Stanford University

Trade

The USSR and European Integration

-

The change of Russian foreign policy under President Putin, the war in Georgia, and the recent disputes over Russian gas exports cannot but affect Moscow's relations with the European Union. Looking back at the history of these relations in the 1960s and 1970s will provide the analyst with valuable insights and with recommendations for future European policy.

Dr. Mueller focuses not only on Russia's current relations with the EU but also the historical buildup to the current state of play. He examines the most recent issues straining the EU-Russia relationship and the dependence of the two powers on each other. Dr. Mueller also leads the audience from World War II to the USSR's eventual recognition of the EEC in 1988. 

Synopsis

Dr. Mueller begins by introducing the current status of both the EU and Russia. As it stands, Russia’s population of 142m people is outweighed significantly by the EU’s 500m. In addition, Dr. Mueller reminds the audience that the EU’s economy is 10 times the size of Russia’s. However, the two are important trade partners. To Russia, the EU represents more than 50% of its trade. To the EU, Russia represents its 3rd largest trading partner. However, the EU’s dependence on Russia for energy is crucial. Dr. Mueller explains how various integration efforts have come to very little. The 1997 Partnership and Cooperation Agreement has not been renewed, and the four common spaces approach the EU took to Russia has borne little fruit. Dr. Mueller reveals how relations are further strained by a variety of current issues such as debates over disarmament, democracy in Russia, and Kosovo.

In order to properly understand this, Dr. Mueller returns to the post-World War II period and the formation of the EEC in 1957. While Western European countries saw the EEC as an opportunity to unite and help each other in economic recovery after the war, the USSR perceived it as an economic base for NATO and an organization standing in the way of the USSR becoming Europe’s supreme power. Dr. Mueller describes how the Soviet Union was forced to change such an attitude because of the success of the EEC in raising wages in member states as well as Eastern European countries’ increasing dependence on it as an export partner. In 1962, Khrushchev took a new approach to all-European integration but his offer of formal relations fell through when de Gaulle vetoed the UK’s membership application into the EEC. Such efforts on the part of the USSR fell through once again in 1972 when the EEC was not interested in dealing with Comecon. Under Gorbachev, the USSR finally recognized the EEC in 1988. Dr. Mueller concludes by saying that while it was obvious that USSR did not really endorse Western European integration, it is surprising that the USSR did not see it as an opportunity to counter U.S. influence during the Cold War.

About the Speaker

Dr Wolfgang Mueller is a research fellow at the Austrian Academy of Sciences and a lecturer in Russian history and politics at the University of Vienna. His book on Soviet policy in Austria, Die sowjetische Besatzung in Österreich 1945-1955 (Böhlau 2005), was awarded the R.G. Plaschka Prize. Dr Mueller was a visiting scholar at the Freeman Spogli Institute's Forum on Contemporary Europe during the 2008-2009 academic year.

Download pdf

Encina Ground Floor Conference Room

Wolfgang Mueller

616 Serra Street
Encina Hall E103
Stanford, CA 94305-6055

(650) 724-8020 (650) 725-2592
0
Research Scholar, Austrian Academy of Sciences
Visiting Scholar, Forum on Contemporary Europe
PhD

Dr Wolfgang Mueller, PhD in contemporary history and Russian studies (University of Vienna), is a research associate at the Austrian Academy of Sciences. Former professional affiliations include the Montreal Holocaust Memorial Centre, Canada, and the Institute of East European History, University of Vienna. Wolfgang Mueller was a visiting fellow at the Russian Academy of Sciences and a member of OSCE missions to the CIS area. He teaches Russian history and politics at the University of Vienna.

Research interests: Russian and Soviet foreign policy, international relations, the Cold War, European integration. Current research projects: continuities in Russian foreign policy behavior, the USSR/Russia and European integration; the revolutions of 1989.

Wolfgang Mueller’s book on postwar Soviet policy in Austria Die sowjetische Besatzung in Österreich 1945-1955 (2005) was awarded the Richard G. Plaschka Prize. Further publications include Sovetskaia politika v Avstrii: Dokumenty iz Rossiiskikh arkhivov (with N. Naimark, A. Suppan, G. Bordiugov eds. 2005); The Austrian State Treaty 1955: International Strategy, Legal Relevance, National Identity (with G. Stourzh, A. Suppan eds. 2005); “Stalin and Austria: New Evidence on Soviet Policy in a Secondary Theatre of the Cold War,” Cold War History 6 (2006) 1; Osteuropa vom Weltkrieg zur Wende (with M. Portmann eds. 2007); “Die UdSSR und die europäische Integration,” in From the Common Market to European Union Building (M. Gehler ed. 2009); Peaceful Coexistence or Iron Curtain? Austria, Neutrality, and Eastern Europe 1955-1989 (Forthcoming).

Dr. Mueller was a visiting scholar with the Forum on Contemporary Europe from October 2008 through March 2009.

Wolfgang Mueller Research Scholar, Austrian Academy of Sciences; Visiting Scholar, Forum on Contemporary Europe Speaker
Seminars

Proliferation of International Dispute Settlement Mechanisms: The Threat of Fragmentation vs. the Promise of a More Effective System? - Some Reflections from the Perspective of Investment Arbitration

Paragraphs

(From the introduction) For more than a decade, international lawyers and international relations scholars have been fascinated by an ever-increasing number of international courts and tribunals. These are producing more international case-law, thereby replacing the traditional scarcity of international law precedents embodied in a few celebrated ICJ and PCIJ cases. Today, there is a host of frequently highly specialized international dispute settlement mechanisms like the WTO Dispute Settlement Body, the International Tribunal for the Law of The Sea, the International Criminal Court, various investment tribunals acting under The International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) Convention or other arbitration rules. All apply, interpret and probably ‘make’ international law. One question frequently raised in this context is whether these institutions contribute to the development of a single uniform body of international law or whether they make ‘their own’ ever more fragmented law. To the extent that they must apply specifically agreed upon rules, such as the WTO agreements, various bilateral investment protection treaties or the Law of the Sea Convention, etc., this is of course largely a false problem. In so far as they rely on common rules of international law, coherence vs. fragmentation does indeed arise and is a serious issue.

Scholars of international law have intensely debated these problems mostly under the heading ‘fragmentation’ of international law or ‘proliferation’ of international courts and tribunals. Gerhard Hafner has significantly contributed to this scholarly debate in a number of articles, and most importantly in a report prepared for the International Law Commission (ILC), which triggered the Commission’s work on fragmentation and was further pursued by Gerhard Hafner’s successor on the ILC, Martti Koskenniemi.

It thus appears appropriate to dedicate a few modest thoughts about these issues to a great international lawyer with whom I have had the privilege to work at the Department of International Law and International Relations at the University of Vienna during the last twenty years. Gerhard Hafner will understand that due to the space allotted in this liber amicorum, I must limit the scope of my remarks on fragmentation and proliferation to a specific subfield of international law. He will also appreciate that the chosen field is investment law and arbitration, which, in many respects, may be viewed as a test laboratorium of international law where many of the pertinent problems mentioned above have appeared in particularly visible form.

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Books
Publication Date
Journal Publisher
Martinus Nijhoff Publishers in "International Law between Universalism and Fragmentation - Festschrift in Honour of Gerhard Hafner", J. Crawford/A. Pellet/I. Buffard/S. Wittich (eds.)
Authors

Where Ukraine is Headed: Transition to Europe

-

Professor Gardner discusses Ukraine's rise since its 'dramatic' recession in the 90s. He interprets this particularly from the perspective of the economy while examining other factors such as football and Ukraine's relationship with Russia. Professor Gardner also looks at Ukraine's integration with Europe and possible ascension into the EU.

Synopsis

Professor Gardner discusses Ukraine’s rise and possible ascension into the EU. Initially, he focuses on the dreadful state of the Ukrainian economy throughout the 1990s, with 20% lost before its independence and a steady 9% annual loss in growth. Gardner identifies the turning point as 2000 where Prime Minister Yushchenko’s reform package transitions the country onto a growth path, now steadily growing at an annual 7%. However, although Gardner says the country has caught up what it has lost, it is still below the transition country average and faces both internal and external challenges. These include skyrocketing inflation, large current account deficit, depreciation of currency, and a substantial trade deficit. In addition, Ukraine’s internal political chaos has led to unreliability in the country’s policy constancy. Externally, Ukraine is caught between a reluctant EU and an aggressive Russia as Dr. Gardner puts it.

The latter half of Professor Gardner’s talk focuses primarily on Ukraine’s integration with Europe. He notes the various ratings Ukraine receives as a transition country in the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD). Overall, Ukraine received a three out four in the transition index. He explains increasing mobile phone use, bank reform, small scale business success, and price liberalization as Ukraine’s strengths on the scale. On the other hand, Ukraine’s weaknesses lie partly in its competition policy and the riskiness of the Ukrainian Stock Exchange. He also cites various key integration signals such as Ukraine’s co-hosting of the 2012 Euro Championship football tournament and its exports to Europe. Professor Gardner believes for Ukraine to make the EU list it will have to raise its EBRD score and rewrite its constitution.

Prof. Gardner also kindly took questions and further discussed a variety of issues. One notable point was that when asked what single move could substantially shift the nation forward and away from Russia, Professor Gardner identified further opening the trade relationship with Europe by reducing trade barriers as key. He also addressed internal political conflict, language issues, and referendums.

This event is sponsored jointly by the Center for Russian, East European and Eurasian Studies and the Forum on Contemporary Europe.

CISAC Conference Room

Roy Gardner Chancellor's Professor of Economics and West European Studies, Indiana University; Kyiv School of Economics (Kyiv) Speaker
Seminars

Creating a New Europe

-

Professor Hedlund explores a shift in focus in Europe away from the 'Brussels vs. Moscow' attitude by proposing strategic interaction in what he calls the 'corridor countries.' He discusses why there is a variety of outcomes in terms of economic success in these countries, in particular the strain of rapid deregulation in 1991 in the Soviet Union. Professor Hedlund also examines the challenges for these countries in Europe now.

Synopsis

In 'Creating a New Europe,' Professor Hedlund begins by discussing the choice the European Union had when they met in the Netherlands in 1991. He argues policymakers could have widened the concept of European integration through free trade and economic cooperation which would have led to unlimited expansion options towards the East. However, Prof. Hedlund argues they decided instead to deepen this notion of 'the United States of Europe' through a currency, flag, and constitution leading to an exclusionary approach. Now, in 2008, there is new opportunity with new members in the EU. Problems such as Russia's interaction with its neighbors which were formerly seen as external issues are now internal issues affecting Brussels. Rather than being 'grateful children' as Jacques Chirac infamously put it, these 'corridor states' are decentralising the game between Brussels and Moscow. Prof. Hedlund argues we must look for more substantial success in internal dynamics in these 'corridor states,' states which were formerly part of the U.S.S.R. and are now part of the EU or are hoping to be in the near future. To Prof. Hedlund, these states are in a good position to act as credible brokers for strategic interaction between the EU and Russia, as well as between each other, such as Lithuania's intervention during the Orange Revolution.

Prof. Hedlund explains how these ‘corridor countries’ were seen as homogenous in 1991 but now have a great diversity in economic outcomes. Much of this can be attributed to the over eager embracement of a market economy by Russia in 1991 and the hardship it caused. In addition, Prof. Hedlund identifies the corrupted markets which exploited the natural resources available following the collapse of the Soviet Union. Moreover, Prof. Hedlund cites that the ‘rent seeking’ attitude of the Russian government was not reciprocated in all former Soviet states. Some were arguably lured by the prospect of EU membership while others might have drawn in by the examples of the successful and democratic Western countries.

To Prof. Hedlund, the challenge now is to develop forward movement in the areas of the ‘corridor countries’ that have become stalled. In addition, some of the markets in those areas must be developed away from their, as he puts it, ‘3rd world’ manners of operating. Accountability is crucial to a functioning economy to Prof. Hedlund. Finally, these ‘corridor countries’ can help in democracy building.

In taking questions, Prof. Hedlund further reiterates his belief in the necessity of accountability. In addition, he touches on his sense that European education is waning, and that this is setting back innovation. Moreover, Prof. Hedlund addresses the merits of a variety of diplomatic approaches.

About the speaker

Stefan Hedlund is an Anna Lindh Research Fellow at the Stanford Forum on Contemporary Europe. He is professor of Soviet and East European Studies at Uppsala University, Sweden. Before 1991, his research was centered on the Soviet economic system. Since then, he has been focusing on Russia's adaptation to post-Soviet realities. This has included research on the multiple challenges of economic transition as well as the importance of Russia's historical legacy for the reforms. With a background in economics, he has a long-standing interest in problems related to the Soviet economic system, and the attempted transition that followed in the wake of the Soviet collapse. More recently, his research has revolved around neo-institutional theory, and problems of path dependence. Among sixteen authored and coauthored titles in English and Swedish, he is the author of Russian Path Dependence (2005), and the forthcoming co-edited volume Russia Since 1980: Wrestling with Westernization (Cambridge, 2009.) Professor Hedlund has received numerous awards including fellowships at the Davis Center for Russian Studies, Harvard University; the Slavic Research Center, Hokkaido University; and at the Kennan Institute, Washington DC.

Download pdf

Daniel and Nancy Okimoto Conference Room

Stefan Hedlund

Department of East European Studies
Uppsala University
Gamla Torget 3, III
Box 514, 751 20 UPPSALA
Sweden

0
Professor of East European Studies, Uppsala University
Visiting Scholar, Forum on Contemporary Europe (December 2008)
Hedlund_photo.JPG PhD

Stefan Hedlund is Professor of East European Studies at Uppsala University, Sweden. A long-standing specialist on Russia, and on the Former Soviet Union more broadly, his current research interest is aimed at economic theories of institutional change. He also has a devouring interest in Russian history, which he has sought to blend with more standard theories of economic change. He has been a frequent contributor to the media, and has published extensively on matters relating to Russian economic reform and to the attempted transition to democracy and market economy more generally. His scholarly publications include some 20 books and close to 200 journal and magazine articles. His most recent monographs are Russian Path Dependence (Routledge, 2005), and Russia since 1980: Wrestling with Westernization (Cambridge University Press, 2008), the latter co-authored with Steven Rosefielde.

 

Stefan Hedlund Professor of Soviet and East European Studies Speaker Uppsala University, Sweden
Seminars

The European Union and "Chindia"

-
The rise of China and India is unparalleled in human history because never before has the world witnessed the simultaneous and consistent takeoffs of two nations, accounting for more one third of the planet’s population, which have been consistently registering high growth rates for two decades. Their rise has profound implications for the world economy and world politics. Both China and India – the two new big kids on the block – have no difficulty with a rule-based world order, what they want is “a different set of rules”. 

The rise of China and India represents both challenges and opportunities for Europe. Rising powers like China and India are challenging the European Union. They will be in a position to shape and influence global agendas and decisions to a greater extent than at present. For both, Europe will remain an indispensable partner since it is a vital source of trade, advanced technology and foreign direct investment. China and India do pose challenges for Europe, but they also provide opportunities since their growth contributes to greater growth worldwide, which means more exports, especially to a swelling consumerist middle class, which will make more demands of European goods, technology, and services.

Rajendra K Jain is Professor of European Studies and Chairperson, Centre for European Studies, School of International Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi. He is Secretary-General, Indian Association for European Union Studies. He has been Visiting Professor at Leipzig and Tuebingen University and at the Maison des Sciences de l’Homme, Paris. He is the author/editor of over two dozen books and has published 70 articles/chapters in books. He has most recently published India and the European Union: Building a Strategic Partnership (2007) (editor).

Download pdf

Philippines Conference Room

Rajendra Jain Professor, European Studies; Chairperson, Centre for European Studies, School of International Studies Speaker Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi
Seminars

The European Union and "Chindia"

The rise of China and India is unparalleled in human history because never before has the world witnessed the simultaneous and consistent takeoffs of two nations, accounting for more one third of the planet’s population, which have been consistently registering high growth rates for two decades. Their rise has profound implications for the world economy and world politics. Both China and India – the two new big kids on the block – have no difficulty with a rule-based world order, what they want is “a different set of rules”.

European political elites seem to be indulging in a degree of scapegoating about the danger from “ChinIndia”, since the roots of European angst really lie, among others, in European difficulties in managing globalization, declining competitiveness, fear of change, and an unsustainable health, pension and social welfare system. The Europeans tends to perceive the Chinese juggernaut as a direct immediate threat to European jobs in some manufacturing sectors whereas India is seen as a latent and potential threat taking away service-sector jobs, though pressures would increase as both move up the value chain.

The European Union’s strategic partnership with China and India is essentially driven by trade and commerce. India has too much of catching up to do with China. India is clearly in the Commonwealth Games league whereas China is in the Olympic Games league.

The rise of China and India represents both challenges and opportunities for Europe. Rising powers like China and India are challenging the European Union. They will be in a position to shape and influence global agendas and decisions to a greater extent than at present. For both, Europe will remain an indispensable partner since it is a vital source of trade, advanced technology and foreign direct investment. China and India do pose challenges for Europe, but they also provide opportunities since their growth contributes to greater growth worldwide, which means more exports, especially to a swelling consumerist middle class, which will make more demands of European goods, technology, and services.

Rajendra K Jain is Professor of European Studies and Chairperson, Centre for European Studies, School of International Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi. He is Secretary-General, Indian Association for European Union Studies. He has been Visiting Professor at Leipzig and Tuebingen university and at the Maison des Sciences de l’Homme, Paris. He is the author/editor of over two dozen books and has published 70 articles/chapters in books. He has most recently published India and the European Union: Building a Strategic Partnership (2007) (editor).

Philippines Conference Room

Rajendra K. Jain Professor of European Studies and Chairperson, Centre for European Studies, School of International Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi Speaker
Seminars

Poland in an Integrated Europe: Perspectives for sustainable development, greater innovation and strategic partnership in the globalized economy

-

Economic security, sustainable development, clean energy and energy security, better regulations, greater innovativeness and the growing share of Polish economy in the international market; these are the main priorities of the Polish government and Ministry of Economy. How is Poland going to handle the 21st Century challenges? How will Poland find its niche in the globalized economy? These are the questions that will be discussed by the Polish Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Economy, Mr. Waldemar Pawlak.

Born in 1959, Mr. Waldemar Pawlak graduated from the Warsaw University of Technology with an engineering degree in automotive and construction machinery. He has served as a member of the Polish Parliament since 1989; as President of the board of the Warsaw Commodities Exchange from 2001 to 2005; as Prime Minister of Poland in 1992 and again in 1993 to 1995; and as Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Economy of Poland since November 2007.

 

This seminar is jointly sponsored by the Forum on Contemporary Europe, the Center for Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law, the U.S.-Polish Trade Council, and the Consulate General of the Republic of Poland in Los Angeles.

Oksenberg Conference Room

Waldemar Pawlak Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Economy, Poland Speaker
Seminars
Subscribe to Trade