This dissertation analyses the phenomenon of regionalism around the Baltic and the Black Sea since the end of the Cold War with a comparative approach and by applying an extended neorealist theory that includes geopolitics and historical legacy. The main focus is regional organizations, the Council of the Baltic Sea States (CBSS) and the Black Sea Economic Cooperation (BSEC), which defines the geographical and political borders of the Baltic and the Black Sea region. These regional organizations are treated as international regimes. The three main varibales taken into consideration in this study are the distribution of power among the big states, the geographical location and the historical legacy that directly and indirectly affect the relations among the states in each region. These variables are consistently applied to the following  four sector analysed in this study: hard security, energy, economic development, and environment. While the last three sectors are areas of cooperation within the CBSS and the BSEC, hard security is not. Its inclusion in this study is because of the fact that it strongly affects the power relations among the states in the two regions and that it is strictly linked to the other three sectors. Although the CBSS and the BSEC have established ad hoc Working Groups with the aim to make cooperation working effectively, regional states cooperate to the extent that it brings relative gains according to the neorealist theory. The analysis shows that the two regimes created around the Balti and the Black Sea are ineffective despite the fact that the CBSS has managed to create stronger cooperative links among its members compared to the BSEC.

This thesis analyzes the Organization of Black Sea Economic Cooperation and Turkey&#039 / s role in this international organization. This thesis argues that contrary to scholars who view institutional weaknesses of BSEC as the main reason of its failure in achieving sufficient level of cooperation among its members, political problems emanating from member states constitute the main reason of BSEC&#039 / s ineffectiveness as an international organization. There are six chapters of this thesis. Following the introductory first chapter, the second chapter of this thesis examines the factors behind establishment of BSEC and its formation process. In the following three chapters BSEC&#039 / s institutional structure, its issue areas and problems are discussed in detail. The last chapter is conclusion.

Po Šaltojo karo pabaigos ir SSRS dezintegracijos Europoje atsirado naujos nepriklausomos valstybės, kurios nepriklausė euro – atlantinėms bendradarbiavimo struktūroms. Tiek Vidurio ir Rytų Europa, tiek Vakarų Europa nebuvo suinteresuota leisti formuotis naujoms skirtims žemyne. Todėl subregionalizmas tapo išeitimi, kuri suteikė galimybę posovietinėms valstybėms bendromis jėgomis siekti reformų, o Vakarų Europai suteikti finansinę bei techninę paramą ir tokiu būdu perkelti vertybes bei normas. Juodosios jūros subregionas sulaukia daug diskusijų, kadangi jo egzistavimo faktas dažnai yra kvestionuojamas. Vis dėlto, šios srities vystymąsis yra ypač svarbus ilgalaikiam Lietuvos ir visos Europos Sąjungos energetiniam ir „minkštajam“ saugumui. Darbe yra siekiama išnagrinėti subregioninio bendradarbiavimo procesus Juodosios jūros subregione ir iškeliami šie uždaviniai: 1. Atlikti subregionalizmo teorinį aiškinimą; 2. Išanalizuoti subregionalizmo procesus Juodosios jūros regione; 3. Pristatyti keturias subregioninio bendradarbiavimo struktūras – JJEBO, GUAM, Demokratinio pasirinkimo bendriją bei Juodosios jūros forumą dialogui ir partnerystei plėtoti. Aptariant subregionalizmo teorinį aiškinimą pasitelkiamas aprašymas bei mokslinės literatūros analizės metodas. Istoriniu aprašomuoju metodu naudotąsi siekiant apžvelgti istorinę subregioninių grupių raidą. Kitiems uždaviniams pasiekti pasitelkiami antrinių duomenų bei turinio analizės metodai. Darbe padaromos kelios išvados. Visų... [toliau žr. visą tekstą] / Black Sea subregionalism After the end of Cold war and the disintegration of USSR in Europe appeared newly independent countries, which remained outside euro – atlantic cooperation systems. Both the Middle East Europe and the West Europe did not want to allow the formation of new divisions in the continent. Therefore the subregionalism became a solution, that allowed a post – Soviet states to seek reforms collectively and the Western Europe to provide financial and technical support and thus to transfer its values and norms. Black sea sub-region receives a lot of discussion, because its existence is often questioned. However, the development of this area is particularly important for long – term energetic and „soft“ security of both Lithuania and the EU. This paper aims to examine the sub-regional cooperation processes in the Black Sea sub-region and out the following tasks: 1. Present theoretical interpretation of subregionalism, 2. Analyze subregional processes in the Black Sea region, 3. Introduce four sub-regional cooperation structures - BSEC, GUAM, Community of Democratic Choice and the Black Sea Forum for Dialogue and Partnership. The description and literature analysis are used then discussing the theoretical interpretation of subregionalism. Historical descriptive method is used to review the hostorical developments of subregional groups. Secondary data and content analysis methods are used for other objects. Work is done through a number of coclusions. In... [to full text]

This article explores the links between the remarkable change in Russian-Turkish foreign relations in the early 2000s and the geostrategic importance of the Caucasus for global energy security. For much of the 1990s, domestic instability and power distribution distracted both countries’ focus on regional issues. Mutual suspicion dominated the bilateral relations, when Turkey, a longstanding NATO stronghold with close ties to the United States and Europe, set out to gain ground in Russia’s traditional sphere of influence. The resulting strategic division of the Caucasus marked a period of continuity in Russian-Turkish relations and resembled the bipolar bloc formation of Cold War times. By drawing on the distinct accounts of Neo-Realism and Liberal Intergovernmentalism, this analysis provides an understanding of the determining factors that changed Russian-Turkish relations from standstill to intensified cooperation despite that national interests in the region proved to be largely consistent. Russia seeks to maintain its traditional hegemonic position and Turkey strives to become a ‘soft power’ in the region. However, central to the new phase of Russian-Turkish relations is a mutual interest in the Caucasus as a stable transport corridor for Caspian energy resources to European and global markets, and both Ankara and Moscow stand to benefit greatly from reconciling geopolitical competition and cooperation in the region.