Elena Korosteleva

Questioning democracy promotion: Belarus' response to the ‘colour revolutions’

The article focuses on the aftermath of the colour revolutions by analysing and questioning the real success, as often depicted by the West, of democracy promotion in the East European region. First of all, the article challenges the conventional logic of democracy promotion – even when backed by moral reasoning and resource availability – as sufficient and adequate for instigating democratic change in non-liberal regimes. By examining the case of Belarus it further contends that authoritarian regimes effectively learn to resist and counteract foreign-led democracy promotion, and often do so legitimately, with a minimal use of force. The article concludes that in order to exercise democracy promotion (if such a thing is possible at all) a far deeper understanding of autocratic narratives is needed, associated with a much closer look at societal norms and values, as well as an individual countrys geopolitical resources and strategies.

Moldova's European Choice: ‘Between Two Stools’?

Abstract The article examines EU–Moldovan relations from the perspective of the external governance framework. It reveals some considerable progress in the procedural engagement of both parties. However, the internal instability experienced by Moldova in 2009 is seen to have disrupted these relations, stalling further negotiations and even questioning Moldovas true commitment to Europe. To understand this ostensibly sudden change in Moldovas allegiance to Europe, it is argued that analysis needs to go beyond conventional governance framework(s). Premised on the notion of ‘constitutive boundaries’ a ‘partnership’ perspective offers a more nuanced understanding of the boundaries of ‘the other’, thus revealing the salience of geopolitics and culture in Moldovas relations with the outside world.

The limits of EU governance: Belarus's response to the European Neighbourhood Policy

The article examines some conceptual and practical tensions related to the application of the external governance framework to the European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) in less motivated states, such as Belarus. First, it critically analyses the foundations of the external governance framework – from M. Smith’s perspective – in order to suggest that the failure of the ENP to legitimize in Belarus should not be solely attributed to the vices of Lukashenko’s regime. Second, it argues that an understanding of specifically Belarusian ‘boundaries of order’ – geopolitics and culture – is essential for tailoring a more nuanced policy that will be able to accommodate the needs and interests of ‘less motivated’ ENP partner states. In conclusion, it is suggested that a new policy framework – of extended partnership – should be more technical and less political, based on horizontal networks of cooperation rather than on hitherto hierarchical governance by conditionality that has found little appeal in the less motivated neighbourhood. Can an Eastern Partnership framework become such an alternative?The article examines some conceptual and practical tensions related to the application of the external governance framework to the European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) in less motivated states, such as Belarus. First, it critically analyses the foundations of the external governance framework – from M. Smiths perspective – in order to suggest that the failure of the ENP to legitimize in Belarus should not be solely attributed to the vices of Lukashenkos regime. Second, it argues that an understanding of specifically Belarusian ‘boundaries of order’ – geopolitics and culture – is essential for tailoring a more nuanced policy that will be able to accommodate the needs and interests of ‘less motivated’ ENP partner states. In conclusion, it is suggested that a new policy framework – of extended partnership – should be more technical and less political, based on horizontal networks of cooperation rather than on hitherto hierarchical governance by conditionality that has found little appeal in the less motivated neighbourhood. Can an Eastern Partnership framework become such an alternative?

Belarusian Foreign Policy in a Time of Crisis

As with the rest of the world, Belarus has been affected by the global economic crisis. However, the main consequences for the country were less economic, but rather political in nature. Although closely connected with Russia, it was not the spill-over of the crisis, such as the reduction in its hitherto ‘miraculous’ levels of economic growth to almost nothing in one year, that hit Belarus hard. Instead, it was Russias deliberate politics of ‘pragmatization’, directed at its ‘near abroad’ to facilitate compliance of and interdependence with its neighbours, which dramatically altered Belaruss foreign policy landscape. The two principal corollaries of the global crisis for Belarus therefore included the new and irreversible search (successful or otherwise) for diversification away from Russia, and the reinvigorated sense of sovereignty with which Belarus now attempts to rebuild itself domestically and internationally.

Was There a Quiet Revolution? Belarus After the 2006 Presidential Election

The 2006 presidential election in Belarus mobilized a large cross-section of society to protest against the Lukashenko regime. Although unprecedented, the mass mobilization was short-lived, failing to develop into another kind of coloured revolution in the region. The key to our understanding of the endurance of Lukashenkos regime seems to lie in its internal environment, and notably, in the seemingly contradictory feature of the Belarusian electorate. Not only do they fully identify with the president, thus effectively legitimizing his politics and policies; they also do so knowingly, through their strategic learning of how to survive and even thrive under Lukashenkos regime. This type of learning, however, may not necessarily lead to a critical reflection of the regimes malpractice, and thus is unlikely to challenge its foundations.

Eastern Partnership: bringing “the political” back in

ABSTRACT This article rethinks the Eastern Partnership agenda using Edkins’ framework of “the political”. Part of the problem, it argues, is the EU’s failure to imagine a new social order, which would give a relational value to the Other, and not by way of disciplining it to the EU standards, but rather, by way of aligning differences to a shared “normal”. The article problematises power relations as a process of “othering” in order to re-conceptualise them via key notions of differentiation, and normalisation. It argues for bringing “the political” back in, for debating and legitimising contesting social orders.

Change or Continuity

This article examines the discourse of the EU’s relations with eastern Europe under the recently launched Eastern Partnership (EaP) initiative. First, it evaluates the EaP’s conceptual framework to suggest that there seems to be more continuity than change in the EU’s modus operandi with its neighbours. More crucially, the notion of ‘partnership’, central to the new philosophy of cooperation with the outsiders, continues to be ill defined, causing a number of problems for the effective and legitimate realisation of the European Neighbourhood Policy/Eastern Partnership in the region. Second, drawing on the empirical investigations of the official discourses in Belarus, Ukraine and Moldova, the article reveals an increasing gap between EU rhetoric and east European expectations. In the absence of adequate partnership response to the needs and interests of ‘the other’, the policy is unlikely to find anticipated legitimation in the neighbourhood.This article examines the discourse of the EU’s relations with eastern Europe under the recently launched Eastern Partnership (EaP) initiative. First, it evaluates the EaP’s conceptual framework to suggest that there seems to be more continuity than change in the EU’s modus operandi with its neighbours. More crucially, the notion of ‘partnership’, central to the new philosophy of cooperation with the outsiders, continues to be ill defined, causing a number of problems for the effective and legitimate realisation of the European Neighbourhood Policy/Eastern Partnership in the region. Second, drawing on the empirical investigations of the official discourses in Belarus, Ukraine and Moldova, the article reveals an increasing gap between EU rhetoric and east European expectations. In the absence of adequate partnership response to the needs and interests of ‘the other’, the policy is unlikely to find anticipated legitimation in the neighbourhood.

The European Union and Belarus: democracy promotion by technocratic means?

Is Belarus an enviable constant in international relations: a maverick, isolated from the West and inseparable from the East? On the surface, there seems to be business as usual: Lukashenkos regime remains unchallenged; Belarus’ relations with the European Union – spasmodic at best; while its absorption into Russias Eurasian project continues apace. Yet, some critical disjunctures – manifested in government tacit resistance to Russias influence, and more instructively, in peoples growing affinity with Europe – may indicate a sea-change transformation in the very fabric of society. This article, utilizing extensive and subject-focused research, conducted in the country between 2009 and 2013, examines the nature and causalities of the occurring change. It argues that democracy promotion, in Belarus’ case, may work better when depoliticized and inculcated, through norms, regulations, and practices of international order, into the daily lives of individuals. Through its continued technocratic, inclusive, and sector-level engagement, European Union governance, even under the conditions of limited bilateral dialogue, have succeeded in fostering much-needed space for reciprocal learning and critical reasoning, which may have far greater transformative potential than manufacturing a single collective will for democracy building.

Eastern partnership and the Eurasian Union: bringing ‘the political’ back in the eastern region

ABSTRACT Drawing on the post-structuralist traditions and especially Jenny Edkins’ [1999. Poststructuralism and international relations: Bringing the political back in. London: Lynne Rienner] interpretation of ‘politics’ and ‘the political’, this article sets to conceptually rethink the geo-strategic dynamics of the EU–Russia relations in the context of the eastern region. It argues that while the EU’s and the Russia-led Eurasian (EEU) projects may be appealing in their own right, their visions for the ‘shared’ eastern neighbourhood remain self-centred and exclusionary. The root of the problem, as this paper contends, is that the EU and the EEU struggle to imagine a new social order, which would give a relational value to the Other as pari passu, and assume cooperation as an interplay of differing normalities rather than subjection to one’s norms and authority. Presently, the EU and Russia find themselves locked in parallel rather than complementary relations with the ‘shared’ region, each attempting to institutionalise their respective political orders, and not by way of contestation – ‘the political’ – but rather by a depoliticised means of technocracy or compulsion. This, if anything, is likely to destabilise the region further, if ‘the political’ is not back on the agenda.

The Challenges of a Changing Eastern Neighbourhood

The chapter examines challenges posed by the changing eastern region to the EU’s eastward foreign policy. It argues that while the EU has been reflective of its approach to the neighbourhood, it still struggles to understand and engage with the increasing complexities of the region. These in particular include the rise of the Eurasian Economic Union and the neighbours’ strong preference for developing complementarity between the EU and Russia’s region-building initiatives. Furthermore, the chapter contends that it is precisely the lack of positive othering involving recognition and engagement between the EU and Russia, and the wider region that prevents the development of more sustainable and effective policies towards the region.