Cristian Nitoiu | Loughborough University in London (original) (raw)

Papers by Cristian Nitoiu

The Ukraine crisis and Russia's contribution to it have raised numerous concerns regarding the po... more The Ukraine crisis and Russia's contribution to it have raised numerous concerns regarding the possible emergence of a new 'Cold War' in Europe. At the same time, Ukraine's popular choice and enthusiasm for European integration expressed clearly on the streets of Kyiv seems to have caused Russia to adopt a (neo)revisionist attitude. In this context, relations between Russia and the EU (and the West for that matter) have been frozen and been directed on path towards conflict. This article analyses how the traditional dichotomy between conflict and cooperation in EU-Russia relations was replaced by conflict in the context of the Ukraine crisis. The article contends that the breakdown of the symbolic and peaceful cohabitation between the EU and Russia has been influenced by the fact that both actors have chosen to ignore key tensions that characterised their post-Cold War interactions. The article identifies three such tensions: the first emphasises divisions between member states and their impact on coagulating a common EU approach towards Russia; the second (geopolitical) tension highlights the almost mutually exclusive way in which the EU and Russia's security interests have developed in the post-Soviet space; finally, the third contends that a clash of values and worldviews between the EU and Russia makes conflict virtually unavoidable.

How can relations between the EU and Russia be repaired in the aftermath of the Ukraine crisis? C... more How can relations between the EU and Russia be repaired in the aftermath of the Ukraine crisis? Cristian Nitoiu summarises the findings of a new report on the future of EU­Russia relations which highlights three routes toward easing tensions: including Russia in the post­Cold War security order in Europe; creating meaningful linkages between the EU and the Eurasian Economic Union; and bridging the gap at a social level between the EU and Russia's citizens. The feeling that we are experiencing the emergence of a new Cold War is increasingly creeping into western and Russian discourse. While this idea was raised a few times during the last decade, many voices in the policy and academic communities rejected the grounds for claiming the re­emergence of a Cold War type of global standoff. Critics of the new Cold War thesis usually point to the fact that the current international context is not characterised by a global clash between two mutually exclusive economic, social and political ideologies. From a western perspective the absence of such a global confrontation is beyond doubt. However, the Kremlin has isolated itself, and seems to increasingly feel comfortable with the idea that the West is an existential threat which seeks to destroy the Russian way of being and its social and political practices. The ideology promoted by Russia is fuzzier than that of the Soviet Union, but the level of antagonism and confrontation embraced by policymakers and (unfortunately) large areas of the population are similar, if not more dangerous than during the Cold War. If during the proper Cold War discourse in Russia focused on avoiding full blown (nuclear) conflict and constructing a cooperative future, now discourse in the public sphere focuses on winning a future war against the West and surviving the harsh international environment. Nuclear weapons are not presented as a deterrent, but as tactical weapons in defending Russia from the West. We might not be living in a genuine Cold War, but we are definitely experiencing the tensest period in relations between the West and Russia, with the possibility for nuclear war arguably even greater than during the proper Cold War. In a new special report 'Avoiding a New 'Cold War': The Future of EU­Russia Relations in the Context of the Ukraine Crisis' we provide a series of clear policy recommendations on how to move discourse and policies from a deeply confrontational mind­set to a more cooperative one. Even though we rarely refer in the report to the idea of a new Cold War, this does not mean that we fail the recognise the serious challenge to peace and security in Europe posed by the current state of EU­Russia relations. Some of the contributors to the report specifically reject the notion that a new Cold War has emerged. However, as the rhetoric around the concept is increasingly being imprinted in Russian and western discourse, it is hard to overlook it.

The crisis in Ukraine, which began in 2013, has had significant implications for European securit... more The crisis in Ukraine, which began in 2013, has had significant implications for European security. Cristian Nitoiu identifies three perceived security threats implied by developments in Ukraine and how these threats may develop in future years: the threat of so called 'hybrid warfare' spilling over from the standoff between Ukraine and Russia; the threat posed by nuclear weapons; and the threat posed by more conventional forms of warfare. Perceptions of security threats are arguably more salient than actual threats, most times having a deep influence on the actions of states and other international actors. Hence, they play a key role in the way the EU, Kyiv and Moscow will shape their policies towards each other in the wake of the Ukraine crisis. While Russia can employ a wide range of capabilities, the EU and Ukraine have very few instruments to tackle security threats, be they traditional or non­traditional. In the case of Ukraine, but also more broadly the post­Soviet space, EU­Russia/Ukraine relations are affected by the perception of three types of security threats: so called 'hybrid warfare', nuclear threats and traditional military threats (i.e. territorial invasion). Hybrid warfare In the West and Ukraine the perception of the threat posed by hybrid war has recently increased sharply. The annexation of Crimea and the war in eastern Ukraine have put the spotlight on the way states engage in conflict by using a series of (sometimes innovative) tools and strategies. Hybrid war combines the use of conventional and non­conventional capabilities, the use of irregular troops, cyber­attacks, support for terrorist, rebel and criminal groups, or the use of the media and civil society for propaganda purposes. In eastern Ukraine in particular we have witnessed a combination of the use of both state and non­state actors by all the sides involved. States tend to use parts of this toolkit even in times of peace, however in such situations these instruments are not combined in order to pursue certain assertive foreign policy goals.

The Ukraine crisis and Russia's contribution to it have raised numerous concerns regarding the po... more The Ukraine crisis and Russia's contribution to it have raised numerous concerns regarding the possible emergence of a new 'Cold War' in Europe. At the same time, Ukraine's popular choice and enthusiasm for European integration expressed clearly on the streets of Kyiv seems to have caused Russia to adopt a (neo)revisionist attitude. In this context, relations between Russia and the EU (and the West for that matter) have been frozen and been directed on path towards conflict. This article analyses how the traditional dichotomy between conflict and cooperation in EU-Russia relations was replaced by conflict in the context of the Ukraine crisis. The article contends that the breakdown of the symbolic and peaceful cohabitation between the EU and Russia has been influenced by the fact that both actors have chosen to ignore key tensions that characterised their post-Cold War interactions. The article identifies three such tensions: the first emphasises divisions between member states and their impact on coagulating a common EU approach towards Russia; the second (geopolitical) tension highlights the almost mutually exclusive way in which the EU and Russia's security interests have developed in the post-Soviet space; finally, the third contends that a clash of values and worldviews between the EU and Russia makes conflict virtually unavoidable.

How can relations between the EU and Russia be repaired in the aftermath of the Ukraine crisis? C... more How can relations between the EU and Russia be repaired in the aftermath of the Ukraine crisis? Cristian Nitoiu summarises the findings of a new report on the future of EU­Russia relations which highlights three routes toward easing tensions: including Russia in the post­Cold War security order in Europe; creating meaningful linkages between the EU and the Eurasian Economic Union; and bridging the gap at a social level between the EU and Russia's citizens. The feeling that we are experiencing the emergence of a new Cold War is increasingly creeping into western and Russian discourse. While this idea was raised a few times during the last decade, many voices in the policy and academic communities rejected the grounds for claiming the re­emergence of a Cold War type of global standoff. Critics of the new Cold War thesis usually point to the fact that the current international context is not characterised by a global clash between two mutually exclusive economic, social and political ideologies. From a western perspective the absence of such a global confrontation is beyond doubt. However, the Kremlin has isolated itself, and seems to increasingly feel comfortable with the idea that the West is an existential threat which seeks to destroy the Russian way of being and its social and political practices. The ideology promoted by Russia is fuzzier than that of the Soviet Union, but the level of antagonism and confrontation embraced by policymakers and (unfortunately) large areas of the population are similar, if not more dangerous than during the Cold War. If during the proper Cold War discourse in Russia focused on avoiding full blown (nuclear) conflict and constructing a cooperative future, now discourse in the public sphere focuses on winning a future war against the West and surviving the harsh international environment. Nuclear weapons are not presented as a deterrent, but as tactical weapons in defending Russia from the West. We might not be living in a genuine Cold War, but we are definitely experiencing the tensest period in relations between the West and Russia, with the possibility for nuclear war arguably even greater than during the proper Cold War. In a new special report 'Avoiding a New 'Cold War': The Future of EU­Russia Relations in the Context of the Ukraine Crisis' we provide a series of clear policy recommendations on how to move discourse and policies from a deeply confrontational mind­set to a more cooperative one. Even though we rarely refer in the report to the idea of a new Cold War, this does not mean that we fail the recognise the serious challenge to peace and security in Europe posed by the current state of EU­Russia relations. Some of the contributors to the report specifically reject the notion that a new Cold War has emerged. However, as the rhetoric around the concept is increasingly being imprinted in Russian and western discourse, it is hard to overlook it.

The crisis in Ukraine, which began in 2013, has had significant implications for European securit... more The crisis in Ukraine, which began in 2013, has had significant implications for European security. Cristian Nitoiu identifies three perceived security threats implied by developments in Ukraine and how these threats may develop in future years: the threat of so called 'hybrid warfare' spilling over from the standoff between Ukraine and Russia; the threat posed by nuclear weapons; and the threat posed by more conventional forms of warfare. Perceptions of security threats are arguably more salient than actual threats, most times having a deep influence on the actions of states and other international actors. Hence, they play a key role in the way the EU, Kyiv and Moscow will shape their policies towards each other in the wake of the Ukraine crisis. While Russia can employ a wide range of capabilities, the EU and Ukraine have very few instruments to tackle security threats, be they traditional or non­traditional. In the case of Ukraine, but also more broadly the post­Soviet space, EU­Russia/Ukraine relations are affected by the perception of three types of security threats: so called 'hybrid warfare', nuclear threats and traditional military threats (i.e. territorial invasion). Hybrid warfare In the West and Ukraine the perception of the threat posed by hybrid war has recently increased sharply. The annexation of Crimea and the war in eastern Ukraine have put the spotlight on the way states engage in conflict by using a series of (sometimes innovative) tools and strategies. Hybrid war combines the use of conventional and non­conventional capabilities, the use of irregular troops, cyber­attacks, support for terrorist, rebel and criminal groups, or the use of the media and civil society for propaganda purposes. In eastern Ukraine in particular we have witnessed a combination of the use of both state and non­state actors by all the sides involved. States tend to use parts of this toolkit even in times of peace, however in such situations these instruments are not combined in order to pursue certain assertive foreign policy goals.

The nation states in the Black Sea area have initiated many co-operative policies but the area al... more The nation states in the Black Sea area have initiated many co-operative policies but the area also sees numerous tensions between neighboring states. The conflict-co-operation paradox, along with ethnic fragmentation and shared culture, are two of the most salient features of the Black Sea Area. These paradoxes are not the only force in the evolution of the region though. There are also issues such as ethnic and national identity, the failure of democratization, energy and resources, as well as the influence of other powers such as Russia, the EU and the USA.

The key questions asked by the authors in this book are: to what extent is there an emerging regionalism in the Black Sea area? Is the Black Sea a region? What are the common interests shared by the former USSR states, the three EU member states neighboring the Black Sea - Bulgaria, Greece and Romania, and a NATO country - Turkey? Are the fault-lines dividing them more pervasive than the incentives for cooperation? Can we speak of a shared identity?

The first part of the book places the Black Sea problematique in a wider historical and spatial context. The authors then take a closer look at the region and examine further the structure of the Black Sea area. They offer a perspective on smaller actors with great ambitions, such as Azerbaijan and Romania, and go on to make a comparison between the emerging regionalism in the Black Sea area and regionalisms in other parts of the world.
Contents: Introduction, Ruxandra Ivan; Part I Identities, Space and History: Fluid histories: culture, community, and the longue durée of the Black Sea world, Alexander A. Bauer and Owen P. Doonan; Two axes, three seas: a geopolitical assessment of the wider Black Sea area, Nicolas Bárdos-Féltoronyi. Part II Structural Evolutions after the Cold War: Black Sea Cooperation and the Great Powers: The Black Sea area within the international system: the struggle for influence between the United States and Russia, Baptiste Chatré and Stéphane Delory; Energy politics in the Black Sea region, Radu Dudau and Armando Marques Guedes; Normative narratives of EU foreign policy in the Black Sea region, Cristian Nitoiu; The Russian factor in the wider Black Sea region: inconclusive status quo or a neo-imperial strategy?, Octavian Milevschi. Part III Regionalism in National Perspectives: New regionalization for a new regional leader? The role of Azerbaijan in the southern Caucasus, Samuel Lussac; Black Sea regional leadership in Romanian foreign policy discourse, Ruxandra Ivan. Part IV A Regionalism like No Other? The Black Sea in Comparative Perspective: Regionalism at the margins: East Central European and Black Sea regional cooperation initiatives in comparative perspective, Luciana Alexandra Ghica; A comparison of Caribbean and Black Sea regionalisms, Caterina Preda; Index.About the Editor: Ruxandra Ivan is a Lecturer at the University of Bucharest, Fellow, Romanian Academy, Romania and Associate Researcher, Université Libre de Bruxelles, BelgiumReviews: 'This is an exceptionally broad-ranging account of the significance of the Black Sea region. It covers everything from ancient history to comparative perspectives in the modern world, yet its clear focus on the nature of regionalism gives the work both coherence and relevance for the study of politics and international relations as a whole.'
Karen Henderson, University of Leicester, UK

'A valuable contribution to the literature on the international politics of the Black Sea region. The chapters in this book provide a comprehensive overview of the divergent positions of the different actors in the Black Sea region…an excellent starting place for anyone wanting to understand the complexities and contradictions of Black Sea regionalism in the twenty-first century.'
Andrew Cottey, University College Cork, Republic of Ireland

'At a crossroad between the former Soviet Union Southern Republics and the EU Eastern member states and Turkey, the Black Sea region is a controversial reality and remains underdeveloped and understudied. As such, Ruxandra's book provides a welcomed coherent collection of substantial chapters comparatively addressing the history, structure, and policies of this region. Both the multiple endogenous and exogenous factors of regional cooperation and conflict, notably US, EU and Russia, are taken into consideration and critically evaluated. The result is a well-focused and insightful contribution to the knowledge of progresses and shortcomings of a relevant part of regionalist comparative studies.'
Mario Telo, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Belgium, and Member of the Royal Academy of Sciences

'This is a welcome and excellent addition to the literature on regionalism. An interdisciplinary team of scholars cover various aspects of Black Sea area regionalism and its limitations. Some chapters in this informative book also give valuable comparative perspectives that can contribute to conceptual and theoretical advances in regionalism studies.'
Finn Laursen, European Union Centre of Excellence, Dalhousie University, Canada

The point of departure for the special collection is provided by the observation that the growing... more The point of departure for the special collection is provided by the
observation that the growing complexity of the crises in the neighbourhood and the internal ones faced by the Union provides a sense of urgency to any type of strategic thinking that the EU might embrace. Against this backdrop, the recent shift towards geopolitics and strategic thinking is contextualized and the understanding of key aspects of ways in which the shift is translated into strategies by EU actors is put forward. The analysis recognizes the recent developments within the institutional dimension of EU’s foreign and security policy, yet it confirms the fundamental meaning of the member states’ willingness to invest resources and harmonize their
foreign policy strategies at the EU level.

The aim of this paper is to shed light on the way the European Parliament's diplomacy affects EU ... more The aim of this paper is to shed light on the way the European Parliament's diplomacy affects EU power, particularly during times of crisis. The analysis is focused on the Cox–Kwasniewski mission that the Parliament sent to Ukraine in 2012–13. Based on interviews and existing literature, we discuss the genesis and the development of the mission and then evaluate its impact. We argue that the mission with time became a key diplomatic instrument and enabled EU power projection by giving momentum to the promotion of the EU's approach towards Ukraine, which was already wavering due to the deadlock over the Association Agreement between Kyiv and Brussels and then due to President Yanukovych's refusal to sign the agreement.

Throughout the past decade the policy of the European Union (EU) towards its eastern neighbours h... more Throughout the past decade the policy of the European Union (EU) towards its eastern neighbours has avoided focusing on security issues. However, the Ukraine crisis had had a deep impact on the EU's foreign policy and its approach towards post-Soviet space. It has highlighted that the EU's eastern neighbourhood is characterised by intense geopolitical competition with Russia. The crisis also underscored the weakness of the EU's low politics approach towards the post-Soviet space and Russia. On the other hand, Russia's actions in Ukraine have made the member states more willing to act together and recognise Russia as a security threat. In this context, the article argues that while the EU has not always viewed its relations with Russia and the post-Soviet space in traditional geopolitical terms, the shape of the regional geopolitical structure has always influenced its policy towards the region. Moreover, the article shows how the EU has gradually embraced geopolitical competition for influence in the post-Soviet space with Russia and even confrontation with Moscow.