After the Vilnius fiasco: Who is to blame? What is to be done? CEPS Essay No. 8, 21 January 2014


Autoria(s): Emerson, Michael
Data(s)

01/01/2014

Resumo

All three parties principally responsible for the Vilnius fiasco are to blame, each in their very different way: the EU for having drafted agreements with an inadequate balance between incentives and obligations, and vulnerable as a result to Putin’s aim to torpedo the whole process in favour of his misconceived Eurasian Union, while Yanukovich tried playing geo-political games that left him personally and the Ukrainian state as Putin’s hostage. It will require a major recalibration of policies to get this unstable new status quo back onto sound strategic lines, and proposals are advanced along three tracks in parallel: for rebuilding the remnants of the EU’s neighbourhood policy, for attempting to get Russia to take Lisbon to Vladivostok seriously, and for promoting a Greater Eurasia concept fit for the 21st century that would embrace the whole of the European and Asian landmass.

Formato

application/pdf

Identificador

http://aei.pitt.edu/58416/1/Essay_No_8_ME_Vilnius_Fiasco.pdf

Emerson, Michael (2014) After the Vilnius fiasco: Who is to blame? What is to be done? CEPS Essay No. 8, 21 January 2014. UNSPECIFIED.

Relação

http://www.ceps.eu/book/after-vilnius-fiasco-who-blame-what-be-done

http://aei.pitt.edu/58416/

Palavras-Chave #European Neighbourhood Policy
Tipo

Other

NonPeerReviewed