Search results

This book provides the first detailed comparative analysis of the unusual partnership between the main European neutral states and NATO. Neutrality and alliance membership are fundamentally incompatible, but through the vehicle of NATO's post-Cold War partnerships the European neutral states and NATO have found a way to bridge this gap and cooperate with one another. Based on case studies of Austria, Finland, Ireland, Sweden and Switzerland written by leading experts, this book explores the detail of each country's relationship with NATO, the factors shaping those relationships and whether any of these states are likely to abandon neutrality and join NATO. The book also contributes to broader work on foreign policy by exploring different explanations of the European neutral states' foreign and security policy choices. This book will be of interest to scholars of the European neutral states, NATO and European security, as well as to those interested in understanding the dynamics behind states foreign policy choices.

Intro -- Acknowledgements -- Contents -- Contributors -- List of Abbreviations -- List of Boxes -- Chapter 1: Introduction: The European Neutral States -- Who Are the European Neutral States? -- The European Neutrals: Existing Academic Debates -- Overview of the Book -- References -- Chapter 2: European Neutrality in Historical Perspective -- The Concept of Neutrality -- European Neutrality: From the Modern State System to the Cold War -- The Cold War -- The Post-Cold War Era -- Conclusion -- References -- Chapter 3: NATO's Partnerships -- The Partnership for Peace -- NATO's Partnership Policy -- Partnership and Membership: What Link? -- Conclusion -- References -- Chapter 4: 'The Allied Partner': Sweden and NATO Through the Realist-Idealist Lens -- The Past: Secret Cooperation During the Cold War -- The Present: Open Cooperation After the Cold War -- Conclusion -- References -- Chapter 5: Finland and NATO: Strategic Choices and Identity Conceptions -- History and Its Strategic Lessons -- Post-Cold War Evolution -- Developing Relations with NATO -- The Domestic Politics of NATO Membership -- NATO Membership as a Security Question -- Influence as an Issue -- Identity Matters -- Rational and Psychological Factors -- The Factors for Change -- Conclusion -- References -- Chapter 6: Austria: Engaged Neutrality -- Historical Background -- International Solidarity -- The Concepts of Collective Defence and Neutrality: Unequal Partners -- The European Union and Neutrality -- Conclusion: Engaged Neutrality -- References -- Chapter 7: Ireland and NATO: A Distinctly Low-Profile Partnership -- History -- Post-Cold War Evolution -- The Domestic Politics of Security Policy and NATO -- Cooperation Within PfP -- Peacekeeping and Crisis Management -- Conclusion -- References -- Chapter 8: Switzerland and NATO: From Non-­Relationship to Cautious Partnership

This fully revised new edition develops a comprehensive framework for understanding the key security issues facing Europe. The book addresses key developments in the global and European security environment, such as the impact of the global financial crisis, the rising power of the BRIC countries and NATO's involvement in the Arab Spring uprisings

Based on a major international research project undertaken by The Institute for East West Studies, this book provides the first comprehensive analysis of an important, but little explored, feature of post-Cold War Europe: the emergence of subregional cooperation in areas such as the Barents, the Baltic Sea, Central Europe and the Black Sea. It analyses the role of subregional cooperation in the new Europe, provides detailed case studies of the new subregional groups and examines their relations with NATO and the European Union.

Against the background of increased tensions between the West and Russia, this article assesses the prospects for continued peace in Europe. The end of the East-West conflict upended the Cold War rules of the game in Europe's east, creating an enduring source of conflict. Balanced against this, however, are a range of factors which act as powerful bulwarks against war: a European balance of power best characterised as modified bipolarity, the continued pacifying effect of nuclear weapons, energy interdependence between Russia and Europe, the deterrent effect of the likely consequences of any extended conventional war, and the continuing impact of the post-1945 satellite reconnaissance revolution. Post-Cold War Western and Russian crisis behaviour also suggests important elements of restraint and mutual communication. Despite the downturn in Russo-Western relations, one can be cautiously optimistic that the long peace in Europe will continue.

AbstractThis article argues that the existing literature on EU foreign, security and defence strategy has paid insufficient attention to two basic prior questions: what is strategy? And what constitutes good strategy? Judged against a baseline definition of good strategy, the EU lacks an agreed assessment of its external environment, struggles to prioritize competing foreign policy objectives, avoids difficult foreign policy choices, and often lacks the ways and means necessary to achieve its goals, yet is reluctant to modify its objectives. These problems reflect the EU's character as a polity: differences amongst member states and the primarily intergovernmental nature of EU foreign, security and defence decision‐making fundamentally constrain the Union's ability to develop and implement external strategy. The EU is better understood as an astrategic actor: an actor without a strategy in the proper meaning of the word and one that will continue to find it difficult to develop such a strategy.

This talk will reflect on the challenges of linking academic programmes and teaching, on the one hand, with the policy-makers and practitioners, on the other, with particular reference to the discipline of international relations (which focuses on relations between states, international organisations and global political and socio-economic dynamics). The talk will draw on experience from University College Cork's Department of Government and Politics, which has an extensive, market-leading work placement programme, and from UCC's MSc International Public Policy and Diplomacy, which is a new model of international relations masters seeking to bridge academia and the world of policy. Our experience shows that it is possible to link academia and the world of policy and practitioners, but that it is not easy, even in an apparently very policy-oriented discipline, and that it involves significant challenges. The talk will highlight a number of challenges involved in linking the academic study of international relations with the 'real world' of international politics: bridging academia and policy/practitioners is not easy in the disciplines of political science and international relations – the two have different needs and, often, different languages; the development and maintenance of work placements and other elements of engagement with policymakers and practitioners involves very significant workload and needs to be properly supported in terms of staffing and infrastructure; and in politics and international relations, the skill sets which policy-makers and practitioners need often differ from those that universities normally provide. Finding the 'right' balance between academic disciplinary requirements/standards and the needs of employers is a difficult task.

2013 marked the tenth anniversary of the European Union's Strategy Against the Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction. Since 2003 the EU has taken significant strides in institutionalizing cooperation on non-proliferation policy and establishing itself as an actor in the sphere of non-proliferation. The EU is now a prominent player in all the major multilateral frameworks relating to non-proliferation and WMD arms control, as well as a leading provider of financial and technical assistance in support of non-proliferation. The impact of the EU's non-proliferation strategy, however, has been less than might have been hoped. In the main multilateral arms control and non-proliferation frameworks, the EU has come up against basic political obstacles that cannot be easily overcome. In terms of key countries and regions of proliferation concern, the EU lacks the leverage to decisively shape the WMD-related decisions of the states concerned. Nevertheless, the EU's non-proliferation strategy is a sensible one: the Union's Member States share an important interest in constraining WMD proliferation, their ability to advance this objective is increased by acting collectively and there is no readily available alternative strategy. The lessons of the first decade of that strategy, however, are that there are limits to what the EU can achieve in the sphere of non-proliferation and that progress will be incremental rather than dramatic.