Samenvatting
Europe-Russia relations are caught in a paradox. From a European perspective, it is
perfectly possible to have ample respect for the artful diplomacy of the Russian Federation and great sympathy for the Russian people, and at the same time worry that the Russian regime is treating Europeans as adversaries. To be convinced that there is little to be gained from conflict, does not mean that conflict is inconceivable. The recent visit by the European High Representative Josep Borrell to Moscow shows that such concerns are increasingly widespread. Indeed, European policy communities are becoming convinced of the notion that they are Russia’s adversary – for the simple reason that Russia treats them as such. In this respect European policies are largely articulated on the basis of a reactive mindset (unlike the more pro-active policies of the US). Against this background, one may wonder what the purpose of is “improving relations”. If the price of improved relations is acquiescence, then improving relations is arguably increasing the risk of conflict yet to come. The question at hand is what Europeans themselves could do to escape this paradox. This essay proposes four hypotheses addressing this question. Unsurprisingly, the overall conclusion is that reciprocity is key.
perfectly possible to have ample respect for the artful diplomacy of the Russian Federation and great sympathy for the Russian people, and at the same time worry that the Russian regime is treating Europeans as adversaries. To be convinced that there is little to be gained from conflict, does not mean that conflict is inconceivable. The recent visit by the European High Representative Josep Borrell to Moscow shows that such concerns are increasingly widespread. Indeed, European policy communities are becoming convinced of the notion that they are Russia’s adversary – for the simple reason that Russia treats them as such. In this respect European policies are largely articulated on the basis of a reactive mindset (unlike the more pro-active policies of the US). Against this background, one may wonder what the purpose of is “improving relations”. If the price of improved relations is acquiescence, then improving relations is arguably increasing the risk of conflict yet to come. The question at hand is what Europeans themselves could do to escape this paradox. This essay proposes four hypotheses addressing this question. Unsurprisingly, the overall conclusion is that reciprocity is key.
| Originele taal-2 | English |
|---|---|
| Titel | How to reverse in a one-way street |
| Redacteuren | Marc Franco |
| Plaats van productie | Brussels |
| Uitgeverij | Egmont - Royal Institute for International Relations |
| Pagina's | 10-12 |
| Aantal pagina's | 3 |
| Volume | 114 |
| ISBN van elektronische versie | 979-10-96843-28-2 |
| Status | Published - 7 sep. 2021 |
| Evenement | How to reverse in a one way street - Online Duur: 25 mei 2021 → 25 mei 2021 |
Publicatie series
| Naam | Egmont Papers |
|---|---|
| Nummer | 114 |
Seminar
| Seminar | How to reverse in a one way street |
|---|---|
| Periode | 25/05/21 → 25/05/21 |
Bibliografische nota
The present publication is the result of a restricted webinar, organized by the EGMONT Institute and the Institute of Europe of the Russian Academy of Sciences. The event took place on Tuesday 25 May. The text is published in parallel by the two institutions.Vingerafdruk
Duik in de onderzoeksthema's van 'Europe-Russia Relations: Reciprocity Is Key'. Samen vormen ze een unieke vingerafdruk.Citeer dit
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver