Suchergebnisse

The global Indian and Pacific region is playing an increasing role in modern international relations. At the beginning of the XXI century, this region is a crossroads of different interests of great powers. The United States continues to play a leading role. The Pentagon introduced the concept of the Indo-Pacific region. From a military-strategic point of view, this concept is a symbol of American-Chinese competition. This process intensified under the Trump administration in 2017-2020. The Biden administration is consolidating regional democracies. Australia, India and Japan play a key role in this process. The European Union promotes the values and ideas of democracy in the Indo-Pacific region. China is an important trading partner of the EU. The intensification of the Sino-US confrontation in early 2022 has blocked the entry into force of the China-EU Free Trade and Investment Agreement. In early 2022, the United States, Great Britain and Australia announced the creation of a military alliance. India and Japan are concerned about China's growing military power. The Republic of Korea has a similar position. Hotspots of confrontation in the region are Taiwan, the Korean Peninsula, the disputed Spratly Islands. The Indo-Pakistani conflict around Kashmir destabilizes regional security. The Indo-Pacific region is an example of a complex multipolar system of international relations. This system is more risky in terms of security. The functioning of internal regional and interregional communication networks is complicated by military-technical, environmental, demographic, socio-cultural, interstate contradictions. The formation of a regional security system is limited by political problems. Post-modern democracies, such as Australia, India, Japan and the modernized Chinese autocracy and the North Korean Stalinist dictatorship, coexist in the Indo-Pacific region. The balance of interests is maintained by the United States and the European Union. This balance is volatile and unpredictable

The choice between modern nation-building and integration into supranational European and Euro-Atlantic structures remains a strategic challenge for the Balkan countries. Success in solving this problem of predominantly mono-ethnic Croatia and Slovenia has not yet become a model to follow. Serbian and Albanian national issues cannot be resolved. Serbia's defeat in the Balkan wars of 1991–1999 over the creation of a "Greater Serbia" led to the country's territorial fragmentation. Two Albanian national states emerged in the Balkans. Attempts to create a union of Kosovo and Albania could turn the region into a whirlpool of ultra-nationalist contradictions. The European Union has started accession negotiations with Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, the Republic of Northern Macedonia, Serbia and Montenegro. The success of these negotiations depends on the readiness of the EU and the ability of these Balkan states to adopt European norms and rules. The accession of all Balkan nation-states to the European Union must finally close the "Balkan window" of the vulnerability of the united Europe. Nation-building in the Balkans on the basis of ethnic nationalism sharply contradicts the purpose and current values of the European integration process. For more than three decades, the EU has been pursuing a policy of human rights, the rule of law, democracy and economic development in the Balkans. The region remains vulnerable to the influences of non-European geopolitical powers: the United States, Russia, Turkey, and China. The further scenario of the great Balkan geopolitical game mainly depends on the pro-European national consolidation of the Balkan peoples and the effectiveness of the European Union's strategy in the Balkans.

The European Union has met Donald Trump's presidency in a crisis, caused by Britain's exit, quarrels over migration policy and prospects for European integration. Trump has abandoned a project to create a transatlantic free trade area. He demanded a one-sided trade advantage for the United States. The rejection of the liberal project of multilateral foreign policy contributed to the deepening of contradictions between the EU and the US in the field of trade, environment, the regime of international disarmament treaties, the algorithm for resolving regional conflicts. The Trump era in US foreign policy was a time of abandoning liberal globalism. But it is impossible to realize this task in one cadence. The question is whether it is possible for Democrats to fully restore liberal globalism in equal cooperation with the European Union.Trump has abandoned the project of a transatlantic free trade area between the United States and the European Union. This shocked the European elites. Differences in approaches to world trade contributed to the coolness. The European Union is promoting a liberal approach. Trump insisted on the priority of the patronage of American interests. As a result, the tradition of relationships has suffered. Until 2017, the United States bought European goods and paid the most to the NATO budget. Trump demanded trade parity and more European funding for NATO. European elites perceived Trump's approach to migration issues as unacceptable. Trump's policy on international conflicts has become another reason for mutual misunderstanding. Trump recognized Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and helped establish diplomatic relations between Israel and the United Arab Emirates. This has become a challenge for the European Union's Middle East policy.

The choice between modern nation-building and integration into supranational European and Euro-Atlantic structures remains a strategic challenge for the Balkan countries. Success in solving this problem of predominantly mono-ethnic Croatia and Slovenia has not yet become a model to follow. Serbian and Albanian national issues cannot be resolved. Serbia's defeat in the Balkan wars of 1991–1999 over the creation of a "Greater Serbia" led to the country's territorial fragmentation. Two Albanian national states emerged in the Balkans. Attempts to create a union of Kosovo and Albania could turn the region into a whirlpool of ultra-nationalist contradictions. The European Union has started accession negotiations with Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, the Republic of Northern Macedonia, Serbia and Montenegro. The success of these negotiations depends on the readiness of the EU and the ability of these Balkan states to adopt European norms and rules. The accession of all Balkan nation-states to the European Union must finally close the "Balkan window" of the vulnerability of the united Europe. Nation-building in the Balkans on the basis of ethnic nationalism sharply contradicts the purpose and current values of the European integration process. For more than three decades, the EU has been pursuing a policy of human rights, the rule of law, democracy and economic development in the Balkans. The region remains vulnerable to the influences of non-European geopolitical powers: the United States, Russia, Turkey, and China. The further scenario of the great Balkan geopolitical game mainly depends on the pro-European national consolidation of the Balkan peoples and the effectiveness of the European Union's strategy in the Balkans.

The European Union has met Donald Trump's presidency in a crisis, caused by Britain's exit, quarrels over migration policy and prospects for European integration. Trump has abandoned a project to create a transatlantic free trade area. He demanded a one-sided trade advantage for the United States. The rejection of the liberal project of multilateral foreign policy contributed to the deepening of contradictions between the EU and the US in the field of trade, environment, the regime of international disarmament treaties, the algorithm for resolving regional conflicts. The Trump era in US foreign policy was a time of abandoning liberal globalism. But it is impossible to realize this task in one cadence. The question is whether it is possible for Democrats to fully restore liberal globalism in equal cooperation with the European Union.Trump has abandoned the project of a transatlantic free trade area between the United States and the European Union. This shocked the European elites. Differences in approaches to world trade contributed to the coolness. The European Union is promoting a liberal approach. Trump insisted on the priority of the patronage of American interests. As a result, the tradition of relationships has suffered. Until 2017, the United States bought European goods and paid the most to the NATO budget. Trump demanded trade parity and more European funding for NATO. European elites perceived Trump's approach to migration issues as unacceptable. Trump's policy on international conflicts has become another reason for mutual misunderstanding. Trump recognized Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and helped establish diplomatic relations between Israel and the United Arab Emirates. This has become a challenge for the European Union's Middle East policy.

The choice between modern nation-building and integration into supranational European and Euro-Atlantic structures remains a strategic challenge for the Balkan countries. Success in solving this problem of predominantly mono-ethnic Croatia and Slovenia has not yet become a model to follow. Serbian and Albanian national issues cannot be resolved. Serbia's defeat in the Balkan wars of 1991-1999 over the creation of a "Greater Serbia" led to the country's territorial fragmentation. Two Albanian national states emerged in the Balkans. Attempts to create a union of Kosovo and Albania could turn the region into a whirlpool of ultra-nationalist contradictions. The European Union has started accession negotiations with Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, the Republic of Northern Macedonia, Serbia and Montenegro. The success of these negotiations depends on the readiness of the EU and the ability of these Balkan states to adopt European norms and rules. The accession of all Balkan nation-states to the European Union must finally close the "Balkan window" of the vulnerability of the united Europe. Nation-building in the Balkans on the basis of ethnic nationalism sharply contradicts the purpose and current values of the European integration process. For more than three decades, the EU has been pursuing a policy of human rights, the rule of law, democracy and economic development in the Balkans. The region remains vulnerable to the influences of non-European geopolitical powers: the United States, Russia, Turkey, and China. The further scenario of the great Balkan geopolitical game mainly depends on the pro-European national consolidation of the Balkan peoples and the effectiveness of the European Union's strategy in the Balkans.

The European Union has met Donald Trump's presidency in a crisis, caused by Britain's exit, quarrels over migration policy and prospects for European integration. Trump has abandoned a project to create a transatlantic free trade area. He demanded a one-sided trade advantage for the United States. The rejection of the liberal project of multilateral foreign policy contributed to the deepening of contradictions between the EU and the US in the field of trade, environment, the regime of international disarmament treaties, the algorithm for resolving regional conflicts. The Trump era in US foreign policy was a time of abandoning liberal globalism. But it is impossible to realize this task in one cadence. The question is whether it is possible for Democrats to fully restore liberal globalism in equal cooperation with the European Union. Trump has abandoned the project of a transatlantic free trade area between the United States and the European Union. This shocked the European elites. Differences in approaches to world trade contributed to the coolness. The European Union is promoting a liberal approach. Trump insisted on the priority of the patronage of American interests. As a result, the tradition of relationships has suffered. Until 2017, the United States bought European goods and paid the most to the NATO budget. Trump demanded trade parity and more European funding for NATO. European elites perceived Trump's approach to migration issues as unacceptable. Trump's policy on international conflicts has become another reason for mutual misunderstanding. Trump recognized Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and helped establish diplomatic relations between Israel and the United Arab Emirates. This has become a challenge for the European Union's Middle East policy.

The politics of the European Union are different from other organizations and states due to the unique nature of the EU. The common institutions mix the intergovernmental and supranational aspects of the EU. A particular feature of Kosovo's internal policy development as an independent state and problematic reasons with a full international recognition of this fact is also highlighted. The research studied objective and subjective historical reasons for the state formation of Kosovo Albanians starting from the latent stage of this process within former Yugoslavia and then up to the declaration of Kosovo independence. The paper deals historical context European Balkan politic ; Політика Європейського Союзу диференціюється в залежності від організаційної природи об'єднання та інтересів держав-членів. Спільні інститути ЄС є міксом міжурядового і наддержавного аспектів Євросоюзу. Суверенізація Косово є викликом і випробуванням для міжнародного позиціонування Євросоюзу та європейської інтеграції загалом. У статті досліджені об'єктивні і суб'єктивні історичні передумови проголошення незалежності Косово від колишньої Югославії. У статті також висвітлено історичний контекст балканської політики Євросоюзу ; Политика Европейского Союза зависит от организационной природы и интересов государств-членов. Общие институты ЕС являются микстом межправительственного и надгосударственного аспектов Евросоюза. Суверенизация Косово является вызовом и испытанием для международного позиционирования ЕС и европейской интеграции в целом. В статье исследованы объективные и субъективные исторические предпосылки провозглашения независимости Косово от бывшей Югославии. В статье также рассмотрен исторический контекст балканской политики Евросоюза

The politics of the European Union are different from other organizations and states due to the unique nature of the EU. The common institutions mix the intergovernmental and supranational aspects of the EU. A particular feature of Kosovo's internal policy development as an independent state and problematic reasons with a full international recognition of this fact is also highlighted. The research studied objective and subjective historical reasons for the state formation of Kosovo Albanians starting from the latent stage of this process within former Yugoslavia and then up to the declaration of Kosovo independence. The paper deals historical context European Balkan politic ; Політика Європейського Союзу диференціюється в залежності від організаційної природи об'єднання та інтересів держав-членів. Спільні інститути ЄС є міксом міжурядового і наддержавного аспектів Євросоюзу. Суверенізація Косово є викликом і випробуванням для міжнародного позиціонування Євросоюзу та європейської інтеграції загалом. У статті досліджені об'єктивні і суб'єктивні історичні передумови проголошення незалежності Косово від колишньої Югославії. У статті також висвітлено історичний контекст балканської політики Євросоюзу ; Политика Европейского Союза зависит от организационной природы и интересов государств-членов. Общие институты ЕС являются микстом межправительственного и надгосударственного аспектов Евросоюза. Суверенизация Косово является вызовом и испытанием для международного позиционирования ЕС и европейской интеграции в целом. В статье исследованы объективные и субъективные исторические предпосылки провозглашения независимости Косово от бывшей Югославии. В статье также рассмотрен исторический контекст балканской политики Евросоюза