Veidlapa Nr. M-3 (8)

Course Description Status: Approved

Course Description Version: 24/25.P.1.00

Description Period: 2024./25 academic year pavasara semestris

Study Course Accepted: -

Study Course Description

Eastern European and South Caucasus Countries Between the EU's Eastern Partnership and Other (geo)Political Projects

Main Study Course Information

Course Code
SZF_060
Branch of Science
Political science
ECTS
6.00
Target Audience
Political Science
LQF
Level 7
Study Type And Form
Full-Time

Study Course Implementer

Course Supervisor
Elizabete Elīna Vizgunova-Vikmane
Structure Unit Manager
Karina Palkova
Structural Unit
Faculty of Social Sciences
Contacts

Dzirciema street 16, Rīga, szf@rsu.lv

About Study Course

Objective

To provide students with knowledge, concepts and analytical tools that will enable understanding of the development of the six Eastern European and South Caucasus countries (Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Moldova, Ukraine) in a broader regional context. To stimulate critical thinking on current development and future trajectories of the six countries and the EU’s Eastern Partnership (EaP) policy, linking it to broader debates in political science such as democratisation and regionalism.

Preliminary Knowledge

General knowledge of the theories and methods in the field of international relations, as well as basic knowledge on Russia, the United States and the European Union.

Learning Outcomes

Knowledge

1.Using in-depth knowledge gained in the study course on the development and operation of Eastern European and Southern Caucasus countries in the cooperation formats and organisations created by the EU and Russia, students will compare the domestic and foreign policy challenges of Eastern Europe and the Southern Caucasus considering domestic and foreign policy challenges among different centres of power. Students will compare and evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of the cooperation formats offered by the EU and Russia, as well as their mutual interaction. Students will compare the explanations of functionalism, neofunctionalism, transactionalism and federalism in the context of regional integration projects.

Skills

1.Working in a group, students will select, read and critically evaluate scientific literature, justify their choice, interpretation and analysis of literature about the historical development of Eastern Europe and the Southern Caucasus and its impact on cooperation with the EU to group members. Through individual and group work, students will identify in oral and written form, compare and evaluate alternative arguments and points of view, formulate, explain and justify their opinion on regional cooperation and integration projects based on different systems of values.

Competences

1.Students will develop a report based on interdisciplinary scientific literature, analysing the opportunities and challenges of the countries of Eastern Europe and the Southern Caucasus in the framework of the EU Eastern Partnership Programme and Russia’s regional projects. Students will evaluate the interdisciplinary nature of complex problems and combine research results and methods from different fields to analyse complex problems in professional, academic and business environments. These competences will not be limited to the regional and global actors covered, but also to other regions and global actors, both in Eurasia and on other continents.

Assessment

Individual work

Title
% from total grade
Grade
1.
Individual work
-
-
Within the module, students will prepare for seminars, read recommended readings, prepare a report and a presentation. The objective of the seminars is to develop students’ ability to justify their point of view; to stimulate activity; to test their knowledge of the topic and the material. Report – to develop the ability to identify the main problem of the topic; to identify and evaluate alternative arguments and points of view; to present one’s own point of view, explaining and arguing why this point of view is more acceptable and superior to any other. The report must compare all possible alternatives, considering all their weaknesses and strengths. Another objective is to develop the skills to independently research situations and problems, evaluate them and develop solutions.

Examination

Title
% from total grade
Grade
1.
Examination
-
-
Each student must choose the topic of the report, taking into account the main topics of the course as well as their research interests. The topic of the report and a brief explanation of how it will be analysed (7-10 sentences) must be submitted by the date of lecture 5. It will be approved by the lecturer, with additional comments, if necessary. Extended drafts of reports should be presented in classes 18-20. Students should actively participate in classes and in the discussion of other presentations. Technical requirements for the report: 10 pages, spacing 1.5, Times New Roman 12 or equivalent. References in footnotes, design according to the Chicago Manual of Style.
2.
Examination
-
-
Attendance – 10% Activity and preparedness during classes – 30% Presentation and report – 35% Final examination (essay) – 25%

Study Course Theme Plan

FULL-TIME
Part 1

  1. Historical development of the Eastern Partnership

Annotation: The Eastern Partnership is a dimension of the European Neighbourhood Policy. It was formally launched in Prague in 2009, mainly thanks to the ambitions of the Member States that joined in 2004 and 2007 to establish closer political and economic ties with their neighbours – Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine. This ambition is understandable given the so-called “old” policies of Member States, maintaining traditionally close relations with their former colonies and with Southern neighbours in particular. However, attempts to establish closer relations with Eastern Partnership countries have faced a number of domestic and international challenges. In this first lecture, we will look at the roots and key events of the Eastern Partnership that influenced its development, as well as EU’s current plans for its future development. Literature: Required reading: Rick Fawn, “The Price and Possibilities of Going East? The European Union and Wider Europe, the European Neighbourhood and the Eastern Partnership” in: Rick Fawn, ed., Managing Security Threats along the EU’s Eastern Flanks. New Security Challenges. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan (2020). “Eastern Partnership policy beyond 2020: Reinforcing Resilience - an Eastern Partnership that delivers for all”, https://ec.europa.eu/neighbourhood-enlargement/sites/near/files/joint_communication_on_the_eap_policy_beyond_2020.pdf “Joint Declaration of the Prague Eastern Partnership Summit”, Prague, 7 May 2009, https://www.consilium.europa.eu/media/31797/2009_eap_declaration.pdf Supplementary reading: Matthew Frear, Klaudijus Maniokas, Laurynas Jonavičius and Ion Tabarta, Report on complementary and alternative modes of engagement with the EaP countries, EU-STRAT Report No. 5, July 2018, http://www.viitorul.org/files/EU-STRAT-Report-No.-5_2.pdf
EventType
Modality
Location
Contact hours
1.
Lecture
On site
Auditorium
2

  1. European Union’s Eastern Partnership policy: continuous search for strategy

Annotation: After the EU decided that closer ties with the Eastern Partnership countries were needed, it faced the next question: how should these links be promoted and what should they look like? Fix et al. (2019) identifies two main approaches: external governance requiring unilateral adaptation to EU norms and a partnership approach that pays more attention to partner countries and their wishes. At different times, different players have preferred one strategy or another. However, as Fix et al. (2019) also point out, the true approach has been inhomogeneous. Although the EU approach has become more pragmatic, with a greater focus on local needs, over time, in many areas it continues to pursue the external governance approach and makes cooperation dependent on the implementation of reforms. In this lecture, we will discuss the EU’s continuous search for strategy for the EaP, as well as the strengths and weaknesses of the different approaches. Literature: Liana Fix, Andrea Gawrich, Kornely Kakachia and Alla Leukavets, “Out of the shadow? Georgia’s emerging strategies of engagement in the Eastern Partnership: between external governance and partnership cooperation”, Caucasus Survey, 7:1 (2019), 1-24, DOI: 10.1080/23761199.2018.1541218 Irina Petrova and Laure Delcour, “From principle to practice? The resilience–local ownership nexus in the EU Eastern Partnership policy”, Contemporary Security Policy, 41:2 (2020), 336-360, DOI: 10.1080/13523260.2019.1678280
EventType
Modality
Location
Contact hours
1.
Lecture
On site
Auditorium
2

  1. The status of the neighbourhood: convoluted identities

Annotation: The six countries of Eastern Europe and the South Caucasus are geographically between the EU and Russia, and in terms of time between their Soviet heritage and modern needs. The national identities of these countries are in the process of change, they have not yet been fully constructed after many years in Soviet power. The six countries are not fully pro-Russian; at the same time, the ambitions of Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine to join the EU are also not fully supported by the EU as a whole. The identity policy in this region is not just a theoretical issue; it is an active choice between different models of development and constructing itself as a society and entity on the international stage, while facing diverse international constraints. In practice, it manifests itself as a constant “struggle for the hearts and minds of citizens” (https://eap-csf.eu/quo-vadis-eastern- partnership-a-retrospective-look-into-the-future-2/). At this seminar we will discuss the identity policy in the region and its significance for the future. Literature: Andrey Makarychev, Incomplete Hegemonies, Hybrid Neighbours: Identity games and policy tools in Eastern Partnership countries, CEPS Working Document, No 2018/02, February 2018, https://www.ceps.eu/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/WD2018-02_AM_IncompleteHegemonies_final.pdf Olena Dobrzhanska and Oleh Pavliuk, “Political Identities of Ukrainian Society in the Context of the EU Eastern Partnership Policy”, Studia i Analizy Naukupolityce 1 (2020), https://czasopisma.kul.pl/sanp/article/download/9840/8310
EventType
Modality
Location
Contact hours
1.
Class/Seminar
On site
Auditorium
2
2.
Class/Seminar
On site
Auditorium
2

  1. Between Russian and European integration projects

Annotation: While in class 3 we discussed the identity competition in six Eastern European and Southern Caucasus countries, in this lecture we will focus on how the EU and Russia respond to and promote different identities and geopolitical orientations. Both Russia and the EU have their own integration projects and offers for the six countries. Both offers are seen as mutually exclusive, especially from the point of view of Russia, which puts these countries in a position where they must primarily adapt to either of them. This is a difficult choice given that the EU integration framework offers long-term benefits but also relatively high short-term adjustment costs, while Russia’s approach as a whole does not require radical reforms and makes it easier for current elites to hold power, but poses short- and long-term risks. In this lecture, we will discuss integration projects of the EU and Russia in the neighbourhood and the reactions of the six countries. Literature: Elena Korosteleva, “Eastern partnership and the Eurasian Union: bringing ‘the political’ back in the eastern region”, European Politics and Society, 17:sup1 (2016), 67-81, DOI: 10.1080/23745118.2016.1171275 https://www.academia.edu/25101969/Eastern_Partnership_and_the_Eurasian_Union_bringing_the_political_back_in_the_eastern_region?auto=download Kamil Całus, Laure Delcour, Ildar Gazizullin, Tadeusz Iwański, Marta Jaroszewicz, and Kamil Klysiński, Interdependencies of Eastern Partnership Countries with the EU and Russia: Three Case Studies, EU-STRAT Working Paper No. 10, April 2018, https://refubium.fu-berlin.de/bitstream/handle/fub188/22526/EU-STRAT-Working-Paper-No-10.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
EventType
Modality
Location
Contact hours
1.
Lecture
On site
Auditorium
2

  1. Six Eastern European and South Caucasus countries and China

Annotation: While Russia and the EU can be seen as the most important actors in the region, the six countries are not isolated also from global trends. China’s presence here has steadily expanded, with a particular emphasis on economic cooperation. This lecture will focus on China’s motivation to build relations with the six countries, as well as its political and economic vision of cooperation with the region and ways in which China’s presence interacts with other key actors in the region. Literature: Marcin Kaczmarski, Jakub Jakóbowski, and Szymon Kardaś, “The effects of China’s economic expansion on Eastern Partnership countries”, EU-STRAT Working Paper No. 17, March 2019, http://eu-strat.eu/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/EU-STRAT-Working-Paper-No.-17.pdf
EventType
Modality
Location
Contact hours
1.
Lecture
On site
Auditorium
2

  1. Six Eastern European and South Caucasus countries, Turkey and the US

Annotation: Turkey and the United States are two other important actors in the region, where the latter is mostly guided by its overall geopolitical interests and relations with Russia, while the former is interested in what is happening in its immediate neighbourhood. Both engage in relations with different countries to varying degrees. Turkey’s presence is prominent, particularly in economic and cultural area, and it also provides significant support to Azerbaijan, which plays a role in the Azerbaijan-Armenia conflict. The United States focuses on security matters, including through NATO, and other political matters such as supporting democracy, as well as generally supporting EU activities in the region. In this lecture, we will discuss Turkey-US relations with the six countries and the ways they make regional dynamics more complex. Literature: Ole Frahm, Katharina Hoffmann, Dirk Lehmkuhl, “Turkey and the Eastern Partnership: Turkey’s Foreign Policy Towards its Post-Soviet Black Sea Neighbourhood”, EU-STRAT Working Paper No. 13, December 2018 (EU-STRAT), http://eu-strat.eu/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/EU-STRAT-Working-Paper-No.-13.pdf Jason Bruder, “The US and the New Eastern Europe (Ukraine, Belarus, Moldova, Georgia, Armenia, and Azerbaijan) Since 1991” in Managing Security Threats along the EU’s Eastern Flanks, 2020, 69-97
EventType
Modality
Location
Contact hours
1.
Lecture
On site
Auditorium
2

  1. Are the six countries a region?

Annotation: While the Eastern Partnership has been based on the premise that there are more similarities than differences between the six countries, and also, as part of this course, we often call it a “region,” can it really be seen as such? What is necessary to regard a group of countries as a “region” and are these prerequisites met? Can it be called a region in some senses, but not in other senses? What are the factors that affect integration or lack of integration? Literature: Laure Delcour and Kataryna Wolczuk, “Between the Eastern Partnership and the Eurasian Economic Union: Competing Region-building Projects in the ‘Common Neighbourhood’” in: Sieglinde Gstöhl, Simon Schunz, Theorizing the European Neighbourhood Policy, London: Routledge, 2017, 187-206 https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Laure_Delcour/publication/318207869_Between_the_eastern_partnership_and_the_Eurasian_Economic_Union_Competing_region-building_projects_in_the_%27common_neighbourhood%27/links/5cd6df27458515712ea36a19/Between-the-eastern-partnership-and-the-Eurasian-Economic-Union-Competing-region-building-projects-in-the-common-neighbourhood.pdf Małgorzata Zajaczkowski, "Regional cooperation within the Eastern Partnership", European Integration Studies 1:138-147. https://www.ceeol.com/search/article-detail?id=606182
EventType
Modality
Location
Contact hours
1.
Class/Seminar
On site
Auditorium
2

  1. Reluctant EaP participants: Belarus and Armenia

Annotation: This lecture pays close attention to the development and foreign policies of the two Eastern Partnership countries – Belarus and Armenia. Both, as well as Azerbaijan, which will be discussed later, may be classified as “disinterested” members of the EaP because they have not declared their wish to join the EU, nor have they signed Association Agreements with the EU. Belarus and Armenia are members of the Eurasian Economic Union (EEU), the Russian-led integration project. Armenia does not intend to withdraw from it (https://eurasianet.org/following- revolution-armenia-comes-to-terms-with-eurasian-union); Belarus, in turn, is the least integrated EaP member and has been subject to multiple sanctions by the EU. However, both have tried to balance between Russia and the EU, which shows that even the least enthusiastic Member States are somewhat attracted to the EaP; Armenia has also signed a comprehensive and extensive partnership with the EU, which took place even after it joined the EEU. We will discuss why these countries are implementing such policies and what they tell about the weaknesses of the EaP initiative. Literature: Alena Vieira and Syuzanna Vasilyan, “Armenia and Belarus: caught between the EU's and Russia's conditionalities?”, European Politics and Society, 19:4 (2018), 471-489, DOI: 10.1080/23745118.2018.1455337 Narine Ghazaryan and Laure Delcour, “From EU integration process to the Eurasian Economic Union: The case of Armenia”, in: Post-Soviet constitutions and challenges of regional integration, eds. R Petrov and P Van Elsuwege (Routledge 2018) https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Laure_Delcour/publication/325246773_From_EU_integration_process_to_the_Eurasian_Economic_Union_the_case_of_Armenia/links/5b8fa01145851540d1c9ef42/From-EU-integration-process-to-the-Eurasian-Economic-Union-the-case-of-Armenia.pdf?_sg%5B0%5D=42G5sMkg8qXOPHBk8RjxS8SS3tkj1rUXz_S3um8GTHRxyV6YCvVyA6BKssKReUEOqZrs_ITMoFgf-T-r2JiDgg.W9QVDOGVNclxD-it9_hG9K4pA8LL8b2QpYDlSgoW98wtZ1DtTjJ960RXy7yfIgQXEzl-OwmZp0nddtJp6T7DMA&_sg%5B1%5D=tGkkw0ekLZ2mNMUKORJBiky2DiMaPPyPtHVQA2vqO3Pfvwnn306G79lonDbDtojFeqDuCNV0rdxtam2V6Sp18U1mYysSuxS54lbNBpf6aGSC.W9QVDOGVNclxD-it9_hG9K4pA8LL8b2QpYDlSgoW98wtZ1DtTjJ960RXy7yfIgQXEzl-OwmZp0nddtJp6T7DMA&_iepl=
EventType
Modality
Location
Contact hours
1.
Lecture
On site
Auditorium
2

  1. EaP active reformers: Georgia and Moldova

Annotation: In contrast to Armenia and Belarus, Georgia and Moldova – especially the former – are enthusiastic members of the EaP, which have declared their willingness to join the EU and signed two Association Agreements (AA) with the EU in 2014, each of which also includes an Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area (DCFTA) agreement. Although the EaP and DCFTA offer no prospects of accession and demand ambitious political and economic reforms, these two countries have been very active in the reform process. However, reforms also involve difficulties, both internal and international counteractions. In this lesson, we will discuss the main lines of reform, the needs of these countries and the obstacles to their further integration with the EU. Literature: Iurie Gotişan, “Eastern Partnership and Moldova: recent trends,” International Issues & Slovak Foreign Policy Affairs Vol. XXVIII, No. 1–2 (2019), 94–112, https://d1wqtxts1xzle7.cloudfront.net/54801308/Research_paper_for_EECS_IG.pdf?1508825636=&response-content-disposition=attachment%3B+filename%3DEU_MOLDOVA_ASSOCIATION_AGREEMENT_RECENT.pdf&Expires=1601238514&Signature=bsx0oFem3t6HmePpw397hzNlKnARb4NcMqOnQJM03y1GpZ6bAqRbOmTsRk6siG0E-~3iuXxiROKJiUJmr3AuLZ6zqN7x8GT4eaEZJS8LOJE8u-Ko3tQzgoScx8zjHMVKUWwwI0aPyinxP180J824CejzAJhMo5HfiU3Ax~ZXsx55JRJ8K7qMDzuF06NZmC6aI4VCUpK~GLr7ehLuEPv5aNyntMjZJeHfZA8h09mfJAqbAe7N9Wl3qxn2y1BPcgtA9Wwk40sPGQyC9c6HQgCSsUqWawlobLL7YKCK~IsbTJhM92UF7cpeWMC5Vipr7WWztHdbp0qpK6VVZ-pIE1EefA__&Key-Pair-Id=APKAJLOHF5GGSLRBV4ZA Anders Wivel, “Living on the edge: Georgian foreign policy between the West and the rest,” Third World Thematics: A TWQ Journal, 1:1 (2016), 92-109, DOI: 10.1080/23802014.2016.1194168 https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/23802014.2016.1194168?casa_token=hkeAFC6GmDUAAAAA:ifh5AsXrLryWAAcLHgAJqUWcNqNCOGvCpO9mormGpttXK53km04-x5v2kHAu9oqAgcmveEJCjUKs
EventType
Modality
Location
Contact hours
1.
Class/Seminar
On site
Auditorium
2

  1. Azerbaijan and Azerbaijan-Armenia conflict

Annotation: Azerbaijan takes a relatively isolated position in the Eastern Partnership because it is not interested in the political and economic reforms needed to achieve closer integration with the EU, but also does not want to become a member of the Eurasian Economic Union. Moreover, as a considerable energy exporting country, Azerbaijan sees no need to compete aggressively for foreign subsidies; van Gills (2017) calls it a “tough negotiator” who can afford to be assertive in talks with the EU. In this lecture, we will discuss Azerbaijan’s development and foreign policy. In addition, we will also discuss the Azerbaijan-Armenia conflict over Nagorno-Karabakh, the complex international presence in this issue, and the obstacles to its resolution. Literature: Eske van Gils, “Differentiation through bargaining power in EU–Azerbaijan relations: Baku as a tough negotiator”, East European Politics, 33:3 (2017), 388-405, DOI: 10.1080/21599165.2017.1322957 Pavlína Bláhová, “Nagorno-Karabakh: obstacles to the resolution of the frozen conflict”, Asia Europe Journal (2019) 17:69–85, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10308-018-0527-4
EventType
Modality
Location
Contact hours
1.
Lecture
On site
Auditorium
2

  1. The heavyweight: Ukraine

Annotation: Ukraine could be described as a “heavyweight” among the EaP countries given its size and population, as well as the fundamental role it has played in relations between Russia and the West. It is also an example of a country with a complex identity (class 3) that is exposed simultaneously to European and Russian influence and the challenges it poses. While Ukraine has signed the Association Agreement with the EU and continues its path of reform, this process is endangered not only by Russian interference but also by domestic factors. In this class, we will discuss Ukrainian foreign policy, its links with the domestic political context and its importance for the Eastern Partnership and international relations as a whole. Literature: Karina Shyrokykh, “The Evolution of the Foreign Policy of Ukraine: External Actors and Domestic Factors”, Europe-Asia Studies, 70:5 (2018), 832-850, DOI: 10.1080/09668136.2018.1479734 Evhen Tsybulenko and Sergey Pakhomenko, “The Ukrainian Crisis as a Challenge for the Eastern Partnership” in: Political and Legal Perspectives of the EU Eastern Partnership Policy, eds. Kerikmäe, T., Chochia, A., Springer, 2016 https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Evhen_Tsybulenko/publication/296674200_The_Ukrainian_Crisis_as_a_Challenge_for_the_Eastern_Partnership/links/5b22758ba6fdcc6974602009/The-Ukrainian-Crisis-as-a-Challenge-for-the-Eastern-Partnership?_sg%5B0%5D=uOwEqay_2wlUcbokwzGvm-2U2X57tcTzLEkgOYE8tp_wl0w9zciVp3E82MpOIIPmrCfQK0eAwB41Rgg2s-jxrw.H8w0CqX3GbakrpT1xXprKiAaxjEekoJJCUJyi15djxDqptwb9feXH6OsME4XTJjKKyOTz81L1pEgEAAFU1F56g&_sg%5B1%5D=f3KFJXS0SeFShlgTpA3CldD_jHQ1tfLpSre-n2qgA0l9xhVC5yc1ZjBvcaHY2NHnl8WoA3NqNWH7gt9XL2z2QZ4CvrG5ApnWfncfjRfIl8DN.H8w0CqX3GbakrpT1xXprKiAaxjEekoJJCUJyi15djxDqptwb9feXH6OsME4XTJjKKyOTz81L1pEgEAAFU1F56g&_iepl=
EventType
Modality
Location
Contact hours
1.
Class/Seminar
On site
Auditorium
2
2.
Class/Seminar
On site
Auditorium
2

  1. Democratisation and its discontents

Annotation: Fukuyama’s “end of history” statement gained popularity after the collapse of the USSR, assuming Western liberal democracy is the only possible development path (https://www-jstor-org.coleurope.idm.oclc.org/stable/ 24027184?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents). The democratisation of the Eastern Partnership countries has been a long-standing EU objective and the EU has provided considerable political, technical and financial support to this end. However, some 30 years after the collapse of the Soviet regime, progress in these countries is at best uneven, with the Economist Intelligence Unit classifying Ukraine, Moldova, Armenia and Georgia as “hybrid regimes”, while Azerbaijan and Belarus are seen as “authoritarian regimes” holding one of the lowest positions in the rankings of 151 countries (http://www.eiu.com/Handlers/ WhitepaperHandler.ashx?fi=Democracy-Index-2019.pdf&mode=wp&campaignid=democracyindex2019). In this lecture, we will discuss EU initiatives to support democracy, their weaknesses and their discontents, as well as the preconditions for further democratic reforms in the EaP countries. Literature: Tanja A. Börzel and Bidzina Lebanidze, ““The transformative power of Europe” beyond enlargement: the EU’s performance in promoting democracy in its neighbourhood”, East European Politics, 33:1 (2017), 17-35, DOI: 10.1080/21599165.2017.1280473 Georgiana Ciceo, “The Europeanization of Moldova’s direct democracy: assessing the new tools for citizen engagement in Policymaking”, Eastern European Journal of Regional Studies Vol. 6, Iss. 1 (2020), https://csei.ase.md/journal/files/issue_61/EEJRS_61_4-23_CIC.pdf
EventType
Modality
Location
Contact hours
1.
Lecture
On site
Auditorium
2

  1. Economic development of the six countries

Annotation: Economic development opportunities can be derived from various international actors in the region, including Russia, the EU, China and Turkey. For countries that have formed part of the Soviet economy and faced serious social and economic challenges after the collapse of the USSR, the ability to provide economic prosperity to their citizens often becomes an important measure of political success. Some countries have chosen to conclude the DCFTA with the EU and liberalise their economies. However, the transformation into a fully liberalised market economy is a process requiring complex reforms and international competitiveness, so other countries have taken the alternative route of more state intervention in the economy. Either way, the economy remains inextricably linked to politics, both domestically and internationally. In this class, we will discuss the different economic models, challenges and potential of the six countries for future economic development, as well as international opportunities and constraints. Literature: Tatjana Muravska and Alexandre Berlin, “Towards a New European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP): What Benefits of the Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Agreements (DCFTAs) for Shared Prosperity and Security?” in: Political and Legal Perspectives of the EU Eastern Partnership Policy, Springer, 2016 https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Archil_Chochia/publication/298517753_Political_and_legal_perspectives_of_the_EU_eastern_partnership_policy/links/5a1124cf0f7e9bd1b2bf3ced/Political-and-legal-perspectives-of-the-EU-eastern-partnership-policy.pdf?_sg%5B0%5D=gxMfzvn2dvFftVGQqNz2k33UWwMKN9SAhiA0837N0JQ1wsgvDNSQ-TD6SGZarcKweG5_tqPFBveUXxhNhFrEWQ.YoxFaI--5tVFlj7ojoEc3ywwZ-L-PgUcYyqYh-pC8u9tdX0TMPzOEmd5jqKsOrf7wt-1FpuQUg-kxehzJ4myzQ&_sg%5B1%5D=FTvcojAiUB9Zqvv7adcw5WKT-H-LCAg6Z9xkcYE8dkwStGNJYG62boWGjxmRC4dKGacTDLE6HptBPki52sWXneQv5rhE_2dECp7UxtyRHuEQ.YoxFaI--5tVFlj7ojoEc3ywwZ-L-PgUcYyqYh-pC8u9tdX0TMPzOEmd5jqKsOrf7wt-1FpuQUg-kxehzJ4myzQ&_iepl= Oana-Ramona Socoliuc and Liviu-George Maha, “The Economic Dynamics of the Eastern Partnership Countries: Between Development Gaps and Internal Fragilities”, in: Resilience and the EU's Eastern Neighbourhood Countries, eds. Rouet G., Pascariu G., Palgrave Macmillan, Cham, 2019, https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-25606-7_4
EventType
Modality
Location
Contact hours
1.
Class/Seminar
On site
Auditorium
2
2.
Class/Seminar
On site
Auditorium
2

  1. EU financial support and cooperation

Annotation: Soon after the collapse of the USSR, the EU began providing technical and financial support to countries currently part of the Eastern Partnership (https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/MEMO_96_41). Over the years, as EU relations with these countries have evolved and increased in importance, this support has grown numerically and become more focused. At the same time, EaP countries are competing with other EU foreign partners over limited funding. There are also uncertainties as to the extent to which the funding allocated is spent to achieve strategically EU objectives and in line with the EU’s initial intention, which areas should be prioritised or de-prioritised and what the EU has been able to achieve. Literature: Věra Řiháčková Pachta, “Eastern Partnership: from the EaP summit to the debate on the new Multiannual Financial Framework”, Europeum Monitor, October 2018, http://europeum.org/data/articles/10-29-eastern-monitor-vrp.pdf Huseyn Aliyev, “Assessing the European Union’s assistance to civil society in its Eastern Neighbourhood: Lessons from the South Caucasus”, Journal of contemporary European studies, 24:1 (2016), 42-60, DOI: 10.1080/14782804.2015.1056112
EventType
Modality
Location
Contact hours
1.
Lecture
On site
Auditorium
2

  1. Traditional and non-traditional security challenges

Annotation: As the conflicts that hit Georgia and Ukraine demonstrated very clearly, the six countries face military threats to security. Currently, among the six countries, only Belarus is not involved in a territorial dispute. Moldova is facing the Transnistrian problem and the conflict between Azerbaijan and Armenia cannot even be described as “frozen” given the high risk of escalation. However, alongside more traditional security threats, these countries also face hybrid hostilities from Russia, cyber warfare, and a diverse threat to public safety – threats affecting the functioning and unity of societies (http://jpeterburgess.com/blog/what-is-societal-security-2/). In this lecture we will discuss the diverse security threats faced by these Eastern and Southern Caucasus countries and the opportunities to mitigate them. Literature: Kornely Kakachia and Bidzina Lebanidze, Global and Diffuse Risks in the Eastern Partnership Countries: Potential Impacts on EU Security (2020), EU-LISTCO Working Paper No. 6, https://refubium.fu-berlin.de/bitstream/handle/fub188/28010/EU-LISTCO-Working-Paper-6.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y&save=y
EventType
Modality
Location
Contact hours
1.
Lecture
On site
Auditorium
2

  1. Simulation game

Annotation: Classes 16-20 will be organised as a simulation game (students will have to prepare their positions based on academic and practical literature identified by them) and student presentations will be discussed in the light of lessons learnt during the course. The simulation game in classes 16-17 will focus on simulating the planning of EU’s future policy on EaP, adopting the current scenario (Part 1) and events after the lecturer announces that a sudden and significant incident occurred in the neighbourhood (Part 2, the precise nature of the event to be simulated will be determined by the lecturer). Students will be divided into the following groups: The European Commission, the European Parliament, Poland, Sweden, Ukraine, Azerbaijan, Belarus (may be changed by the lecturer). Literature is mentioned above at each particular class. Literature for classes 16-20 will be determined by the students themselves, taking into account lessons learned during the course.
EventType
Modality
Location
Contact hours
1.
Class/Seminar
On site
Auditorium
2
2.
Class/Seminar
On site
Auditorium
2
3.
Class/Seminar
On site
Auditorium
2
4.
Class/Seminar
On site
Auditorium
2
5.
Class/Seminar
On site
Auditorium
2
Total ECTS (Creditpoints):
6.00
Contact hours:
46 Academic Hours
Final Examination:
Exam (Written)

Bibliography

Required Reading

1.

Visa literatūra ir angļu valodā un piemērota gan latviešu, gan angļu plūsmas studentiem

2.

Aliyev, Huseyn, “Assessing the European Union’s assistance to civil society in its Eastern Neighbourhood: Lessons from the South Caucasus”, Journal of contemporary European studies, 24:1 (2016), 42-60

3.

Bláhová, Pavlína, “Nagorno-Karabakh: obstacles to the resolution of the frozen conflict”, Asia Europe Journal (2019) 17:69–85

4.

Börzel, Tanja A., and Bidzina Lebanidze, ““The transformative power of Europe” beyond enlargement: the EU’s performance in promoting democracy in its neighbourhood”, East European Politics, 33:1 (2017), 17-35

5.

Bruder, Jason, “The US and the New Eastern Europe (Ukraine, Belarus, Moldova, Georgia, Armenia, and Azerbaijan) Since 1991” in Managing Security Threats along the EU’s Eastern Flanks, 2020, 69-97

6.

Całus, Kamil, Laure Delcour, Ildar Gazizullin, Tadeusz Iwański, Marta Jaroszewicz, and Kamil Klysiński, Interdependencies of Eastern Partnership Countries with the EU and Russia: Three Case Studies, EU-STRAT Working Paper No. 10, April 2018

7.

Ciceo, Georgiana, “The Europeanization of Moldova’s direct democracy: assessing the new tools for citizen engagement in Policymaking”, Eastern European Journal of Regional Studies Vol. 6, Iss. 1 (2020)

8.

Delcour, Laure, and Kataryna Wolczuk, “Between the Eastern Partnership and the Eurasian Economic Union: Competing Region-building Projects in the ‘Common Neighbourhood’” in: Sieglinde Gstöhl, Simon Schunz, Theorizing the European Neighbourhood Policy, London: Routledge, 2017, 187-206

9.

Dobrzhanska, Olena, and Oleh Pavliuk, “Political Identities of Ukrainian Society in the Context of the EU Eastern Partnership Policy”, Studia i Analizy Naukupolityce 1 (2020)

10.

“Eastern Partnership policy beyond 2020: Reinforcing Resilience - an Eastern Partnership that delivers for all”

11.

Fawn, Rick, “The Price and Possibilities of Going East? The European Union and Wider Europe, the European Neighbourhood and the Eastern Partnership” in: Rick Fawn, ed., Managing Security Threats along the EU’s Eastern Flanks. New Security Challenges. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan (2020).

12.

Fix, Liana, Andrea Gawrich, Kornely Kakachia and Alla Leukavets, “Out of the shadow? Georgia’s emerging strategies of engagement in the Eastern Partnership: between external governance and partnership cooperation”, Caucasus Survey, 7:1 (2019), 1-24

13.

Frahm, Ole, Katharina Hoffmann, Dirk Lehmkuhl, “Turkey and the Eastern Partnership: Turkey’s Foreign Policy Towards its Post-Soviet Black Sea Neighbourhood”, EU-STRAT Working Paper No. 13, December 2018 (EU-STRAT)

14.

Ghazaryan, Narine and Laure Delcour, “From EU integration process to the Eurasian Economic Union: The case of Armenia”, in: Post-Soviet constitutions and challenges of regional integration, eds. R Petrov and P Van Elsuwege (Routledge 2018)

15.

Gotişan, Iurie, “Eastern Partnership and Moldova: recent trends,” International Issues & Slovak Foreign Policy Affairs Vol. XXVIII, No. 1–2 (2019), 94–112

16.

“Joint Declaration of the Prague Eastern Partnership Summit”, Prague, (7 May 2009)

17.

Kaczmarski, Marcin, Jakub Jakóbowski, and Szymon Kardaś, “The effects of China’s economic expansion on Eastern Partnership countries”, EU-STRAT Working Paper No. 17, March 2019

18.

Kakachia, Kornely, and Bidzina Lebanidze, Global and Diffuse Risks in the Eastern Partnership Countries: Potential Impacts on EU Security (2020), EU-LISTCO Working Paper No. 6

19.

Korosteleva, Elena, “Eastern partnership and the Eurasian Union: bringing ‘the political’ back in the eastern region”, European Politics and Society, 17:sup1 (2016), 67-81

20.

Makarychev, Andrey, Incomplete Hegemonies, Hybrid Neighbours: Identity games and policy tools in Eastern Partnership countries, CEPS Working Document, No 2018/02, February 2018

21.

Muravska, Tatjana, and Alexandre Berlin, “Towards a New European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP): What Benefits of the Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Agreements (DCFTAs) for Shared Prosperity and Security?” in: Political and Legal Perspectives of the EU Eastern Partnership Policy, Springer, 2016

22.

Petrova, Irina, and Laure Delcour, “From principle to practice? The resilience–local ownership nexus in the EU Eastern Partnership policy”, Contemporary Security Policy, 41:2 (2020), 336-360

23.

Řiháčková Pachta, Věra, “Eastern Partnership: from the EaP summit to the debate on the new Multiannual Financial Framework”, Europeum Monitor, October 2018

24.

Shyrokykh, Karina, “The Evolution of the Foreign Policy of Ukraine: External Actors and Domestic Factors”, Europe-Asia Studies, 70:5 (2018), 832-850

25.

Socoliuc, Oana-Ramona, and Liviu-George Maha, “The Economic Dynamics of the Eastern Partnership Countries: Between Development Gaps and Internal Fragilities”, in: Resilience and the EU's Eastern Neighbourhood Countries, eds. Rouet G., Pascariu G., Palgrave Macmillan, Cham, 2019

26.

Tsybulenko, Evhen, and Sergey Pakhomenko, “The Ukrainian Crisis as a Challenge for the Eastern Partnership” in: Political and Legal Perspectives of the EU Eastern Partnership Policy, eds. Kerikmäe, T., Chochia, A., Springer, 2016

27.

van Gils, Eske, “Differentiation through bargaining power in EU–Azerbaijan relations: Baku as a tough negotiator”, East European Politics, 33:3 (2017), 388-405

28.

Vieira, Alena, and Syuzanna Vasilyan, “Armenia and Belarus: caught between the EU's and Russia's conditionalities?”, European Politics and Society, 19:4 (2018), 471-489

29.

Wivel, Anders, “Living on the edge: Georgian foreign policy between the West and the rest,” Third World Thematics: A TWQ Journal, 1:1 (2016), 92-109

30.

Zajaczkowski, Małgorzata, "Regional cooperation within the Eastern Partnership", European Integration Studies 1:138-147

Additional Reading

1.

Frear, Matthew, Klaudijus Maniokas, Laurynas Jonavičius and Ion Tabarta, Report on complementary and alternative modes of engagement with the EaP countries, EU-STRAT Report No. 5, July 2018

2.

Stanislav Secrieru and Sinikukka Saari, eds, The Eastern Partnership a Decade On: Looking Back, Thinking Ahead, Chaillot Paper No. 153 (Paris: EU ISS, 2019)

;