Democratisation in EU Foreign Policy: The Cases of Belarus, Turkey and Ukraine

Result code in IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F61989592%3A15220%2F22%3A73609180" target="_blank" >RIV/61989592:15220/22:73609180 - isvavai.cz</a>

Result on the web

<a href="https://www.martenscentre.eu/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/Democratisation-in-EU-Foreign-Policy.pdf" target="_blank" >https://www.martenscentre.eu/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/Democratisation-in-EU-Foreign-Policy.pdf</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/17816858221087509" target="_blank" >10.1177/17816858221087509</a>

Result language

angličtina

Original language name

Democratisation in EU Foreign Policy: The Cases of Belarus, Turkey and Ukraine

Original language description

Since the end of the Cold War, the EU has become a major force in the democratisation process in Eastern Europe. It has focused primarily on the appeal of its soft power, promoting liberal economic policies and democratisation. Since the completion of the ‘easy task’ of the East–Central European democratic transition with the EU enlargement waves of 2004 and 2007, the EU has only had partial success in performing the major task of stabilising its neighbourhood and preparing it for possible accession in the future. Three countries on the eastern border of the EU have caused significant political and economic challenges to the EU’s accession policy (Turkey) and to the European Neighbourhood Policy (Belarus and Ukraine). All three have revealed the weaknesses of intra-EU decision-making processes (especially the lack of flexibility and the unwillingness to apply ‘hard’ power politics) and the disunity of the EU member states’ voices, which reflects their very divergent national interests. Still, the policies adopted by the EU with regard to these countries also represent an opportunity for the EU. The paper focuses on the key attributes that the EU needs to consider when drafting its policies, both bilateral and multilateral, towards these countries. We especially focus on those features which might be overlooked or neglected due to the urgency of the pressing current issues. We argue that a well-prepared EU policy vis-à-vis these countries should (a) be in the EU’s interests, (b) align with the EU’s actual capabilities and (c) stem from a profound knowledge of the situation in the countries concerned. The structure of the paper therefore first examines the situations in Ukraine, Turkey and Belarus. This is followed by a comparison of the three countries, and country-specific and general recommendations for short- and medium-term EU policy. Individual member states could assume more active roles in promoting specific policy recommendations. The EU should be specific, clear and consistent about what is acceptable and what is not, and form rules-based relationships that take a step-by-step approach which is adhered to. This approach should also bring together the differing interests of the EU member states and the EU institutions.

Czech name

—

Czech description

—

Type

O - Miscellaneous

CEP classification

—

OECD FORD branch

50601 - Political science

Project

<a href="/en/project/GA19-15958S" target="_blank" >GA19-15958S: Europeanization discourse in the EU candidate countries</a><br>

Continuities

P - Projekt vyzkumu a vyvoje financovany z verejnych zdroju (s odkazem do CEP)

Publication year

2022

Confidentiality

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů