Samual Charap: Frozen Conflicts in Eurasia: the Cyprus Analogy, Center for American Progress, April 16

Scott Gehlbach and Philip Keefer: Private Investment and the Institutionalization of Collective Action in Autocracies: Ruling Parties and Legislatures, Journal of Politics, April 2012

Vladimir Gelman: Vosstanovit negativnyy konsensus uroki dlya rossiyskoy oppozitsii (Re-establish negative consensus: lessons for Russian opposition), op-ed in Russian, slon.ru; Video of lecture: How one should not pursuse social research (YouTube)

Dmitry Gorenburg: Russia fears demonstration effects of Syrian uprising, Russian Military Reform, April, 25; Russia in the Arctic: Editor’s Introduction, Russian Military Reform, April 17

Olexiy Haran: Yulia Tymoshenko’s plight becomes PR disaster for Ukraine, The Guardian, May 3

Debra Javeline and Elizabeth Brooks: “The Health Implications of Civic Association in Russia,” Social Science & Medicine, May 2012 Issue

Serhiy Kudelia: Interview on Ukrainian opposition, VOA News, May 5; Is Political Science Possible in Ukraine? (subscripton required), Krytyka, No. 1-2, 212

Tomila Lankina: Unbroken Links? From Imperial Human Capital to Post-Communist Modernisation, Europe-Asia Studies, Volume 64, Issue 4, 2012

Marlene Laruelle: Book Review of Russian Eurasianism: An Ideology of Empire, Insight Turkey, Volume 14, No. 1

Andrey Makarychev: Identity and representation in Russia’s regions: Adopting a critical theory perspective; Institute for East European Studies, Free University of Berlin, Germany, April; Recommended (subscription required): PONARS as a Transnational Epistemic Community: An Insider’s View, Problems of Post-Communism, Volume 59, Number 2, March-April

Sergei Markedonov: Opinion: the current negotiations between Azerbaijan and Russia on the Gabala Radar Facility, Commonspace.eu, April 23; Lessons from Moscow (English, Russian), Ekho Kavkaza, April 6

Sergey Minasyan: Interview: Все весомые политические силы Армении приняли правила игры (The major political forces of Armenia adopted the rules of the game), News.am, May 17; Геополитический треугольник Южного Кавказа (The Geopolitical Triangle of the South Caucasus), Iran.ru, May 16; Иран и динамика региональной гонки вооружений (Iran and the dynamics of regional arms race), Iran.ru, May 4

Harris Mylonas: Interview: Nightly Business Report, PBS, May 14; with Akis Georgakellos, Greece’s Elections and Its Aftermath, The Utopian Blog, May 9; Pre-Election Report: 2012 Greek Parliamentary Election, The Monkey Cage, May 5; with Keith Darden: The Promethean Dilemma: Third-Party State-building in Occupied Territories, Ethnopolitics, Issue 1, March, pp. 85-93; with Keith Darden: The Promethean Dilemma Revisited: A Response to Bardos, Christia, Gortzak &Siroky and Jenne, Ethnopolitics, Issue 1, March, pp. 109-112

Arkady Moshes: Белоруссия: новый раунд старой игры, in Russian, Ежедневный журнал, April 20

Nikolai Petrov: The Kremlin’s Filter Facade, The Moscow Times, April, 17; Regional Dimensions: Gubernatorial Election Genie Out of the Bottle, The St. Petersburg Times, April 4

Nicu Popescu: EU-Ukraine: from fatigue to irritation, Euobserver.com, April 30; Will Yanukovich become a Putin?, Euobserver.com, April 24; EU is showing its teeth, Euobserver.com, April 16; Rogozin’s Travails in Moldova, European Council on Foreign Relations Blog, April 2

Vladimir Popov: Пот, кровь и институты, Expert, in Russian, May 14

Nona Shahnazarian: Center–Northern Caucasus, chapter in Russian Federation 2012, Short-term prognosis, Eds. K. Tuur & V. Morozov, Tartu University Press, Vol. 11; Conference proceedings (in Russian): Русская диаспора через призму творчества С. Довлатова: абсурд, стёб, симулякр на перекрестке, Kuban Socio-Economic Institute, Краснодар, 2011; Published online (in Russian): В сб статей: Полевые записки: сборник эссе школы исследователей южного, Поселок Вале, 2010

Gulnaz Sharafutdinova: Ideas and Political Communication in the Service of Power in Russia and the Post-Soviet Space: Guest Editor’s Introduction and The Limits of the Matrix: Ideas and Power in Russian Politics of the 2000s, Problems of Post-Communism (subscription required), Volume 59, Number 3 / May-June 2012

Konstantin Sonin: The World Bank Chose Well, The Moscow Times, April 25; When Protesters Are Driven to Hunger Strikes, The Moscow Times, April 12

Ekaterina Stepanova: Illicit drugs and insurgency in Afghanistan, in Perspectives on Terrorism, Volume VI, Number 2, pp. 4-18, May 2012

Anar Valiyev: Critical Time for Azerbaijan-Iranian Relations, Eurasia Daily Monitor, April 23;  Undecided Fate of the Gabala Radar Station, Eurasia Daily Monitor Volume: 9 Issue: 72, April 11; The Quest for Political Reform in Azerbaijan: What Role for the Transatlantic Community, Istituto Affari Internazionali (IAI), Working Papers 12/12, April

Lucan A. Way: The Kantian Logic of Democratization: A Footnote on Levitsky and Way’s Competitive Authoritarianism: Hybrid Regimes after the Cold War, Abandoned Footnotes (blog), April 28

———–

PONARS Eurasia recently held a policy workshop in Tartu, Estonia. See the public session video and photos as well as the full agenda.

By Andrey Makarychev

The EU desperately tries to incorporate the human rights agenda into its nascent common foreign policy. These endeavors are especially debatable in the light of the unprecedented campaign for politically boycotting the Euro-2012 sports tournament to be held this summer in Ukraine. Yet in the forthcoming years there will be a number of other mega-events to be hosted by authoritarian rulers who will certainly try to use them to legitimize their reign, events such as the Eurovision song contest in Baku, Formula One in Bahrain, World Ice Hockey Championship in Minsk, and the Winter Olympics in Sochi in 2014.

The “More Europe” project, which held its recent meeting in Berlin, highlighted these issues. The political connotations of the football boycott story are obvious, and they stretch far beyond Ukraine. Casting an eye on the Olympic Games in Sochi, Russia – a place with its own list of political prisoners – might in due time also be subjected to similar sanctions, which, despite symbolism, may significantly damage the country’s international profile.

Yet the German position is by now, frankly speaking, far from perfect. In fact, Berlin – as well as Brussels – has sent a Realpolitik type of message to Kyiv: either Yulia Tymoshenko is allowed to leave the country for medical treatment or the EU blocks further negotiations on economic issues and does its best to isolate the Yanukovich government in Europe. Read the rest of this entry »

A diverse group of PONARS Eurasia members held a successful policy workshop in Tartu, Estonia, May 6-8, 2012, on the theme of “Continuity and Change: Examining Regime Trajectories and Security in East Europe and Eurasia.” The public session keynote address was given by Kristiina Ojuland, Member of the European Parliament and former Estonian Foreign Minister (2002-2005). Memos and Policy Perspectives volumes from the three-day event will be available at the end of May on this site. PONARS Eurasia thanks Viatcheslav Morozov and his team at the University of Tartu for their partnership. See the video, photos, and agenda. The photograph of participants below was made available by Harris Mylonas.

“With or without Putin, Russia wants to be part of Europe.”

by Andrey Makarychev

Vladimir Putin’s comeback to the Kremlin continues to ignite polemics about the future of Russia–EU relations. With an eye toward the upcoming PONARS Eurasia workshop in Estonia (see the previous post on this page), let me remark on what Kristina Ojuland, a former Estonian Foreign Minister, said recently at the informative “Europe meets Russia” conference in Berlin held by the Institute for Cultural Diplomacy.

Ojuland began by taking a very normative position, proclaiming that the “democracy agenda is back on the table again in EU’s Russia policy.” However, she insisted that Russia is an autocratic and corrupted regime, which makes the prospects of strategic partnership with the EU rather bleak.

Moreover, in her view, the EU – especially the European parliament – won’t continue a “business as usual” policy with Russia. More specifically Read the rest of this entry »

“Continuity and Change: Examining Regime Trajectories and Security in East Europe and Eurasia”

AGENDA

Friday, May 4
Presentation of “EU-Russia Watch” (new publication) by the Centre for EU-Russia Studies & University of Tartu, at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Tallinn

Sunday, May 6
1:00 p.m. – 2:30 p.m., Russia and the Middle East
Chair: Cory Welt, George Washington University

Dmitry Gorenburg, Harvard University  
“Fear of Instability or Protecting Russian Interests Abroad? Why Russia Supports Repressive Regimes in the Middle East”

Ekaterina Stepanova, IMEMO
“The Syria Crisis and the Making of Russian Foreign Policy”

Ayşe Zarakol, Washington and Lee University
“Turkey, Russia, and the Arab Spring”

3:00 p.m. – 4:30 p.m., Crossing Geopolitical Divides
Chair: Viatcheslav Morozov, University of Tartu

Read the rest of this entry »

With Russia’s entrance to the organization, U.S. trade policy toward Russia needs to be revisited.

By Cory Welt | April 30, 2012 | © Center for American Progress

The U.S. Congress in the coming months will consider whether to grant “permanent normal trade relations” with Russia as part of Russia’s pending accession to the World Trade Organization. Russian membership in the organization is a foregone conclusion, but U.S. trade relations with Russia would suffer if Congress balks at granting normal trade relations to Moscow once Russia joins the organization. Further complicating the issue is whether Congress should keep Russia on the list of nations subject to the Soviet-era Jackson-Vanik amendment—which still conditions U.S. trade on a country’s respect for freedom of emigration—or should replace it with a new piece of human rights legislation.

This is why Congress and the Obama administration need to thoughtfully consider the proposed Sergei Magnitsky Rule of Law Accountability Act of 2011, a bill with bipartisan support that seeks to impose visa bans and asset freezes on human rights violators in Russia. Many of its supporters want to condition permanent normal trade relations with Russia, including its “graduation” from the Jackson-Vanik amendment to the 1974 U.S. Trade Act, on the passage of the Magnitsky bill.

This urge to link the two decisions is understandable. It would be more effective, however, to consider the decisions separately but simultaneously. So let’s look at each decision in turn.  More

Cory Welt is the Associate Director of the Institute for European, Russian and Eurasian Studies at George Washington University’s Elliott School of International Affairs and an Adjunct Fellow at the Center for American Progress.

By Andrey Makarychev

One of the unintended consequences of the current economic crisis in the eurozone is the growing self-confidence of some “new Eastern Europeans” vis-à-vis Europe. The EU neighbors with strong European aspirations nowadays have all the reason to claim that it was not the EU enlargement but the mismanagement of public finances in some Mediterranean countries that caused huge problems for Europe.    

It is against this backdrop that one has to understand the self-encouraging statement, “We are hopefully not Greece,” which was made in Berlin by Serhiy Teriokhin, a member of the Verkhovna Rada and former Ukrainian Minister of the Economy. He spoke a couple of days ago at the German Council on Foreign Relations (DGAP), making a strong case for Ukraine’s European prospect which, in his opinion, lacks alternatives, since even the ruling Party of Regions hesitates to take an explicitly pro-Russian stand.

Pavel Klimkin, Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine, was even more straightforward, “I don’t like multi-vectoral policy as a term,” he said at another seminar held by the EU Commission office in Berlin a day later, and continued, “The issue of joining Europe is not contentious in the Ukrainian domestic debate, unlike the issues of legalizing the Russian language or NATO membership. Europeanization is a unifying idea for all Ukraine, and this is, in fact, the only policy Ukraine can pursue.”

Read the rest of this entry »

by Andrey Makarychev

The defense of the Khimki forest or protests against the destruction of historical downtowns in St. Petersburg or Kazan appear to be very close to the European experience of civic engagement in public policy.

In fact, Russia’s civil society – at least, its most politically active segment – faces exactly the same dilemma as in many European countries: should the anti-establishment forces form their own parties and thus try to integrate into the existing system with an expectation to change it from within (as the Pirate Parties in several European countries do), or should they keep their networked structures thus (re)inventing new ways of political influence, pressure and lobbying for specific changes.

There was certainly no better place to discuss new forms of political participation spreading across Europe than in a city market in Berlin’s famous district of Kreuzberg.

Read the rest of this entry »

by Andrey Makarychev

History has played an unalienable role in the formation of national identities in Eastern and Central Europe, locations in the last century deeply traumatized by the consecutive dictatorships of National Socialism and Communism. The overcoming of these experiences, despite the seemingly neutral language of professional historians, always contains strong political messages inscribed in today’s historical narratives in this part of Europe. Production of historical knowledge is by no means a spontaneous process, it has its own design and mechanisms of control. Yet there is a crucial difference, in this regard, between Europe, where the “epistemic power” is in the hands of professionals (“trans-national intellectuals,” to borrow a term from my friend, Sergey Akopov, from St. Petersburg), and Russia where professional debates were substituted by the state’s search for “historical truth” and its top-down imposition upon society. The very genre of the debates on the historical past in Russia were undermined by the state’s ambitions to monopolize the historical discourse and turn it into a battle for symbolic domination. The concomitantly politicized historical narratives presuppose taking sides and identifying “bad guys” eager to demolish the Russian grandeur. The poorly developed infrastructure of historical science in Russia turned the “collective Kremlin” into the key speaker on historical matters in Russia’s relations with its neighbors.

The conference “Region-State-Europe: Regional identities under dictatorship and democracy in Central and Eastern Europe” (which was convened by the European Network Remembrance and Solidarity in the Slovakian Embassy in Berlin) made clear that European historians, sociologists, and anthropologists, in comparison to their Russian counter-parts, are looking for different questions and research subjects. They are interested in finding out whether the national identities of countries, many quite recently “returned” to Europe, can accommodate a variety of subnational identities. European scholars are keen on discovering the meeting points between different cultures (for example, German and Tatar), regions of cultural diversity (Upper Silesia, Pomerania, Bukovina, Galicia, Sudeten, Dobruja), and a variety of cross-border experiences (Slovakia-Hungary, Poland-Slovakia, Germany-Poland, and so on). Eastern and Central Europe is viewed as a palimpsest of trans-national spaces, which defy top-down and state-controlled identities, and opt for the long discussed model of “Europe of regions,” rather than a more traditional “Europe of nation states.”

Read the rest of this entry »

Two decades and over five hundred scholarly issues later Demokratizatsiya: The Journal of Post-Soviet Demokratization, is enjoying a new beginning at the Institute for European, Russian and Eurasian Studies (IERES) at the George Washington University. This issue, “Twenty Years Since the Collapse of the USSR: What Have We Learned?“, draws (primarily) from presentations by members of the Program on New Approaches to Research and Security in Eurasia (PONARS Eurasia) that were given at a major policy conference in Washington, DC, in late 2011. This issue focuses on political economy, state-society relations, ethnic politics, and more, while the next issue will contain the second set of conference papers covering culture, history, and foreign policy.

“Demokratizatsiya is the indispensable international journal on post-Soviet democratization. It focuses on the end of the Soviet Union and the contemporary transformation of its successor states. From dissidents to presidents, readers recognize Demokratizatsiya as a tool for building institutions from the ashes of the USSR and communism. In each quarterly issue, distinguished scholars from around the world address politics, economics, social issues, legal systems, nationalities, international relations, and human rights.”

Demokratizatsiya welcomes submissions by recognized and emerging academics, journalists, practitioners, and other specialists. To subscribe call (717) 632-3535. Articles from this issue (Vol. 20, No. 2, Spring 2012) will be made available in the near future. Visit the IERES website for more information.