Suchergebnisse

In its external regional policy (European interregionalism), the European Union attaches great importance to Latin-Caribbean America, taking into account its enormous economic, market, human and raw material potential. The European Union is developing cooperation with Latin American countries in a very competitive environment. The United States have the traditional influence in the region. The US for centuries have been involved in the formation of the region. Since 2014, China has pushed the EU to the third place in terms of economic cooperation with Latin American countries. The European Union responds to this competition with a well-structured policy of investment and offers mutually beneficial cooperation to Latin American regional institutions. The EU heeds the new requests of the Latin American regional community. This creates certain competitive advantages for the European Union in the region.Key words: European Union, Latin-Caribbean America, European Interregionalism, MERCOSUR, UNASUR, the Andean Community, the San Jose Group, the Rio Group, ALBA, CELAC. ; В своей внешней региональной политике (европейский интеррегионализм) Европейский союз придает важное значение Латинско-Карибской Америке, учитывая ее огромный экономический, рыночный, человеческий и сырьевой потенциал. Европейский союз развивает сотрудничество с латиноамериканскими странами в острой конкурентной среде, прежде всего с США и Китаем. Традиционное влияние в регионе имеют США. В то время как Китай с 2014 г. потеснил ЕС на третье место по объему экономического сотрудничества со странами Латинско-Карибской Америки. Европейский союз стремится противопоставить США и Китаю в регионе хорошо структурированную политику инвестиций и взаимовыгодного сотрудничества с латиноамериканскими региональными институтами, учитывающую новые запросы латиноамериканского регионального сообщества. Это придает Европейскому союзу определенные конкурентные преимущества в регионе.Ключевые слова: Европейский союз, Латинско-Карибская Америка, европейский интеррегионализм, Сообщество латиноамериканских и карибских государств, МЕРКОСУР, УНАСУР, Андское сообщество, группа Сан-Хосе, группа Рио, АЛБА.

The article starts from an analysis of S.P. Huntington's theory of the clash of civilizations and puts in evidence one of its critical points, i.e. the fact that Huntington does not pay any attention to the development by the EU of a particular kind of actorness through the promotion of interregionalism worldwide. Tracing the history of the different phases of success and decline of both theories, the article attempts to test their persistent explanatory and analytical capacity in relation to current developments in the international arena as well as in the academic context.

The relationship between the European Union and the Latin American region is a part of the logic of inter-regionalism. This article approaches this relation particularly as regards Latin American integration. To this end, it first addresses a conceptual overview (considering the academic implications of concepts such as, e.g., region, regionalism, and inter-regionalism, among others). A documentary method was used for verifying the existence of an interregional strategy for the European Union and the possible Americanization of such a strategy. As a result of this, the existence of this strategy has translated, among other things, into the negotiation of a Free Trade Agreement between the European Union and Andean Community of Nations (FTA EU-ACN). Two major conclusions can be drawn from this article. On the one hand, there is evidence of said Americanization, and on the other hand, the second conclusion is that the international presence of Europe as a regional actor has grown strong. This strength is comparable with the strengthening of its soft power worldwide. ; La relación Unión Europea - América Latina se inscribe en la lógica del interregionalismo. En este artículo se aborda esa relación, especialmente en lo que concierne a la integración de América Latina. Para ello se ofrece, en un primer momento un panorama conceptual (desde las implicaciones académicas de región, regionalismo e interregionalismo, entre otros). Mediante el método documental se verificó la existencia de una estrategia interregional de la Unión Europea y la posible norteamericanización de la misma. Se obtuvo como resultado que la existencia de la estrategia se ha traducido (entre otras) en la negociación del Tratado de Libre Comercio entre la Unión Europea y la Comunidad Andina de Naciones (TLC UE-CAN). Se llegó finalmente a dos conclusiones mayores. La primera es la constatación de dicha norteamericanización. La segunda es que se observa una profundización de la presencia internacional de Europa como actor regional y que esto es comparable con la profundización de su poder blando en el mundo.

The European Union pursues an active foreign policy both in a form of bilateral ties with sovereign states and while interacting with regional associations. The article considers the strategic attractiveness of the Persian Gulf region for the European Union as well as EU's external regional policy (European interregionalism) towards the Gulf Cooperation Council. The paper analyzes the methodological basis of the European interregionalism, the goals and specific directions of the EU's policy in the region, the mechanisms for its implementation, strategic changes in the EU's policy while taking into account the Arab Spring. The authors conclude that the cooperation initially planned in Brussels on the basis of exporting the liberal values could not stand the test of the Arab Spring. In the Global Strategy of 2016 the EU introduced changes that envisage a differentiated approach in the policy of European interregionalism. In the final part, the authors draw the conclusion about the effectiveness of the new EU Global strategy towards the GCC. © 2019 Institute of Europe Russian Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Abstract Interregionalism has been increasingly used to advance cooperation on regional and global security challenges. This study examines three interregional dialogues comprising East Asia, Europe, and Latin America. Each interregional security agenda reflects specific concerns and different evolving paths. Insights from 'multilateral security governance' approaches can reinforce the analysis of how security agendas emerge and change, and how their related norms and practices evolve.

Regionalism as an international phenomenon dates back to post-WWII decades. It is well studied both in theoretical and practical perspective. It is quite clear to most researchers what the "old" or "new" regionalism is, and what kind of logic stands behind it. However, the classic theory of regionalism does not explain contemporary processes of interregional and transregional integration, which we witness today. A common point of the three approaches (namely, regionalism, interregionalism and transregionalism) is that all of them are related to globalization. Each of these approaches constitutes a response to globalisation's challenges, which varies from region to region. Nevertheless, their aims and scope differ greatly. Regionalism represents interstate and transnational co-operation within an international region. It is derived from the logic of institutionalized interactions that may take a range of forms—from regular consultations on the ministerial level to creation of supranational bodies and common policies. Interregional co-operation implies institutionalized agreements between states representing two or more regions, which can act either on their own (i.e. quasi-interregionalism, or hybrid interregionalism) or as a part of a regional organization / informal regional group of states. The logic of interregionalism dwells on the wish for widening the geographic scope of economic interaction by opening new regional markets. Transregional cooperation, on the contrary, is promoted primarily by political factors, such as the wish of some states, which share common values, to unite their efforts in order to play a greater role in global governance. It is argued that the study of regionalism, interregionalism and transregionalism can make an essential contribution to the development of the contemporary theory of international relations. ; Регионализм как феномен международных отношений имеет давнюю историю, берущую начало в послевоенные годы. Он хорошо изучен как теоретически, так и практически. Исследователям не составляет труда идентифицировать «старый» и «новый» регионализм, объяснить его логику. Вместе с тем, классическая теория регионализма не позволяет осмыслить современные процессы межрегиональной и трансрегиональной интеграции, разворачивающиеся на наших глазах. Общим для них является то, что все они связаны с процессом глобализации и представляют собой коллективную реакцию на него, варьирующуюся от региона к региону. Вместе с тем, цели и масштаб их существенно разнятся. Регионализм опирается на межгосударственное и, шире, транснациональное сотрудничество в пределах международного региона. Он подчиняется логике установления институционализированных взаимосвязей, которые могут принимать различные формы – от регулярных консультаций на министерском уровне до создания наднациональных органов и выработки общей согласованной политики. Межрегиональное сотрудничество развивается на базе институционализированных соглашений между государствами-представителями двух и более международных регионов, которые могут выступать как поодиночке (так называемый квази- или гибридный межрегионализм), так и в составе региональной организации или неформального регионального блока. Логика межрегионализма основывается на стремлении расширить географию экономического взаимодействия за счёт выхода на новые региональные рынки. В основе трансрегионального сотрудничества, напротив, лежат, в первую очередь, политические факторы, а именно, стремление отдельных государств, разделяющих общие ценности, объединиться ради более эффективного участия в глобальном управлении. Представляется, что исследования регионализма, межрегионализма и трансрегионализма могут внести существенный вклад в развитие современной теории международных отношений.

This article is part of the 'EU-NormCon research project' ('Normative contestation in Europe: Implications for the EU in a changing global order') funded by the National R+D Plan of the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness (CSO2016-79205-P). ; Interregionalism has been increasingly used to advance cooperation on regional and global security challenges. This study examines three interregional dialogues comprising East Asia, Europe, and Latin America. Each interregional security agenda reflects specific concerns and different evolving paths. Insights from 'multilateral security governance' approaches can reinforce the analysis of how security agendas emerge and change, and how their related norms and practices evolve.

The article starts from an analysis of S.P. Huntington's theory of the clash of civilizations and puts in evidence one of its critical points, that is that Huntington doesn't pay any attention to the development by the EU of a particular kind of actorness through the promotion of inter-regionalism worldwide. Tracing the history of the different phases of success and decline of both theories, the article tries to test their persistent explanatory and analytical capacity in relation to current developments in the international arena and in the academic context.

Abstract Brazil-European Union relations punch below their weight. Cooperation takes place at three levels: relations with European Union (EU) member states, Brazil`s partnership with Brussels, and EU-MERCOSUR negotiations. This multilevel governance contrasts with poor results: there is no free trade agreement, development cooperation became irrelevant, and international positions rarely converge. The article explores the reasons for the underperformance by comparing foreign policy shifts in Brazil and the EU, and analyzing multilevel governance in selected sectors of cooperation. It is based on four assumptions: multilevel relations are uncoordinated, idealist inter-regionalism doesn't work, and crisis-driven, liberal realist foreign policies in Brazil and the EU facilitate bilateralism.

This inception paper expatiates on the conditions that are necessary in determining the effectiveness of the European Union's (the EU's) leadership in science and cultural diplomacy (SCD) on regionalism and inter-regionalism in the South. These conditions include willingness, capacity and acceptance. Willingness delineates the scope of the ambition of the EU in SCD. Capacity covers elements that pertain to breadth and depth/ quality and quantity of resources mobilized and available to lead SCD that delivers results. Acceptance refers to the nature of the credibility that the EU is able to command both within and outside the Union respecting its influence to attract followers both amongst Member States of the Union as well as third states, regional and international organizations. The emphasis of the paper is on effectiveness in terms of impact on regionalism and inter-regionalism in the South. Focus is placed on regional and inter-regional processes/ initiatives in Africa, Southeast Asia and Latin America.

The European Union (EU) has adopted a very generous region-to-region approach towards Latin America in recent decades. However, although the EU adopted the same interregional strategy across different policy areas, the quality of interregional interaction (and success) vary significantly. An interesting case of EU-driven interregionalism is the case of EU-Latin America science diplomacy. In this policy area, it seems that the EU's interregional approach has been particularly successful, as both regions continuously call for the creation and strengthening of a "Common Area for Higher Education, Research and Technology", and various high-level working groups and action plans have been established to achieve this end. Yet, a critical assessment of EU-Latin America interregional cooperation in the field of science, higher education and innovation has not been produced to date. This paper aims to fill this notable academic (and policy-making) gap by providing a thorough overview of (1) the EU's drivers behind this particular foreign policy action and the chosen interregional approach; (2) the applied policy instruments and actions of this specific case of EU-Latin American interregional relations; and (3) achieved impact of this specific case of EU-Latin American interregional relations.

This article provides a contextualisation for the study of relations between the European Union and Africa. We identify seven major trends and drivers that have characterised the literature surrounding the relationship: colonial legacy, meanings of partnership, asymmetry, market liberalisation, politicisation, regional actorness and the changing global order. In the literature, these elements tend to be examined separately or in unidirectional perspectives. This article argues, however, that each element invariably influences both sides, although not necessarily in the same manner or to the same effect. In addition, most elements are intertwined and influence each other. These entanglements become visible when examining all seven elements as part of one context. This article suggests that proceeding on an assumption of mutual influence and highlighting the intertwined nature of the different elements constitutes a framework that serves this special issue's efforts to recalibrate African and European perspectives in the scholarship. ; SCOPUS: ar.j ; info:eu-repo/semantics/published

The birregional strategic partnership between the EU and LAC initiated in 1999, has evolved to adapt to both; changes in the global context and the restructuring of power, and changes in regional integration processes that have altered the balance and nature of the relationship. Currently the EU and LAC have multiple levels of relationship - inter-regional, trans-regional and sub-regional - comprising a heterogeneous set of actors in a complex interregionalism scheme, surpassing the traditional categories of the studies on nterregionalism. ; La Asociación estratégica birregional entre la UE y ALC iniciada en 1999, ha evolucionado para adaptarse tanto los cambios en el contexto global y la re-estructuración del poder, como a transformaciones en los procesos de integración regional que han alterado el equilibrio y la naturaleza de la relación. Actualmente la UE y ALC tienen múltiples niveles de relación –global, inter-regional, transregional y sub-regional– abarcando un conjunto de actores heterogéneos en un esquema de interregionalismo complejo, que sobrepasa las categorías tradicionales de los estudios sobre interregionalismo.

Today's world is witnessing the remarkable development of transregional ties between distinct regions and powers within the international system evolving towards multipolarity. However, the essence of transregionalism remains understudied to the extent that there is no clear consensus for which terminology should be used to define this phenomenon. The article compares existing approaches to transregionalism conceptualization, analyzes the differences in the use of terms, and discusses the global impact of transregional relations on world politics and economy. The author advocates a term transregionalism (instead of interregionalism, crossregionalism, macroregionalization etc.) and suggests its definition. ; В современном мире все активнее набирают силу трансрегиональные процессы, вовлекающие в себя целые регионы и основные полюсы эволюционирующей к полицентричности мировой системы. При этом сам феномен по-прежнему остается недостаточно изученным, о чем свидетельствует отсутствие консенсуса даже на этапе выбора терминологии. В настоящей статье сравниваются различные подходы к концептуализации трансрегионализма, анализируются используемые термины, а также рассматривается влияние трансрегионализма на мировую политику и экономику. Автор обосновывает целесообразность использования термина «трансрегионализм» (вместо используемых терминов «интеррегионализм», «кроссрегионализм», «макрорегионализация» и т.д.) и предлагает его определение.

В современном мире все активнее набирают силу трансрегиональные процессы, вовлекающие в себя целые регионы и основные полюсы эволюционирующей к полицентричности мировой системы. При этом сам феномен по-прежнему остается недостаточно изученным, о чем свидетельствует отсутствие консенсуса даже на этапе выбора терминологии. В настоящей статье сравниваются различные подходы к концептуализации трансрегионализма, анализируются используемые термины, а также рассматривается влияние трансрегионализма на мировую политику и экономику. Автор обосновывает целесообразность использования термина «трансрегионализм» (вместо используемых терминов «интеррегионализм», «кроссрегионализм», «макрорегионализация» и т.д.) и предлагает его определение. ; Today's world is witnessing the remarkable development of transregional ties between distinct regions and powers within the international system evolving towards multipolarity. However, the essence of transregionalism remains understudied to the extent that there is no clear consensus for which terminology should be used to defi ne this phenomenon. The article compares existing approaches to transregionalism conceptualization, analyzes the differences in the use of terms, and discusses the global impact of transregional relations on world politics and economy. The author advocates a term transregionalism (instead of interregionalism, crossregionalism, macroregionalization etc.) and suggests its defi nition.