Search

You searched for: Content Type Working Paper Remove constraint Content Type: Working Paper Publishing Institution The Geneva Centre for Security Policy Remove constraint Publishing Institution: The Geneva Centre for Security Policy Political Geography Russia Remove constraint Political Geography: Russia
Number of results to display per page

Search Results

  • Author: Gustav Lindstrom
  • Publication Date: 01-2011
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: The Geneva Centre for Security Policy
  • Abstract: The 2010 Gstaad Process meeting was held in Switzerland from 16-18 September. Entitled “Beyond Geopolitics – Common Challenges, Joint Solutions?”, the event was organised by the Geneva Centre for Security Policy (GCSP) with the financial support of the Swiss Federal Department of Foreign Affairs (FDFA). Additional partners and contributors were the James Martin Center for Non-proliferation Studies in Monterey (California) and the PIR Center (Moscow).
  • Topic: Security, Arms Control and Proliferation, Science and Technology, Weapons of Mass Destruction
  • Political Geography: Russia, United States, Europe
  • Author: Jon Strandquist
  • Publication Date: 01-2009
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: The Geneva Centre for Security Policy
  • Abstract: At the 2008 Gstaad Process conference, the discussion of securityrelated issues central to West-Russia relations focused on four broadly defined areas: global security, energy security, missile defence, and nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament.
  • Topic: Conflict Prevention, Foreign Policy, Cold War
  • Political Geography: Russia, Europe, Asia
  • Author: Selbi Hanova
  • Publication Date: 02-2009
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: The Geneva Centre for Security Policy
  • Abstract: On 22-23 September 2008, the Geneva Centre for Security Policy (GCSP) and the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) Academy, Bishkek, organised a forum for security policy experts from Eurasia, East and South-East Asia, Europe and the United States, to analyse and discuss the continued interaction of key regional security dynamics and functional issues in Central Asia over 2008. A series of panels identified major emergent themes, linkages and trends, and reflected on their strategic impact and security policy implications. The focus included panels on the Afghan factor and Georgian crisis in Central Asian security politics, energy geopolitics, the role of the Collective Security Treaty Organisation (CSTO) and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) in the region, as well as US and Russian policies towards Central Asia. The seminar highlighted and analysed some of the key security tendencies and practical aspects of security in the region including emerging trends and themes, their interplay and contradictions as well as their likely strategic influence and consequences.
  • Topic: Conflict Resolution, Security
  • Political Geography: Russia, United States, Europe, Central Asia, Southeast Asia
  • Author: Miriam Fugfugosh
  • Publication Date: 07-2008
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: The Geneva Centre for Security Policy
  • Abstract: The OSCE area is marked by a number of common characteristics that define the overall context for mediation efforts. Some of the main commonalities highlighted during the Consultation were: the significant roles of global and regional actors in the OSCE area, including the United States, the member states of the European Union, Russia, Turkey and Iran; the multiplicity of international and regional organisations active in the area, such as the United Nations (UN), Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), Council of Europe (CoE), European Union (EU), and North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO); and the protracted nature of the so-called 'frozen' conflicts, such as the Transdniestrian, Georgian-Abkhaz, Georgian-Ossetian and Nagorno-Karabakh conflicts. These characteristics pose significant challenges for mediation efforts in the region.
  • Topic: Conflict Resolution, Security, Democratization, Globalization
  • Political Geography: Russia, United States, Europe, Iran, Turkey
  • Author: V. Semin
  • Publication Date: 07-2005
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: The Geneva Centre for Security Policy
  • Abstract: Three years have passed since June 2002, when G8 Leaders, in the Canadian town of Kananaskis, launched the Global Partnership against the Spread of Weapons and Materials of Mass Destruction (GP), and committed to support projects initially in Russia.After the end of the Cold War and demise of the Soviet Union, Russia inherited a large number of strategic nuclear missiles, means of their delivery (including strategic and generalpurpose submarines) and huge arsenals of chemical weapons. In 1991-1992 we had to consolidate urgently and put into secure storage all nuclear weapons from the Ukraine, Kazakhstan and Byelorussia, which became non-nuclear states under the Nuclear Non- Proliferation Treaty.
  • Topic: International Relations, Arms Control and Proliferation, Weapons of Mass Destruction
  • Political Geography: Russia, Ukraine, Kazakhstan, Soviet Union
  • Author: Daniil Kobyakov, Vladimir Orlov
  • Publication Date: 06-2005
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: The Geneva Centre for Security Policy
  • Abstract: Since the inception of the G8 Global Partnership (GP) program in Kananaskis on June 27 2002, the program has passed through different stages. Initially, it was just a loud political declaration, adopted by the leaders of the G8 following the attacks of 9/11. A Russian participant of the Kananaskis Summit later recalled with some surprise how smoothly and, to some extent, unexpectedly for the Russians involved the "$20 billion" pledge was shaped in that Canadian village. Interviewed on a major European GP-related conference a year after the Kananaskis summit, he was frank to exclaim: "Arriving in Kananaskis, we [Russians] could hardly even expect that this whole giant wave now called Global Partnership would be born from our discussions of non-proliferation and counter-terrorism".
  • Topic: International Relations, Security, Weapons of Mass Destruction
  • Political Geography: Russia
  • Author: Vitaly Fedchenko
  • Publication Date: 04-2005
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: The Geneva Centre for Security Policy
  • Abstract: As Lao-Tzu once said, 'Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach him how to fish and you feed him for a lifetime'. This sentence expresses the essence of effective assistance. If you want to provide somebody with food, there are two options: either to supply him during all his lifetime or to teach him how to earn a living. Similarly, if you want a state to get rid of WMD capabilities, there is always an option to blow up some facilities, but the next day it would be necessary to check whether no new WMD capabilities have developed. Another option is to make the process self-sustaining on the ground, ensuring that the state itself is looking after it.
  • Topic: International Relations, Arms Control and Proliferation, Weapons of Mass Destruction
  • Political Geography: Russia
  • Author: Cristina Chuen
  • Publication Date: 04-2005
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: The Geneva Centre for Security Policy
  • Abstract: The Global Partnership Against the Spread of Weapons and Materials of Mass Destruction is nearly three years old. While the initiative—launched on June 27, 2002, at the G8 annual summit in Kananaskis, Canadai—brought new donors to the table and added a new sense of urgency to nonproliferation projects in Russia, to date the programs have yielded mixed results. There is much that remains to be done if the next seven years are going to fulfill the promise of Kananaskis.
  • Topic: International Relations, Security, Arms Control and Proliferation, Weapons of Mass Destruction
  • Political Geography: Russia
  • Author: William Hitchcock
  • Publication Date: 08-2000
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: The Geneva Centre for Security Policy
  • Abstract: Two years ago, when many of us gathered together in the dramatic Alpine setting of Leukerbad to consider the recent past and the likely future of US-European relations, our group was full of dire prognostications. Russia was headed toward collapse, the EU looked weak after the Yugoslav war, NATO expansion appeared to be dividing Europe; the introduction of the euro looked liked a risky gamble that might worsen trans-Atlantic relations; and most disturbing for me as an American, my government was preoccupied with the Lewinsky scandal and the future of the Clinton presidency seemed at risk. Indeed, one of our colleagues, discussing the crisis over after-dinner drinks, declared that Clinton would resign from the presidency within matter of weeks.
  • Topic: Security, Defense Policy, NATO
  • Political Geography: Russia, United States, Europe, Asia
  • Author: Anne Deighton
  • Publication Date: 08-2000
  • Content Type: Working Paper
  • Institution: The Geneva Centre for Security Policy
  • Abstract: The 'St Malo process' which has being taking shape since December 1998, will bring a qualitative change in the EU's role as an international institution. Many of the big initiatives that the Union undertakes are not fully understood early on - unexpected, and sometimes unintended consequences can result from the changes that the EU agrees to. It takes time for the institutional implications of major changes to emerge: the Single Act was, in the mid 80s, often seen as the 'elephant that gave birth to a mouse'; and the Maastricht Treaty as at once called too federalist, and too timid. Likewise, the exact configuration of the changes that St Malo may bring will also take time to become clear. 'Militarising' the EU, however, ends one of the last policy taboos of a 'civilian-power' European Union and breaks through the 'glass ceiling' of the EU's self-denying ordinance against the adoption of the instruments of military force which has existed since its inception. This paper assesses how far these changes got by the summer of 2000 and asks whether the last eighteen months are one stage in the messy birth of a post-Cold War pan-European defence and security regime with institutions based around NATO and the EU. Europe's institutional configuration tends to matter more to Europeans than to our transatlantic partners; but institutions are the reality of contemporary European international politics. 'Multilateral institutionalism' too, is inescapable, and how institutions relate to each other has become an increasingly significant question. To accept this does not meant that states do not matter, for states also use institutions, as well as being shaped by institutions.
  • Topic: Security, Defense Policy, NATO
  • Political Geography: Russia, United States, Europe, Asia, Switzerland