Advertisement

Die konzentrierte Außenpolitik der baltischen Staaten

  • Michèle Knodt
  • Sigita Urdze
Chapter

Zusammenfassung

Die Außenpolitik der baltischen Staaten ist stark geprägt von ihrer Okkupation und Annexion durch die Sowjetunion im Zweiten Weltkrieg, die bis heute eine besondere Bedeutung Russlands in diesem Politikbereich bedingt. Durch ihren Beitritt zur EU im Mai 2004 sind sie in der Gemeinsamen Außen- und Sicherheitspolitik (GASP) sowie der Gemeinsamen Sicherheits- und Verteidigungspolitik (GSVP) formal gleichberechtigte Mitglieder, was z. T. eine thematische Erweiterung der Außenpolitik zur Folge hat. Dieses Kapitel will zunächst die Hauptlinien der Außenpolitik der baltischen Staaten ab der Wiedererlangung der Unabhängigkeit aufzeigen, um anschließend zu verdeutlichen, welche Möglichkeiten und Beschränkungen der EU-Beitritt auf Seiten der baltischen Staaten in diesem Politikfeld zur Folge hatte. In einem letzten Schritt soll unter Rückgriff auf die politikwissenschaftliche Literatur zu kleinen Staaten gezeigt werden, wie die baltischen Staaten, die nach den gängigen Definitionen1 zur Kategorie der kleinen Staaten gezählt werden, ihrerseits mittels ihrer besonderen Verhandlungsart die Außenpolitik der EU gestalten und für sich nutzen können bieten.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literartur

  1. Baillie, Sasha. 1998a. The Position of Small States in the EU. In Small States Inside and Outside the European Union. Interests and Policies, Hrsg. Laurent Goetschel, 193–205. Boston, Mass./London: Kluwer Academic.Google Scholar
  2. Baillie, Sasha. 1998b. A Theory of Small State Influence in the European Union. Journal of International Relations and Development 1 A: 195–219.Google Scholar
  3. Benz, Arthur. 2000. Entflechtung als Folge von Verflechtung: Theoretische Überlegungen zur Entwicklung des europäischen Mehrebenensystems. In Wie problemlösungsfähig ist die EU? Regieren im europäischen Mehrebenensystem, Hrsg. Edgar Grande und Markus Jachtenfuchs, 141–164. Baden-Baden: Nomos.Google Scholar
  4. Budrytė, Dovilė. 2006. New Initiatives in Lithuania’s Foreign Policy after the Dual Enlargement. In Global and Regional Security Challenges: A Baltic Outlook, Hrsg. Heli Tiirmaa-Klaar und Tiago Marques, 63–85. Tallinn: Tallinn University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Charter, David. 2009. Latvian’s ‚Iron Lady‘ slams EU’s male elite. TimesOnline, 18. 11. 2009. Google Scholar
  6. Collier, Mike. 2007a. Leaders warn of Baltic ‚energy island‘. The Baltic Times, 12. 10. 2007. Google Scholar
  7. Collier, Mike. 2007b. Island in a Storm. Transitions Online, 30. 10. 2007. Google Scholar
  8. Commission of the European Communities. 2001. The EU and Kaliningrad, 17. 02. 2001, COM (2001) 26 final.Google Scholar
  9. Commission of the European Communities. 2002. Kaliningrad: Transit, 18. 09. 2002, COM(2002) 510 final.Google Scholar
  10. Cooper, Rachel. 2009. Lithuania, Poland and Ukraine create a joint military brigade. Telegraph. co.uk, 18. 11. 2009. Google Scholar
  11. Der Spiegel. 6. 3. 2006. 108–109. Wer beerbt Annan? Google Scholar
  12. Ehin, Piret und Eiki Berg. 2009. Incompatible Identities? Baltic-Russian Relations and the EU as an Arena for Identity Conflict. In dies.: Identity and Foreign Policy. Baltic-Russian Relations and European Integration, 1–14. Farnham, England/Burlington, VT: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  13. Elman, Miriam Fendius. 1995. The Foreign Policies of Small States: Challenging Neorealism In Its Own Backyard. British Journal of Political Science 25/H. 2: 171–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Estonian Government. 2004. The Estonian Government’s European Union Policy for 2004–2006. http://www.riigikantselei.ee/failid/The_Government_s_European_Policy_for_ 2004_2006_FINAL.pdf. Zugegriffen: 3. 3. 2010.
  15. Estonian Ministry of Foreign Affairs. o. J. Priority Partner Countries. http://www.vm.ee/?q=en/taxonomy/term/75. Zugegriffen: 3. 3. 2010.
  16. eurogas. 2006. Eurogas/Baltic Gas/Basrec Conference with the Participation of EU Commissioner Piebalgs and Lithuanian Prime Minister Brazauskas. http://www.eurogas.org/uploaded/06P280%20-%20Eurogas-Basrec-Baltic%20Gas%20%20conference%208%20 May%2020062.pdf. Zugegriffen: 9. 3. 2010.
  17. European Commission. 2010a. Member of the European Commission. Algirdas Semeta. http://ec.europa.eu/commission_2010-2014/semeta/about/cv/index_en.htm. Zugegriffen: 9. 4. 2010.
  18. European Commission. 2010b. Member of the European Commission. Andris Piebalgs. CV. http://ec.europa.eu/commission_20102014/piebalgs/about/cv/index_en.htm#top Zugegriffen: 9. 4. 2010.
  19. European Commission. 2010c. Vice-President of the European Commission. Siim Kallas. Profile. http://ec.europa.eu/commission_20102014/kallas/about/profile/index_en.htm Zugegriffen: 9. 4. 2010.
  20. European Union/Russian Federation. 2002. Joint Statement of the European Union and the Russian Federation on Transit between the Kaliningrad Region and the Rest of the Russian Federation. http://www.google.de/url?sa=t&source=web&ct=res&cd=1&ved=0CAkQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.delrus.ec.europa.eu%2Fen%2Fimages%2FpText_pict%2F575%2Fsum%2520jointst.doc&rct=j&q=agreement+eu+russia+kaliningrad+2002&ei=leGUS-K9IaehsQbllrmTAw&usg=AFQjCNHgJ5dkjRtcRwikKn21sjB29geCFQ.. Zugegriffen: 8. 3. 2010.
  21. Eurostat. 2005. Eurobarometer 62: Die öffentliche Meinung in der Europäischen Union. http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/eb/eb62/eb_62.de.pdf. Zugegriffen: 6. 4. 2010.
  22. Eurostat. 2006. Eurobarometer 64: Die öffentliche Meinung in der Europäischen Union. http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/eb/eb64/eb64_de.pdf. Zugegriffen: 6. 4. 2010.
  23. Eurostat. 2007. Eurobarometer 66: Die öffentliche Meinung in der Europäischen Union. http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/eb/eb66/eb66_de.pdf Zugegriffen: 6. 4. 2010.
  24. Eurostat. 2008. Eurobarometer 68: Die öffentliche Meinung in der Europäischen Union.http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/eb/eb68/eb_68_de.pdfZugegriffen: 6. 4. 2010.
  25. Eurostat. 2009. Eurobaromètre 70: 3. L’Union européenne d’aujourd’hui et de demain. http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/eb/eb70/eb70_part3_fr.pdf Zugegriffen: 6. 4. 2010.
  26. Eurostat. 2010. Table of Results Standard Eurobarometer 72. http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/eb/eb72/eb72_anx_vol1.pdf Zugegriffen: 6. 4. 2010.
  27. Fofanova, Elena und Viatcheslav Morozov. 2009. Imperial Legacy and the Russian-Baltic Relations: From Conflicting Historical Narratives to a Foreign Policy Confrontation? In Identity and Foreign Policy. Baltic-Russian Relations and European Integration, Hrsg. Piret Ethin und Eiki Berg. 15–31. Farnham, England/Burlington, VT: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  28. Frey, Bruno und Reiner Eichenberger. 1999. The New Democratic Federalism for Europe. Functional, Overlapping, and Competing Jurisdictions. Cheltenham: Edgar Elgar.Google Scholar
  29. Galbreath, David J. und Jeremy W. Lamoreaux. 2007a. Bastion, Beacon or Bridge? Conceptionalising the Baltic Logic of the EU’s Neighbourhood. Geopolitics, 12/1: 109–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Galbreath, David J. und Jeremy Lamoreaux. 2007b. Punching above your Weight? The Baltic States as ‚Small States‘ and the European Neighbourhood Policy. In Uncertain Transformations – New Domestic and International Challenges. Proceedings of the International Conference, Rīga, November 9–11, 2006, Hrsg. Žaneta Ozoliņa und Nils Muižnieks, 21–33.Google Scholar
  31. Rīga: LU Akadēmiskais apgāds. Galbreath, David J., Ainius Lašas und Jeremy W. Lamoreaux. 2008. Continuity and Change in the Baltic Sea Region. Comparing Foreign Policies. Amsterdam/New York: Rodopi. Gammelin, Cerstin. 2009. Fraktionsübergreifender Frauenaufstand. sueddeutsche.de, 18. 11. 2009.Google Scholar
  32. Geurts, Charles-Michel. 1998. The European Commission: A Natural Ally of Small States in the EU Institutional Framework? In Small States Inside and Outside the European Union. Interests and Policies, Hrsg. Laurent Goetschel, 49–64. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  33. Giedraitis, Vincentas Rolandas. 2007. Power Lines and Pipe Dreams: Energy and Politics in Lithuania. Lithuanian Quarterly Journal of Arts and Sciences 53/2.Google Scholar
  34. Government of the Republic of Lithuania. 2004. Programme of the Government of the Republic of Lithuania for 2004–2008. http://www.lrv.lt/bylos/vyriausybes/en_13_programa.pdf. Zugegriffen: 3. 3. 2010.
  35. Haab, Mare. 1998. Potentials and vulnerabilities of the Baltic States. Mutual competition and cooperation. In The Baltic States in World Politics, Hrsg. Birthel Hansen und Bertel Heurlin, 1–23. Richmond: St. Martin’s Press.Google Scholar
  36. Haukkala, Hiski. 2009. Contextualizing and Qualifying Identities: Baltic-Russian Relations in the Context of European Integration. In Identity and Foreign Policy. Baltic-Russian Relations and European Integration, Hrsg. Piret Ethin und Eiki Berg. 161–170. Farnham, England/ Burlington, VT: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  37. Hey, Jeanne A. K. 2003. Introducing Small State Foreign Policy. In dies.: Small States in World Politics. Explaining Foreign Policy Behaviour, 1–12. Boulder, Co./London: Lynne Rienner Publishers.Google Scholar
  38. Holtom, Paul. 2005. The gatekeeper ‚hinge‘ concept and the promotion of Estonian, Latvian and Lithuanian new/postmodern security agendas. In The Baltic States and Their Region. New Europe or Old? Hrsg. David Smith, 293–312. Amsterdam/New-York: Rodopi.Google Scholar
  39. Jakniūnaitė, Dovilė. 2009. Neighbourhood Politics of Baltic States: Between the EU and Russia. In Identity and Foreign Policy. Baltic-Russian Relations and European Integration, Hrsg. Piret Ethin und Eiki Berg. 117–131. Farnham, England/Burlington, VT: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  40. Janukonis, Marius. 2010. Five Years of Membership. Lithuanian EU Experience. Tagung Außenpolitik baltischer Staaten Berlin.Google Scholar
  41. Joenniemi, Pertti. 1998. From Small to Smart: Reflections on the Concept of Small States. Irish Studies in International Affairs 9: 61–62.Google Scholar
  42. Jonson, Lena. 1998. Russia and the ‚near abroad‘. Concepts and Trends, In The Baltic States in World Politics, Hrsg. Birthel Hansen und Bertel Heurlin, 112–132. Richmond: St. Martin’s Press.Google Scholar
  43. Katzenstein, Peter. 1985. Small States in World Markets. Ithaca/London: Cornel University Press.Google Scholar
  44. King, Gundar J. und David E. McNabb. 2009. Crossroads Dynamics in Foreign Policy. The Case of Latvia. Problems of Post-Communism 56/3: 29–41.Google Scholar
  45. Knodt, Michèle. 2003. Vom „Europa der Regionen“ zum „Europa mit den Regionen“. Eine Reise durch die regionale Europaforschung. In Regieren unter neuen Herausforderungen: Deutschland und Europa im 21. Jahrhundert. Festschrift für Rudolf Hrbek zum 65. Geburtstag, Hrsg. Matthias Chardon, Ursula Göth, AR Dr. Martin Große Hüttmann und Christine Probst-Dobler, 161–176. Baden-Baden: Nomos.Google Scholar
  46. Knodt, Michèle und Sigita Urdze. 2009. Europeanization of Federal and Unitary States within the EU, Paper for Panel: Federal, regional, and decentralized systems and the dynamics of the distribution of powers in Europe. Panel No. 394, 5th ECPR General Conference, 10–12 September, 2009 Potsdam.Google Scholar
  47. Kohler-Koch, Beate. 1999. Evolution and Transformation. In The Transformation of Governance in the European Union, Hrsg. Beate Kohler-Koch und Reiner Eising, 14–35. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  48. Lamoreaux, Jeremy W. und David J. Galbreath. 2008. The Baltic States as ‚Small States‘: Negotiating the ‚East‘ by engaging the ‚West‘. Journal of Baltic Studies 39/1: 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Latvijas Republikas Ārlietu ministrija. 2009. Latvijas dalības Eiropas Savienībā pieci gadi: ieguvumi un izaicinājumi ārējo attiecību jomā. http://www.am.gov.lv/lv/eu/Latvija-ES-5/ieguvumi-arejas-attiecibas/. Zugegriffen: 10. 3. 2010.
  50. Lehti, Marko. 2005. Estonia and Latvia: A ‚new‘ Europe challenges the ‚old‘? In The Baltic States and Their Region. New Europe or Old? Hrsg. David Smith, 87–114. Amsterdam/New- York: Rodopi.Google Scholar
  51. Lehti, Marko. 2007. Protégé or go-between? The role of the Baltic states after 9/11 in EU-US relations. Journal of Baltic Studies 38/2: 127–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Lehti, Marko. 2009. Baltic Region in Becoming: From the Council of the Baltic Sea States to the EU’s Strategy for The Baltic Sea Area. Lithuanian Foreign Policy Review 22: 9–27.Google Scholar
  53. Lietuvos Respublikos Užsienio reikalų ministerija. o. J.. Lithuanian Development Cooperation. http://www.orangeprojects.lt/site/. Zugegriffen: 9. 3. 2010.
  54. Linkevičius, Linas. 2008. The European Union Neighbourhood Policy towards Ukraine. Lithuanian Foreign Policy Review 21: 62–85.Google Scholar
  55. Lotherington, John. 2006. Ukraine: what have been the consequences of the Orange Revolution? http://www.johnsmithmemorialtrust.org/nmsruntime/saveasdialog.asp?lID=354&sID=966. Zugegriffen: 10. 3. 2010.
  56. Lucius, Robert von. 2003. Unerschrocken. FAZ.NET, 20. 6. 2003. Google Scholar
  57. Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Latvia. o. J. Development co-operation priority countries. http://www.mfa.gov.lv/en/DevelopmentCo-operation/info/?print=on. Zugegriffen: 3. 3. 2010.
  58. Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Latvia. 2006. LATVIA’S FOREIGN POLICY GUIDELINES 2006–2010, 6. 6. 2006. Ministru kabineta 2006. gada 6.jūnija rīkojums Nr.417.Google Scholar
  59. Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Lithuania. o. J. Lithuanian Development Cooperation Policy. http://www.urm.lt/index.php?472771401. Zugegriffen: 3. 3. 2010.
  60. o. A. 2003. ‚New Europe‘ backs EU on Iraq. BBC News, 19. 2. 2003. Google Scholar
  61. o. A. 2008. EU’s Piebalgs Seeks Political Push For Nabucco Gas. Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, 04. 09. 2008. Google Scholar
  62. o. A. 2009a. The Baltic Sea Region States reach agreement on the Baltic Energy Market Interconnection Plan, 17. 6. 2009, IP/09/945.Google Scholar
  63. o. A. 2009b. Mr. Atomkraft wird EU-Energiekommissar. EurAktiv.de, 27. 11. 2009. Google Scholar
  64. Ostrom, Vincent. 1999. Polycentricity (Part I and II). In Polycentricity and Local Public Economies. Readings from the Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis, Hrsg. Michael McGinnis, 52–74, 119–38. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
  65. Ozoliņa, Žaneta and Toms Rostoks. 2006. Latvian Outlook on the European Union Common Foreign and Security Policy. In Global and Regional Security Challenges: A Baltic Outlook, Hrsg. Heli Tiirmaa-Klaar und Tiago Marques, 86–101. Tallinn: Tallinn University Press.Google Scholar
  66. Proissl, Wolfgang. 2006. Andris Piebalgs – Der Elektroschocker. Financial Times Deutschland, 18. 9. 2007. Google Scholar
  67. Romanovsky, Viktor und Andrei Stepanov, Mikhail Tsikel. 2002. The Perspective of Kaliningrad’s Policy Makers and Practitioners. Russian Regional Perspectives Journal 1/3.Google Scholar
  68. Rosenau, James. 1966. Pre-Theories and Theories of Foreign Policy. In Approaches to Comparative and International Politics, Hrsg. Barry R. Farrell, 27–93. Evanston: Northwestern University.Google Scholar
  69. Rostoks, Toms und Graudiņš, Māris. 2008. Riga Conference. The Contribution of the European Neighbourhood Policy to the Development of Eastern Neighbours, 25. 4. 2008, Rīga.Google Scholar
  70. Rostoks, Toms. 2009. Krievijas un Gruzijas konflikts un Latvijas drošība. Diena, 3. 1. 2009. Rothstein, Robert Lewis. 1968. Alliances and Small Powers. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  71. Rothstein, Robert Lewis. 1977. The Weak in the World of the Strong. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  72. Schmidt, Thomas. 2004. Das politische System Lettlands. In Die politischen Systeme Osteuropas, Hrsg. Wolfgang Ismayr, 111–151. Opladen: Leske + Budrich.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Schmidt, Thomas. 2003. Die Außenpolitik der Baltischen Staaten. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Singer, Marshall R. 1972. Weak States in a World of Powers. New York/London: Collier-Macmillan.Google Scholar
  75. Socor, Vladimir. 2005a. Poland, Lithuania, Ukraine create inter-parliamentary Assembly, Joint Battalion. Eurasia Daily Monitor 2/96, 16. 5. 2005. Google Scholar
  76. Socor, Vladimir. 2005b. Moscow Signs Border Agreement with Estonia. Eurasia Daily Monitor 2/99, 19. 5. 2005. Google Scholar
  77. Socor, Vladimir. 2005c. Moscow Stonewalling on Border Agreements with Latvia, Estonia. Eurasia Daily Monitor 2/85, 1. 5. 2005. Google Scholar
  78. Steindorff, Silvia v. 2006. EU-Kleinstaaten. Motoren der Integration? Aus Politik und Zeitgeschichte (APuZ) 4: 23–30.Google Scholar
  79. Thorhallsson, Baldur. 2000. The Role of Small States in the European Union. Aldershot: Ashgate. Valionis, Antanas. 2001. Lithuania on its way to a United Europe. http://www.ieis.lu/lectures/Lithuania.PDF. Zugegriffen: 8. 3. 2010.
  80. Vare, Raivo. 2005. Towards an EU Baltic Eastern Policy – a sceptical viewpoint. In Russia, the EU and the Baltic States. Enhancing the Potential for Cooperation, Hrsg. Matthes Buhbe und Iris Kempe, 17–22. Moscow: Friedrich-Ebert-Foundation.Google Scholar
  81. Vilutytė, Monika. 2006. The European Union is not afraid of the Russian transit through Lithuania. http://www.vrm.lt/index.php?id=671&type=98 = 98. Zugegriffen: 8. 3. 2010.
  82. Vital, David. 1971. The Survival of Small States. Studies in Small Power/Great Power Conflict. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  83. Vital, David. 1972. The Inequality of States. A Study of Small Power in International Relations. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  84. Vitkus, Gediminas. 2006. Three Western Myths about Security and Defense Policy of the EU New Member States: Lithuania’s Case. In The Future of the European Foreign, Security and Defence Policy after Enlargement, Hrsg. Gisela Müller-Brandeck-Bocquet, 111–131. Baden-Baden: Nomos.Google Scholar
  85. Wehner, Markus. 2006. Prügelknaben Moskaus? Estland und Lettland und ihr Verhältnis zum russischen Nachbarn. Ost-West 1: 30–36.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften | Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michèle Knodt
    • 1
  • Sigita Urdze
    • 1
  1. 1.Technischen Universität DarmstadtDarmstadtDeutschland

Personalised recommendations