place.

The tariffs imposed by the United States (U.S.) on Turkish-origin steel products in 2018 undeniably affected the strategic behavior of steel companies based in Turkey. The objective of this paper is to analyze through semi-structured interviews how the trade strategy of Turkish steel firms is affected by these tariffs. Conventional wisdom commends that corporate response of steel companies against the tariff imposition focused mostly on two main strategies: seeking alternative markets and innovation-based product diversification. Our findings suggest that, a mixture of political and economic reasons lie behind the levies. This makes the Turkish case interesting in the overall trade wars between the U.S. and a multitude of countries, especially in the emerging-market concept.

The study will focus on the European Union’s attitude towards Russia by taking into consideration a dilemma: The European Union (EU) wants to uphold its values and principles while endeavoring to maximize its interests. In the post-Cold War period, Moscow’s policy choices have often been problematic for the Europeans. In the period following the Ukrainian conflict, the analysis of the relations between the two “strategic partners” is more difficult than ever. At least three reasons underlie this difficulty. First, the EU is notoriously incapable of reaching a common position on how to deal with the Russian problem. Second, trade is an important factor for the relations between the EU and Russia where oil occupies a significant place. Third, Russia has also a signification position vis-à-vis the EU as a powerful actor of international relations.

The present study focuses on the relations between China and the European Union by taking into consideration a specific matter of discord: The arms embargo, which is effective since 1987 and which has political and economic repercussions. Chinese authorities have frequently asked for the removal of the embargo, but the European authorities declined despite internal divisions. Nevertheless, commercial relations between Brussels and Beijing grow bigger and no deterioration is expected in the foreseeable future. The objective of the study is to find the reasons why the embargo may still remain in place. The reason why European authorities stick to the ban is threefold. First, their arms sales to China can lead to a shift in the balance of power with undesired consequences. Second, the European Union is backed by major powers (especially Japan and the USA) on the issue. Third, the current stalemate has not impeded the development of political and economic relations between Beijing and Brussels so far.