Cooperation and Conflict

In this article, some of the possibilities and obstacles involved in attaining stable peace in the Baltic Sea region are analysed. By stable peace is understood a relationship in which military conflict resolution has become unthinkable regardless of how serious a prospective conflict may become. It is argued that stable peace does not presently exist in the region as a whole, but that instead the situation resembles what is elaborated in this article as an integrative peace built on trust, one in which elements of security competition remain in place. The article establishes an analytical framework of different peace types around the concepts of distrust, trust and confidence. This framework is subsequently employed in an analysis of developments in the Baltic Sea region after the Cold War. The analysis shows that the extensive web of cooperative schemes in place in the region shows the promise of a move towards stable peace. In addition, democratic developments in the region generally point in the same direction. One word of caution concerns the democratic developments in Russia — while generally promising, this fundamental parameter remains to be settled permanently.

The external borders of the European Union (EU) are becoming increasingly difficult to delineate as it exports policies to states beyond its own membership. While the EU possesses a clearly defined membership, its borders are `fuzzy'. The purpose of this paper is to consider the impact of these `fuzzy' borders on the EU's neighbours - and its resulting `fuzzy' politics. Two case studies are considered: the Baltic States and the Mediterranean. In each, the authors seek to assess the impact of EU relations with these two regions. Four tentative conclusions are drawn. First, the EU is indeed surrounded by regions that can be regarded as intermediate spaces between the inside and outside of the Union, and these regions have indeed become the targets of significant `policy-export'. Over time, the EU has developed substantial interests and significant influence in what can be called the `near abroad'. Second, the EU does not possess a coherent policy of dealing with this `near abroad'. An uneasy mix of initiatives often contradicts the stated goal of region-to-region relations. Third, EU relations with the two regions actually appear to serve rather opposing functions - simultaneously facilitating enlargement and non-enlargement. Finally, the regional impact of EU policies varies considerably as a consequence of the different geo-political and institutional context in the two regions.