Abstract
In this paper, the author analyzes the ideals, motivations, circumstances and challenges of establishing and of properly running the so-called “wider Black Sea region,” a multi-state project in the Black Sea inspired by similar models in the Mediterranean and the Baltic Sea, as well as by geopolitical necessities, one which is yet barely in its framework-setting stages. In focus is Romania and the part it should be able to—and ought to—play, as a Member State of both the EU and of NATO, in taking steps and cooperating with other EU and non-EU states bordering the Black Sea, in the interest of stabilizing, securing and developing the region given the complex geopolitical situation created between the dissolution of the USSR (together with the “frozen conflicts” left behind) and the subsequent expansion waves of NATO and the EU.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
The conceptual framework used in this analysis is developed elsewhere. See Bădescu and 1995.
- 2.
Only when the setting of a frontier process’ expansion border is natural, therefore organic, does the frontier space cease to exist. The typical case here is, for instance, the expansion of the Protestant frontier across Europe, which organically stopped at the edge of the Orthodox space, hence the setting of the Protestant border occurred on its own (here is not the place to detail why this was so).
- 3.
The manner in which those tasked with explaining the meaning of the presidential statement did so only increased the sense of confusion and undermined the topic’s prestige.
- 4.
- 5.
- 6.
Naturally, there was no shortage of criticisms—why not “the individual”?—, and this option of Buzan’s was attributed to his “neo-realist” background.
- 7.
Romania is nowadays, in turn, a NATO member state, obliged to configure its security forces according to the requirements applicable to it after joining. We are referring to the elaboration of the national security doctrine and, consequently, to the defining and elaborating, based on this doctrine, of all logistic assets—military forces, special services, legislation, intellectual and academic centers, research institutes, conferences, publications, encyclopedias, etc.—in order to implement the doctrine in all its components. Furthermore, it is precisely the complexity of the security question that constitutes an element rendering the Black Sea, and implicitly, the Republic of Moldova, a target of maximal interest for Romania.
- 8.
Our analysis will rely on the current most substantial work on the topic, that of Fabrizio Tessarini: see Tessarini 2004. Moreover, for the question of the Baltic states and of security in the area, see: Lieven 1993; Bildt 1994; Brundtland 1994; Asmus and Nurick 1996; Quo Vadis? NATO and the Baltic States 1996; Lejins and Ozolina 1997; Puheloinen 1997; Jopp and Arnswald 1998; Brzezinski and Larrabee 1999; Browning 2002.
- 9.
Regarding perceptions between the Baltic states and Russia on matters related to the question of security see Jaeger 2000.
- 10.
This is one aspect that did not exist by the Black Sea, and which mattered and continues to matter in the economy of developing a cooperation process in the area.
- 11.
One exception in Romania is the transient publication of the substantial “EUXIN. Revistă de Sociologie, Geopolitică şi Geoistorie” (EUXIN. Journal for Sociology, Geopolitics and Geohistory), ed.: Euxin Group, quarterly publication, No. 1–2, 1997, 328 pp. The agenda of this publication reads, among others, “The Gordian knot of NATO’s expansion is the Euxine circle with its boundaries, its multitude of ethnicities and its invincible Orthodox Christianity. Euxin wishes to respond to that challenge making the Pontos Euxeinos into a centrum mundi and Romania into a trio confinium of the three major issue domains: the Atlantic, the Russian and the Germanic”.
- 12.
One of the broadest—but in use—definitions of europeanization would be the measure of the extent to which domestic/internal changes were triggered by the European integration.
- 13.
When we claim that critical mass for the North-Atlantic option is not yet reached we mean that we are not yet at the moment of having reached the institutional and human threshold (institutional functioning, level of education and orientation of individuals in political and civil administration, economic, cultural or social exchange, political agreements, etc.) making the Euro-Atlantic integration process irreversible or, at least, that returning to the former Soviet space ( CIS, etc.) is no longer feasible. This aspect—having reached critical mass—is what most firmly differentiates the Republic of Moldova from Romania or Bulgaria. (It ultimately does not matter whether or not reaching critical mass occurs with the genuine agreement of its generating political leaders).
- 14.
Before elaborating a strategy, Bucharest must immediately proceed to an early-warning action regarding the issue of Trans-Dniester. The currently vehiculated initiatives risk the compromising of not just the conflict’s solution but even of a Euro-Atlantic strategy in the wider Black Sea region, as the Trans-Dniester conflict is part of it (we shall return to this issue in the final part of this text).
- 15.
For an evaluation of Brătianu’s analyzes of the Black Sea, see Dungaciu 2004, pp. 292–298.
- 16.
Including of the Republic of Moldova, as we have already shown in the corresponding section. Perpetuating the “neutrality” status of this country—fictitious since foreign troops are still stationed on its territory against its will—is an error. Certainly, managing this process must be handled firmly and intelligently, always keeping an eye on the developments in the east of the Republic (in Trans-Dniester).
- 17.
Aleksandr Dugin was one of the founders of the National Bolshevic Party (owner of party card No. 2, after the one held by national-bolshevic leader Eduard Limonov). Dugin’s “Eurasian” ideology is based on the priority of state interests, countering world globalization and “combating Americanism”.
- 18.
There have been previous mentions about the degree of artificiality found in the wider Black Sea region project. See Igor Munteanu’s text in Asmus et al. 2004.
- 19.
This Convention was invoked by Turkey to block access to the Black Sea for western or American ships, including in the case of the most recent American intervention in Iraq, although strategic interests urged for it.
- 20.
There has even been talk of replacing the document with the UN’s Maritime Law, signed by 119 delegates on December 10 1982 (except for the US).
- 21.
Interestingly, Russia, which now opposes NATO being present in the Black Sea, used the same type of argument in 1870 to unilaterally abrogate the clauses of the Paris Treaty, which restricted its presence in the Black Sea.
References
Ascherson, N. (1996). Black Sea. New York: Hill and Wang.
Asmus, R. D., & Nurick, R. C. (1996). NATO enlargement and the Baltic states. Survival 382(2, Summer): 121–142.
Asmus, R. D., Konstantin, D., & Joerg, F. (Eds.). (2004). O nouă strategie euro-atlantică pentru regiunea Mării Negre. Bucharest: Institutul Român de Studii Internaţionale “Nicolae Titulescu”.
Aydin, M. (2004). Europeʼs next shore: The Black Sea region after EU enlargement, ISS, Occasional papers, No. 53, June.
Bertsch, G. K., Craft, C., Jones, S. A., & Beck, M. (Eds.). (2000). Crossroads and conflict. Security and foreign policy in the Caucasus and Central Asia. New York: Routledge.
Bădescu, I., & Dungaciu, D. (1995). Sociologia şi geopolitica frontierei (Vol. 2). Bucharest: Editura Floarea Albastră.
Bildt, C. (1994). The Baltic litmus test. Foreign Affairs, 73(5), 72–85.
Bird, T., & Croft, S. (2001). The Copenhagen school and European security. Working paper, University of Birmingham.
Bordonaro, F. (2005). Merkel and German foreign policy. Power and Interest News Report (PINR), 13/07.
Browning, C. S. (2001). A multi-dimensional approach to regional cooperation: The United States and the northern European initiatives. European Security, 10(4), 89–91.
Browning, C. S. (2002). Competing or complementary policies? Understanding the relationship between the NEI and NDI. Paper presented at the ISA panel, Europe’s North: A Platform for Innovative Policies, New Orleans.
Brundtland, A. O. (1994). Nordic security at the end of the cold war: Old legacies and new challenges. In D. M. Snider & A. O. Brundtland (Eds.), Nordic-Baltic security: An international perspective (pp. 1–30). Washington, DC: Center for Strategic and International Studies.
Buzan, B. (1991). People, states and fear. London: Harvester Wheatsheaj.
Daly, J. (1997). Oil, guns, and empire: Russia Turkey, Caspian New Oil’ and the Montreaux Convention, Caspian Crossroad Magazine, 3(2).
Dungaciu, D. (2004). Naţiunea şi provocările (post)modernităţii. Bucharest: Tritonic.
Dungaciu, D. (2005). Moldova ante portas. Bucureşti: Editura Tritonic.
Emerson, M. (2001). The elephant and the bear: The European Union, Russia and their near abroads. Brussels: CEPS.
Emerson, M. (2004). European neighbourhood policy—strategy of placebo. CEPS Working Paper, No. 215, November.
Emerson, M. (2005). The Black sea as epicenter of the aftershocks of the EUʼs earthquake. CEPS Policy Brief, No. 79, July.
George, W. B. (2001). Remarks by the President in an Address to Faculty and Students of Warsaw University. Address, Warsaw, Poland, June 15, 2001. http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/06/20010615-1.html. Accessed 26 Oct 2007.
Herzig, E. (2000), The new Caucasus. Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia. London: The Royal Institute of International Affairs.
Hough, P. (2004). Understanding global security. Routledge: Taylor and New York.
Jaeger, Ø. (2000). Securitizing Russia: Discursive practices of the Baltic states. Peace and Conflict Studies, 2, 18–35.
Jopp, M., & Arnswald, S. (Eds.). (1998). The European Union and the Baltic states. Visions, interests and strategies for the Baltic sea region. Helsinki: The Finnish Institute of International Affairs. (Bonn: Institut für Europäische Politik).
King, C. (1999). The Moldovans. Romania, Russia, and the Politics of Culture. Stanford: Hoover Institution Press.
Lejins, A., & Ozolina, Ž. (Eds.). (1997). Small states in a turbulent environment: The Baltic perspective. Riga: Latvian Institute of International Affairs.
Lieven, A. (1993). The Baltic revolution: Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and the path to independence. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Maestro, J. (2001). Euro-Mediterranean process and the northern dimension: A comparative approach. www.bd.lst.se.
McSweeney, B. (1996). Identity and security: Buzan and the Copenhagen school. Review of International Studies, 22(1), 81–94.
McSweeney, B. (1999). Security, identity and interests. A sociology of international relations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Puheloinen, A. (1997). Russiaʼs geopolitical interests in the Baltic area. Cambridge: Center for International Affairs, Harvard University.
Quo Vadis? NATO and the Baltic states (1996). Conference proceedings published by the Konrad Adenauer Foundation and the Latvian Institute of International Affairs. Riga, Latvia, 7 December.
Thual, F. (2004). Géopolitique des Caucases. Paris: Ellipses.
Tessarini, F. M. (2004). Europaeum Baltic sea region security and cooperation from post-wall to post-enlargement Europe. Department of Political Science, University of Copenhagen.
Vahl, M. (2005). Models for the European Neighbourhood Policy. The European Economic Area and the Northern Dimension. Centre for European Policy (CEPS) Studies Working Document. No. 218/February 2005.
Vieregger, M. (2005). Opţiunea Germaniei: Neo-gaullism sau atlantism? New Europe Review, 2(4), 17–21.
Zbigniew, B., & Larrabee, F. S. (1999). U.S. policy toward Northeastern Europe. New York: The Council on Foreign Relations.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Editor(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Dungaciu, D. (2015). Geopolitics and Security by the Black Sea: The Strategic Options of Romania and Republic of Moldova. In: Vaduva, S., Thomas, A. (eds) Geopolitics, Development, and National Security. SpringerBriefs in Political Science. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-12685-2_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-12685-2_2
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-12684-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-12685-2
eBook Packages: Business and EconomicsBusiness and Management (R0)