Osteuropa
Osteuropa
2012-04-05
Abstracts Osteuropa 2/2012
Head First. Security Policy in Europe
Daniel Hamilton
A Big This-As-Well-As-That
U.S. European Policy under Barack Obama
U.S. European policy under President Barack Obama is following es-sentially the same course set by previous administrations. Differences in individual points are motivated by a more diffuse global security situation on the one hand and by economic constraints at home on the other. This leads to calls for a more even distribution of burdens among alliance partners. Another innovation was the "reset" in relations with Russia. The impression that emerged in some Central European coun-tries at the outset of Obama's tenure -- namely that the United States has "turned away from Europe" -- is incorrect. At a number of levels, the United States is still trying to cooperate with Europe and to ensure the continent's security.
Iurii Fedorov
Intended Collateral Damage
Russia's "New Security Architecture"
Russia would like a new security architecture for Europe. This, it is said, would overcome the Cold War and create a common security space. Moscow doesn't even try to conceal its true goal: the North At-lantic Treaty Organisation and the Organisation for Security and Coop-eration in Europe are to be replaced. Russia would like to see security understood only in military terms and to gain a veto over all European security issues. Those who hope that accommodation would facilitate security policy cooperation with Russia on other issues are wrong. Rus-sia's foreign policy functions according to a modus based purely on power; in Moscow, compromises are considered a sign of weak-ness.
Hans-Joachim Spanger
Dual Strategic Indecision
The United States, NATO, Russia, and European security
The United States and the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation are pur-suing a dual strategy in European security policy and trying both to integrate and exclude Russia. The Euro-Atlantic partners consider NATO the foundation of security in Europe. Russia rejects this. In-stead, the Kremlin's is promoting a new European security order by means of treaty. The NATO states immediately turned this down. The goal of a common security policy in Europe remains unrealised.
Vladimir Handl
Security Association
Germany and the East Central European States
In East Central Europe, Germany has not been considered a security threat for a long time. But the enlargment of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation and the European Union to the east, grand projects that bound Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, and Hungary to the Fed-eral Republic, have been fulfilled. Pragmatism and the primacy of eco-nomics have found their way into relations. Divergent views on the role of the United States and Russia do no more produce fundamental dis-agreements. The EU debt crisis, however, brings a new challenge: Germany has recognised that it must assume a leading role in the EU. The countries of East Central Europe need to understand that in the long run only a strong EU with a strong Germany at its core can ensure that traditional security policy in Europe remains a non-issue.
Jaroslaw Cwiek-Karpowicz
Dealing with Asymmetry
Poland and Russia: A New Beginning
Relations between Poland and Russia suffer from the pronounced asymmetry between the two countries. After 15 years of verbal con-frontations, they have been trying to make a new start since 2009. This has been made easier by the fact that the United States has also redefi-ned its relationship with Moscow. Even if Polish-Russian relations have improved significantly and no longer depend in essence on rela-tions between Washington and Moscow, a breakthrough has yet to take place. Overcoming the fundamental differences between Poland and Russia in such fields as energy policy and the politics of remembrance requires real change in Russia.
Jan Eichler, Vit Stritecky
State of Shock
The Czech Republic and the New U.S. Foreign Policy
Large parts of the Czech foreign policy establishment are fixated on the United States. These circles have no answer for the United States' de-clining interest in Europe. The improvement in relations between Washington and Moscow therefore caused a shock in Prague. There is still no new strategic concept. Instead, the Atlanticists are searching for ersatz issues so they can hold their rhetorical positions: tactical nuclear weapons, energy security, and policy towards Israel.
Nik Hynek, Ondrej Ditrych
East Central Europe in NATO
The New Strategic Concept, Missile Defense, Afghanistan
To this day, the East Central European members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation see in Russia a potential threat. This perception influenced their attitude towards NATO's new Strategic Concept. They wanted to see the guarantee of military assistance strengthened and tried to maintain the U.S. military presence in Europe. After the shock of U.S. President Barack Obama's retreat from his predecessor's missile shield plans, only Poland could secure participation in the new missile defence system and a U.S. military presence on its soil. The countries of East Central Europe are participating in Afghanistan not least of all in the hope of convincing NATO and the United States to champion the security concerns of East Central Europeans.
Michal Koran
New Profile, Fragile Consensus
The Security Policy of the Visegrad Group
Eastern Europe is in danger of slipping to the periphery of Europe. The reasons are the United States' slow retreat from Europe and the Euro-pean Union's crisis. Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, and Hun-gary are trying to counter this risk by enhancing cooperation within the Visegrad Group. They are coordinating their policies towards their eastern neighbours and trying to pursue an independent security policy. At the same time, however, the centrifugal tendencies of the EU crisis are growing stronger. Poland is playing an increasingly important role in European politics; the importance of the three small states by con-trast is decreasing.
Andrei Zagorskii
A Lost Cause?
The Future of the OSCE in the European Security System
The Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe is in a severe crisis. After the enlargement of the European Union and the North At-lantic Treaty Organisation, the OSCE suspended work in East Central Europe. In Southeastern Europe, the most important area of OSCE ac-tivity in the 1990s, the organisation is increasingly being replaced by the EU. The OSCE has failed to significantly increase its activities in the post-Soviet realm. Many Western states may wish for such an ex-pansion of activity, but the overwhelmingly authoritarian regimes of the post-Soviet realm see this as unwanted interference. Thus, the OSCE has to wait for a new great moment, a second wave of democ-ratic upheavals, before it can again champion the values of democracy and rule of law as declared in the Charter of Paris for a New Europe.
Ondrej Ditrych, Vit Stritecky
Conflict Management in Georgia
Opportunities and Obligations for the EU
For 20 years, a conflict over the breakaway regions of Abkhazia and South Ossetia has been smouldering in Georgia. After the open civil war from 1990 to 1995, the United Nations and the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe sought to mediate between the par-ties to the conflict. The United States wanted to strengthen Georgia vis-à-vis its powerful neighbour Russia. The August 2008 war between Georgia and Russia has changed the situation considerably. The OSCE and the UN had to withdraw their missions; the United States curtailed its engagement. This is the European Union's hour. As the only interna-tional broker on site, it has an obligation to prevent renewed escalation. The EU has the unique opportunity to realise the goals of its eastern policy and to establish itself as a regional player of some weight in the Southern Caucasus.