Terrorism is not what could be called a new phenomenon in the world. The end of the Cold War and globalisation, however, “have let the genie out of the bottle”. In this article the author analyses issues pertaining to the definition of terrorism, tendencies of the terrorist threat (particularly, causes of the growing fatality of terrorism), the impact of globalisation on the phenomenon of terrorism and opportunities and dangers behind the fight against terrorism in the globalisation age. The article claims that during the age of globalisation terrorism becomes popular not only as a means for an asymmetric fight against the stronger opponent of the world’s “evil” states; the fight against terrorism is more and more often used as a supplementary instrument in the external and internal policies of Western world democracies. Devoid of an agreement on what terrorism is, states, facing the pressure of foreign and internal interests and/or external pressure, have become used to exaggerating the appeal of the terrorist threat, which, in turn, creates a counterproductive effect and increases security stakes.
Lithuanian membership in NATO and American engagement in Lithuania is part of an increasing American commitment to Northers Europe and the Baltic states. American involvement in our region reflects the changing American grand strategy and threat perception. What implications these changes can have for our region and what decision-makers in Washington expect from new NATO RPU members are the focal points of this article.
The author argues that in order to keep Americans committed, the Baltic states must rethink their foreign and security policy objectives, redefine old priorities and adapt them to the new geostrategic reality.
North Atlantic Treaty Organization was founded with the purpose of containing and deterring the Soviet Union. The enormous threat it posed has gone away. Russia does not pose a similar threat. Thus, the following problem has arisen: is NATO still indispensable and if so, what kind of NATO is needed in the 21st century? In other words: what is NATO’s raison d’être today? Analysis of various views and opinions raised on these issues is the main purpose of this article. It gives the most attention to different standpoints of Americans and their allies in Europe and their conflicting relations, which pose a danger to the unity and future of the Alliance. Another focus is the relation between NATO enlargement and its changing nature. The Alliance’s ability to respond to new challenges to international security, whose symbol became September II, and its role in the new global security system are explored as well.
This article is aimed to provide an analysis of the circumstances and problems related to Lithuania’s integration into NATO. It presents an overview of the path of Euro- Atlantic integration Lithuania has taken as well as the reasons behind the favourable outcome of NATO’s Prague Summit in November 2002, discusses factors which have had an impact on NATO enlargement and their interplay: a general development of the geopolitical landscape in Europe and Lithuania’s efforts to receive an invitation of membership. The context of NATO enlargement is used to review Lithuania’s security policy, relations with Russia, as well as the influence of Russia as a specific and exclusive factor in the processes of NATO enlargement. The article concludes with a summary of Lithuania’s foreign policy objectives and priorities for the post-Prague period.
Though the Baltic Sea region appears to be an ideal place for the formation of classical regional security regime, this assumption appears to be substantially wrong for one simple reason - Russia cannot accommodate itself in this regional format. Therefore, only international institutions of a wider scope are capable of resolving the dilemma of Baltic security and performing the conflict prevention function. CSCE successfully coped with this task in 1991-1994. CSCE was the international format that ensured successful withdrawal of Russian troops from the Baltic States. However it soon became clear that the organisation is of little use in further settlement and normalisation of the Baltic-Russian relations. Therefore, the regional Cold War could only be ended by the influence of international institutions capable of conducting equal dialogue with Russia. And NATO could became such institution. After uniting its former antagonists into NACC, then into EAPC and PfP, and after 2002 decision to invite the Baltic States to start accession talks, it managed to find a peculiar form of institutionalisation of relations with Russia. Therefore one may say that the security regime in the Baltic Sea region is becoming a NATO-centric regime because even countries formally not members of NATO will have established solid relations with this organisation. This applies to Finland and Sweden for a long time already. And there is a chance now that the same will soon apply to Russia.
New threats after the Cold War have imposed a claim for new instruments of prevention and defense, consequently changing security relations between states and their co-operational perspectives. The future of European security had become very obscure.
Observing the complexity and multitude of various processes on the global stage as well as crucial changes in the international system and aiming to better understand European security perspectives in this chaotic environment, institutionalization of the European security system, was chosen as the main object of this article.
The main purpose of the article is to estimate the process and perspectives of the institutionalization of the European security system. The first part of the article is devoted to major changes in the global security agenda after the Cold War. Factors, which influence or might influence security of the European region, are identified. Analysis of possible institutionalization of the regional security system in Europe is conducted in the second part. In two last parts the article looks at the opportunities of the NATO and the EU to become the cornerstones of an effective European security system.
The article deals with the issue on Russian foreign policy in length of one year - from September 2001 till October 2002. It’s evident, that the attacks of terrorists on the Twin Towers in New York signalled the turn in Russian foreign policy under the leadership of President Vladimir Putin from confrontation with USA and Euro Atlantic organizations to the cooperation with the said opponents. The turn was influenced by the objective bankrupt to confront with the West. Otherwise, the domestic high popularity rating of President Putin and his image of the State’s consolidator, what has been originated on the brutal represses of Chechnya’s separatism and the authoritarian concentration of power, served for the taken, non popular in Russia, course of ally with the West and particularly with USA.
It’s shown within the article, how fluctuated the emphasises of Putin’s policy in the analysed period, i.e. from the cooperation of USA and Russia in crushing the Afghanistan’s Talibs, from the entering into the pact START - 3 and establishing NATO - Russian Council to the reactivated flirtation with Peking and Phenian, and the blackmail with the rockets “Satana”. It is also established, how Putin’s diplomacy relates the brewed Iraq crisis and the case of Chechnya militants in Georgia Pankisi pass and how for the pro western political course was obtained the transit through Lithuania to/ from Kaliningrad. In sum, Putin just modifies the previous Russian (Eugenie Primakov) so called multipolar World strategy. The emphasises of Putin’s political line point up not the forthright blocking of USA power, but the game of diplomatic in the concert of Great Powers, where Putin himself appears as a good player. The democracy itself doesn’t take the priority in Russia and Putin’s policy, meanwhile, doesn’t lead to structural integration with the West, but far to the specific contiguous of Russian and the West structures. On the one part Euro Atlantic military structures enter into the post Soviet Union space - into Baltic countries, also Transcaucasia and Central Asia, on the other part the Russian energetics’ capital penetrates to Central East Europe and Balkans, Russia preserves and even expands its influence upon Central Asia and the Far East.
The authors of the article analyse how the policy of the Russian Federation towards Kaliningrad Oblast could influence main national interests of the Lithuanian Republic - the integration into the EU and NATO. Thus two main problems are discussed in the article: first, how Russia seeks to use the problem of military transit to/from Kaliningrad Oblast, stopping Lithuania's Euro-Atlantic integration; second, the interaction of what factors within the context of the EU enlargement could influence decisions on visa and civic transit issues. It is emphasized, that the EU enlargement creates a pressing need for indepth modernisation of the Oblast (for the implementation of which Russia is not ready and lacks capacity). Neither Russia nor the EU (including candidate countries) is interested in the potential worsening of the socio-economic situation in Kaliningrad region. Due to this reason, successful crisis prevention should be an important interest for all regional actors. Nevertheless, analysis of their positions reveals that there is a lack of strong political determination to decide the Kaliningrad issue substantially (by resorting to unconventional tools, breaking the status quo), as the problem of successful adaptation of the oblast (together with the relevant values) is not placed high on the regional actors’ agenda. The analysis of Russian military transit from/to Kaliningrad Oblast indicates that the Kremlin was seeking political agreement on military transit in the hope of holding Lithuania in its sphere of influence. The presumption is made that Russia could again try to legitimate the military transit through the territory of Lithuania even if Lithuania is invited to join Euro- Atlantic structures.
The Republic of Belarus is the most authoritarian state in Central and Central- Eastern Europe. The international security community identifies the threats of Aleksandr Lukashenko’s regime at global and regional levels. The article analyses the problem: what are the concrete threats posed to Lithuania by the Belarusian authoritarianism? The profiles of the problem presented here - the origins of authoritarianism in Belarus, the pattern of the dependence in the relations between Belarus and Russia, the international security community and Belarus, the development of the Lithuania-Belarus relationship - make it possible to identify eventual threats to Lithuania arising within political, social, economic and ecological sectors.