Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Cooperation and Conflict
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Hubel, H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

The Baltic Sea Subregion after Dual Enlargement

Helmut Hubel

Institute of Political Science at the Friedrich Schiller University, Jena, Germany, Helmut.Hubel{at}uni-jena.de

It is argued in this article that the enlargement processes of the two major institutions of the West significantly affect the ‘externalities’ of the Baltic Sea area, and that this area should therefore be understood as a European subregion rather than as a distinct region. Whereas the extent of institutional adaptations of the European Union and NATO since the end of the East-West conflict is impressive, both enlargements are also creating new problems. In the case of the EU, its homogeneity and the functioning of its institutions promise to be stretched to their very limits, particularly given the tendencies towards ‘opting out’ of the aquis in several EU member states of the Baltic Sea area. Concerning NATO, the author recognizes the irony that the new members hoped to join the ‘old alliance’, while in reality this has already undergone transformation from a defence body to an institution dealing primarily with out-of-area problems. For both the enlarged EU and NATO the ‘partnership’ with Russia is more a modus vivendi than a clear perspective for the future and there is a need for further adapations on both sides.

Key Words: Baltic Sea area • Baltic states • enlargement • EU • NATO • regionalism • Russia

Cooperation and Conflict, Vol. 39, No. 3, 283-298 (2004)
DOI: 10.1177/0010836704045204


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Cooperation and ConflictHome page
D. J. Galbreath
Latvian Foreign Policy after Enlargement: Continuity and Change
Cooperation and Conflict, December 1, 2006; 41(4): 443 - 462.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Cooperation and ConflictHome page
A. Bergman
Adjacent Internationalism: The Concept of Solidarity and Post-Cold War Nordic-Baltic Relations
Cooperation and Conflict, March 1, 2006; 41(1): 73 - 97.
[Abstract] [PDF]