The EU's security actorness: the case of EUMM in Georgia

Freire, Maria Raquel; Simão, Licínia

doi:10.1080/09662839.2013.808191

Cited by 19 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Deficient local ownership, one way or another, has been registered not only in places where the EU is well known for its executive interventions, heavy footprint, and trusteeship governance as in Bosnia (Tolksdorf, 2014;Vandemoortele, 2012) and Kosovo (Collantes-Celador & Juncos, 2011;Kappler & LemayHébert, 2015;Qehaja, 2017). The EU's record on local ownership has also been less than satisfactory in most other interventions launched further afield, for example, in Afghanistan (Larivé, 2012, p. 194), Congo (Rayroux & Wilén, 2014), Georgia (Freire & Simão, 2013, p. 467), or Somalia (Oksamytna, 2011). According to the EU's own lessons learned reports, one of the key weaknesses of the EU's support to SSR has been the lack of local ownership (European Union, 2016c, p. 2).…”

Section: Local Ownership In Eu Peacebuildingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reclaiming the local in EU peacebuilding: Effectiveness, ownership, and resistance

Ejdus

Juncos

2017

Contemporary Security Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Local Ownership In Eu Peacebuildingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reclaiming the local in EU peacebuilding: Effectiveness, ownership, and resistance

Ejdus

Juncos

2017

Contemporary Security Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…However, despite numerous efforts and the existence of the European Union Monitoring Missio n, there are no significant developments in the field of defense and security policy. Georgia relies on the Russian Federation and its foreign policy in many spheres, so the decarbonisation will most likely occur accordingly [ 20 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Decarbonisation of eastern European economies: monitoring, economic, social and security concerns

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Decarbonisation of the European economy is one of the main strategic goals of energy transition in the European Union (EU), which aims to become a leader in this process by 2050 and to include other European countries making thus the European continent the first carbon neutral region in the world. Although decarbonisation is an important goal of the EU, the models for monitoring the progress of this process have not yet been clearly defined, and views on the social, economic, and security implications in terms of prioritising decarbonisation are conflicting. The main objective of this paper is to determine the methodological correctness of the existing method of decarbonisation monitoring, to develop a new monitoring model indicating the differences in the EU and European countries that are non-EU and to point out the underlying social, economic and security implications that must certainly find their place in the decision-making process in this field. Results The main results showed that there is no clearly defined model for monitoring the success of decarbonisation, while the indicators that are commonly used for this purpose make a model that, as the analysis shows—is methodologically incorrect. In the case of EU countries, the following indicators proved to be the most reliable: consumption-based CO2 and share in global CO2. For non-EU countries, the best monitoring indicators are CO2 per unit of GDP, consumption-based CO2, and renewable energy consumption. These indicators can explain 99% of the variance in decarbonisation success. Conclusions The basic conclusion of the paper is that even before the implementation, the decarbonisation monitoring model should be defined and methodologically tested, and the use of a single model for all EU countries or for all countries is not recommended. It is proposed to simplify the monitoring model, with an emphasis on monitoring of consumption-based CO2, which proved to be the most efficient in all sampled countries. The current method of monitoring is based exclusively on environmentally related indicators while ignoring the fact that decarbonisation is associated with almost all aspects of development. The additional social, economic and security aspects need to be developed and included in the further monitoring process.

show abstract

“…In the Russo-Georgia 2008 War, the EU served as a mediator and quickly acted to create a cease-fire between the conflicting parties. 1 The EU established a monitoring mission in Georgia, and commissioned a fact-finding mission to determine which state was at blame for initiating the war. The EU's belief in engagement over confrontation and coercion was strong.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Strategic culture and competing visions for the EU’s Russia strategy: flexible accommodation, cooperative deterrence, and calibrated confrontation

Silva

2022

International Relations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article analyzes the national security strategies of EU member states in the 2009–2018 period, and conceptualizes three security strategies EU member states have adopted toward Russia – flexible accommodation, cooperative deterrence, and calibrated confrontation. It tests strategic culture hypotheses against those of realism and commercial liberalism to explain the variation of EU member states’ security strategies toward Russia. While a realist explanation would predict EU member states geographically proximate to Russia would possess more confrontational security strategies, geographic proximity and confrontational security strategies toward Russia are not positively correlated. Bilateral economic interdependence with Russia, the presence of populist parties in EU member states governing coalitions, and EU member states’ alignment or status as an occupied state during the Cold War also do not explain EU member states’ security strategies toward Russia. A more consistent explanation of the variance in EU member states’ policy on Russia revolves around the strategic culture of the state in question. States with a more Atlanticist perspective tend to be more confrontation with Russia than their more Europeanist counterparts, regardless of geographic proximity or economic interdependence with Russia.

show abstract

The EU's security actorness: the case of EUMM in Georgia

Cited by 19 publications

References 19 publications

Reclaiming the local in EU peacebuilding: Effectiveness, ownership, and resistance

Reclaiming the local in EU peacebuilding: Effectiveness, ownership, and resistance

Decarbonisation of eastern European economies: monitoring, economic, social and security concerns

Strategic culture and competing visions for the EU’s Russia strategy: flexible accommodation, cooperative deterrence, and calibrated confrontation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About