Courses Outline

9.10 Introductory Course and seminar

16.10 Course: The political construction of Eastern
Europe and the Western Balkans.
Seminar: Who draws the boundaries and the borders?
23.10 Course: Europeanization as a development policy.
EUs policies in its neighborhood.
Seminar: EU main development instruments and their
evolution in time.
30.10 Course: Former Yugoslav Republics. The Western
Balkans - the conflict region.
Seminar: Types of humanitarian intervention
6.11 Bosnia and Herzegovina
13.11 Kosovo
27.11 Macedonia
28.11 The most important donors in the WB and their
interests. Conclusions.

Courses Outline
4.12 Course- Former Soviet Republics. The Black Sea
geopolitics.
MID Term exam
8.12 - Moldova
Seminar - Romanias focus on Moldova. Guest - Specialist
on the Eastern Partnership, from Moldova.
18.12 - Georgia
Seminar World Bank strategy for Eastern Europe and
Georgia. Guest World Bank specialist from Washington
15.01 - Ukraine
Seminar The main challenges of the Humanitarian crisis
in Ukraine. Guests 1 OSCE youth expert from Romania
and 1 expert from Amnesty International
22.01 The future of Eastern Europe after the
Ukrainian crisis. Concluding Course and Seminar.

The Former Soviet

Republics and
The Black Sea
Geopolitics.
Thursday,
4 of December
th

Eastern European Studies

DICHA, second year
Dr Miruna Troncota

Readings

2020 a Vision for the Black Sea

report of the Commission for the
Black Sea, 2012.
Charles King, Extreme Politics,
chapter The Benefits of Ethnic War,
2010.
Eastern Partnership presentation by
the EEAS, 2013
Eastern Partnership index, 2014

Topics
Region-building strategies along the
Black Sea
Main features of the Black Sea region
before and after the Cold war
The most important players &
events that have marked the region
The efficiency of the Eastern
Partnership

Region-building in the Black

Sea
Today, the Black Sea remains a
fascinating bridge between Europe
and the Middle East and between the
cultures of Eastern Orthodox
Christianity and Islam.
The turbulent past and present
of this fascinating regionfrom
ancient Greek seafarers to the glories
of Ottoman Istanbul to the current
issues in Ukraine.

Mysteries of the Black Sea World

Herodotus, the ancient Greek historian, painted
a picture of the Black Sea as the domain of
barbarians and monsters. Explode what this
region was really like in antiquity, including
Greek encounters with non-Greek tribes and
the creation of vibrant trading centers, most
spectacularly at Byzantium.
The strange ecology of the Black Sea played a
role in ancient patterns of settlement and gave
rise to some of the most enduring of the Greek
mythsthe intrepid Argonauts and the quest
for the Golden Fleece.

The Age of Empires

Travelers to the Black Sea today are often
surprised to find architectural evidence of a
forgotten age, a time when the great Italian
trading empires of Genoa and Venice
maintained commercial centers all around
the coastline.
The arrival of Tatar-Mongol invaders and the
slow rise of Russia brought new powers into the
region.
In the 19th century, the rivalry between Russia
and Ottoman Turkey led to the Crimean War and
made the Black Sea one of the centerpieces of
European strategy.

Odessa and Istanbul:

Cosmopolitan Cities

The two most important cities around the Black

Sea, Odessa in Ukraine and Istanbul in Turkey,
have long had reputations as cosmopolitan
centers.
Odessa's mixed Russian, Ukraine, and Jewish
heritage and Istanbul's Muslim, Christian, and
Jewish traditions made both into urban
environments where culture, art, and
commerce flourished.
But in the 20th century, the fate of each
illustrated the fragility of multiculturalism in an
age of nation-states.

Over the last quarter century,

the Black Sea has been one of Europe's most turbulent zones.

Understanding the past can give a more

nuanced understanding of
contemporary predicaments, such as
the conflicts in Chechnya and the
Caucasus,
the dilemmas of Turkish foreign policy,
and
the tensions over Ukraine.

The Black Sea region

It has undergone countless political
transformations over time.
A fascinating area because of:
- the changing dynamics of the Black Sea
countries and the complex realities of their
politics and conflicts, economies and societies.
- its complicated geography, the interests of
others and the regions relations with the rest
of the world in large part explain its
resurgence.

The Black Sea Region

However, despite the fact that the region was
divided by EastWest strategic rivalry, this
strained political and military balance did
provide stability, albeit accompanied by
marginalization, political fragmentation and
economic paralysis. The existence of blocs
precluded the possibility of much meaningful
communication and cooperation across the sea.
At the same time the situation left isolated
some of the regions lands and peoples from the
outside world.

The Black Sea Region

Situated at the crossroads of Europe and Asia, the
Black Sea has been a zone of contention and
confrontation for centuries.
From antiquity, the region was traditionally the
backyard of one or two powers, which dominated and
closed it to the outside world.
Then, during the Cold War, it found itself on the
frontline of the global struggle for dominance.
For 40 years NATO members, Turkey and
Greece, guarded the south and south-east
while Warsaw Pact members, the Soviet Union,
Bulgaria and Romania, dominated the rest.

The Black Sea Region

Its strategic location, between the
hydrocarbon reserves of the Caspian
basin and energy-hungry Europe,
places the Black Sea in a unique
position.
Oil, gas, transport and trade routes
are all crucial in explaining its
increasing relevance.

The Black Sea region

a heightened US interest since 9/11
the enlargement of NATO and the EU along its shores
and repeated Russian-Ukrainian crises over gas.
August 2008 war between Russia and Georgia followed
by its fallout,
discussions over the fate of the Russian Black Sea fleet in
Sevastopol,
the impact of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict on the
Armenian-Turkish rapprochement,
developments regarding the conflict in Transnistria,
the changing nature of Russo-Turkish relations
and finally, the evolving global economic and political
landscape as a result of the current world financial crisis.

The Black Sea Region

The regional stakeholders: Armenia,
Azerbaijan, Bulgaria, Georgia, Greece,
Moldova, Romania, Russia, Turkey and
Ukraine.
The other key players are the EU and
NATO, both of whom are now present on the
Black Sea, along with the United States.
All three have openly expressed their
interests in the region and have formulated
policies accordingly.

The Black Sea Region

competition to control pipelines,
shipping lanes and transport routes
to secure increased political and
economic influence, not only
throughout the region, but on a
global scale, raises the risks of
confrontation.

The Black Sea Region

In the early 1990s, a half dozen small wars
raged across the region, a series of armed
conflicts that we might term collectively
the wars of the Soviet succession:
Nagorno-Karabakh, Transnistria, South Ossetia,
Abkhazia, Chechnya, Tajikistan.
Each involved a range of players, including
the central governments of newly sovereign
states, secessionists, the armed forces of other
countries, and international peacemakers.

The Black Sea Region

Eurasias de facto countries are informational
black holes. Traveling there is diffi cult and
sometimes dangerous. Elections have been
held but never under the eyes of disinterested
international observers. Economic and
demographic data are not included in statistics
compiled by national and international
agencies. Locally published books and
newspapers barely circulate within the
secessionist regions themselves, much less to
national capitals or abroad. Charles King

The Black Sea Region

The leaders of these republics and their
counterparts in central governments speak
a common languageRussianduring
negotiating sessions. Many had similar
professional backgrounds during the Soviet
period. The territory that separates them is
in some cases minuscule: Tiraspol is fifty
kilometers from the Moldovan capital,
Chisinau; Tskhinvali is under two hours
drive from the Georgian capital, Tbilisi.

The Black Sea Region

Yet the problems they have spawned are
immense. They are the central political
problem for the recognized states whose
territory they inhabit, and they have
become conduits for trafficking in drugs,
arms, and even people across Eurasia into
Europe and beyond. Especially after the
independence of Kosovo, they have
become bones of contention among
Russia, the United States, and the EU.

The Black Sea Region

From 2000 until the onset of the world
economic crisis, the region had one of the
fastest rates of growth in the world.
Trade between countries of the region was
also on the rise.
Since the end of the Cold War it has
undergone a fundamental change in terms
of economic development and has now
secured a place on the global economic
agenda.

The Black Sea Region

Since the end of the wars, secessionist
elites have moved on with the process of
building states, and even central elites
and average citizens have learned to
accommodate themselves to that
process.
But the cessation of the armed conflict
has perversely made a final political
settlement even more difficult to achieve.

The Black Sea Region

The energetic institution building in
the secessionist regions is a legacy
of the Soviet system.
Three of the conflict zones had some
of the basic institutions of statehood
already (through their status as
autonomous areas)

The Black Sea Region

Diaspora politics has also played a
role. Armenia and the Armenian
diaspora have been the sine qua non
of Karabakhs existence. For all
practical purposes, Karabakh is now
more an autonomous district of
Armenia than a part of Azerbaijan.

International Intervention
as a Resource

In each of these conflicts, international

involvement has been frequent, if not
frequently successful.
In Azerbaijan, the OSCE-sponsored Minsk
Group has provided good offi ces and a
mechanism for negotiations since 1992.
In Moldova, an OSCE mission that has
been active since 1993 has sponsored
numerous rounds of negotiations.

International Intervention
as a Resource
In Georgia, a United Nations observer mission
was deployed in 1993 to provide a basis for
negotiations on Abkhazias future and to
monitor the peacekeeping operation
conducted by the CIS forces in the GeorgianAbkhaz security zone.
In South Ossetia, Russian peacekeepers
have been in place since the end of the war,
and negotiations on South Ossetias final
status have continued apace, involving Russia,
North Ossetia, and the OSCE as mediators.

 Despite this active engagement, little of

significance has been achieved, even despite
political change in each of the recognized
states.
At times the policies of international negotiators
have actually strengthened the statehood of
the secessionist regions. International
intervention can itself be a useful resource for
the builders of unrecognized states.
Charles King

 The Kosovo Precedent

The real precedent, from this
perspective, is not Kosovos
declaration of independence but
rather its swift recognition by the
same Western governments that
routinely condemn Eurasias other
unrecognized regimes as separatists
or, worse, terrorists.
Charles King

Russia
The Russian official history of the postSoviet wars argues for Moscows
pacifying role in each of the conflicts.
Russian foreign and security policy since
the wars has been complex in each of
these cases, but it has centered around
three main elements, all of which have
turned out to be crucial resources for the
unrecognized republics

Soviet union
Existed between 1922 and 1991
In the late 1980s the last Soviet leader,Mikhail
Gorbachev, sought to reform the Union and move it in
the direction ofNordic-style social democracy,
introducing the policies ofglasnostandperestroikain
an attempt to end theperiod of economic
stagnationand democratize the government. However,
this led to the rise of strongnationalistand separatist
movements.
Central authorities initiateda referendum, boycotted by
the Baltic republics, Armenia, Georgia, and
Moldova, which resulted in the majority of
participating citizens voting in favour of preserving the
Union as arenewed federation.

Russia
1. Russian economic support
2. negotiations with Moldova and Georgia
regarding the withdrawal of Russian
troops have been linked with the
resolution of the secessionist disputes.
3. Russian citizenship and visa policy has
encouraged the secessionist regions to
see themselves as effectively
independent states.

Russia
The proliferation of energy
routes while potentially increasing
bilateral cooperation at the expense
of the regional may, at the same
time, result in redundancy owing to
too much capacity for not enough
gas and oil.

Russia
Russia intervened in Georgia, in August
2008, to repel a Georgian attack on
South Ossetia. After five days of fighting,
a ceasefi re brokered by the EU brought
open hostilities to a halt. In the weeks
that followed, Russia beefed up its
military presence in both South Ossetia
and Abkhazia and, on August 26, formally
recognized the two republics as
independent.

Russia
Russias own go-it-alone approach to
foreign policy, along with the blind eye that
Western governments had turned to the
problem of Eurasias secessionist struggles
over the last fifteen years, produced the fiveday war of summer 2008.
Although Western governments and news
agencies were quick to see a revived Russian
imperialism as the chief cause, this chapter
elucidates the rather more complicated
prehistory of the August crisis.

The year 2008

The Russian intervention and recognition
changed the dynamics of Eurasias
unrecognized states, but it was a change
that was, in many ways, predictable.
Kosovo had set a clear precedent,
despite repeated denials by Western
governments, for how territorial issues
were to be treated across the
postcommunist world.

Black Sea politics works best if the approach is

regional. The Commission on the Black Sea
a civil society initiative developed and launched jointly in
January 2009 by The Bertelsmann Stiftung, Gtersloh;
the Black Sea Trust for Regional Cooperation
(BST-GMFUS), Bucharest; the Economic Policy Research
Foundation of Turkey (TEPAV), Ankara,
and the International Centre for Black Sea Studies
(ICBSS), Athens.

 The regional actors

Interested outsiders
The international community
Is there a Black Sea regionalism?
The Organisation of the Black Sea
Economic Cooperation (BSEC) 19922012 - 20 years

 With the end of the Cold War, the geopolitical

position of the Black Sea changed beyond
recognition:
- The demise of communism unleashed armed
conflicts and pent up historical tensions. It led to
the dissolution of a superpower, the birth of six
new sovereign states and several secessionist
movements.
- It also opened the region to outside influences and
competition while at the same time witnessing the
birth of a slow process of region-building.

 The role of Bulgaria Romania Turkey

and the former Soviet countries
Russia
Moldova
Ukraine
Georgia

The emerging map of Eastern

Europe

Europeanization - EU's Model of

Development?

Eastern Partnership Index

2011-2013
http://www.eap-index.eu/
EaP Index 2013 - Ukrainian leaflet.pdf
(271.75 KB)
EaP_Index_2013.pdf(1.07 MB)
EaP Index 2012.pdf(2.42 MB)
EaP Index 2011.pdf(761.25 KB)

The European Integration Index for

Eastern Partnership Countries
tracks the progress of Eastern Partnership (EaP)
countriesArmenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia,
Moldova, and Ukraineon an annual basis.
It provides a nuanced crosscountry and cross-sector
picture that is comparative.
The Index is a monitoring tool that is also intended to
assist EU institutions in applying the more for more/less
for less principle, announced by the EU in May 2011.
Although the EU and independent civil society initiatives
provide numerous regular assessments of the progress of
EaP countries in European integration, few of these
assessments have attempted to place the countries in a
comparative perspective.

The European Integration Index for

Eastern Partnership Countries
The Index was developed by independent civil
society experts who advocate reforms related to
European integration. It is prepared by the
International Renaissance Foundation (IRF) in
partnership with the Open Society Foundations
(OSF) and experts from think-tanks and university
institutions in EaP countries and the EU.
The project is funded by the IRFs European
Programme and the EastEast: Partnership
Beyond Borders Programme of the OSF

The European Integration Index for

Eastern Partnership Countries
The Index interprets progress in
European integration as the
combination of two separate yet
interdependent processes:
- increased linkages between each of the
EaP countries and the European Union;
- greater approximation between those
countries institutions, legislation and
practices and those of the EU.

The European Integration Index for

Eastern Partnership Countries
1. Linkage Dimension
2. Approximation dimension
3. Management Dimenion

The European Integration Index for

Eastern Partnership Countries
Index o Europeanization?
While the first process reflects the
growth of political, economic and
societal interdependencies between
EaP countries and the EU, the second
process shows the degree to which
each EaP country adopts institutions
and policies typical of EU member
states and required of EaP countries
by the EU.

Conclusion
Straddling Europe and Asia, the Black Sea
links north to south and east to west.
In the last two decades the Black Sea has
changed beyond recognition. We have
witnessed the transformation of the former
communist societies and the impact of
globalisation.
Eastern Partnership was not an efficient
development tool and especially after the
Ukranian war it needs to be reinvented.

LETS HAVE A BREAK!

Mid term exam, 4.12

1. Shortly describe the aim and the main
instruments used by the European Union in
the Western Balkans starting with 2003.
2. Indicate the most important bilateral and
multilateral donors in the Western Balkans
(at least 3 for each).
3. Indicate 2 multi-ethnic political systems in
the WB region and shortly explain their
connection with the periods 1992-1995 and
2001.
4. Please choose a donor and a recipient
country from the WB and shortly describe
the political dimension of their
international cooperation interactions.

Mid term exam

5. According to the 2014 Transparency
International Corruption Perception
Index published on the 3rd of December
2014, Albania and Kosovo are ranked joint
110thout of 174 countries around the world
that were assessed in the report. Compared
to other countries in the region, Kosovo and
Albania continue to be the most corrupt
countries in South-East Europe.
Please comment these results from the
perspective of the development policy
efficiency in the WB.