Cross-Border Cooperation: Executing Intergovernmental Competences

The article examines the legal principles of the formation and development of cross-border and regional cooperation between Ukraine and the European Union. Having summarized the entire complex of special legal literature, it is determined that the legal principles of the formation and development of cross-border and regional cooperation between Ukraine and the European Union have practically not been studied by legal science. It is established that the current policy of Ukraine is marked by a European integration priority, the implementation of which is impossible outside the format of cooperation with the European Union, including cross-border and regional cooperation. The process of forming the studied sphere of legal relations is determined, the main trends and features of the development of these relations at different stages of historical development are determined, it is determined that the functioning of cross-border and regional cooperation between Ukraine and the European Union can be possible only under the condition of sufficient and proper regulatory regulation. It has been studied that Ukraine’s intentions to develop relations with the European Union were first enshrined in a Resolution of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, and later recorded in the Partnership and Cooperation Agreement between Ukraine and the European Communities and their Member States, and the requirements for cross-border and regional cooperation were defined in the Ukraine-European Union Action Plan “European Neighborhood Policy”, and later became more detailed in the Association Agreement between Ukraine, on the one hand, and the European Union, the European Atomic Energy Community and their Member States, on the other hand. It was found that although the analysed regulatory legal acts of Ukraine have become somewhat oriented towards the norms of European Union law in the field of cross-border cooperation and regional cooperation, they still need improvement in terms of unification of terminology in the field of cross-border cooperation and regional cooperation; clear regulation of the status of the cross-border cooperation body under the euroregional cooperation groupings, clear regulation of the competence of local authorities regarding forms of cross-border cooperation, etc.

В статье рассматриваются основные направления, тенденции и перспективы приграничного и регионального сотрудничества Монголии и России (на примере Республики Бурятия). Дан исторический экскурс приграничного со-трудничества, который позволил реконструировать давние торгово-экономические и добрососедские связи между Россией и Монголией. На основе статистических данных по состоянию на 2018–2019 гг. проведён анализ динамики двухстороннего торгового оборота, инвестиционного сотрудничества и современного состояния торгово-экономического сотрудничества Республики Бурятия и Монголии. Установлено, что в рамках реализации трёхстороннего экономического коридора «Россия – Монголия – Китай» приграничное сотрудничество между Монголией и Республикой Бурятия имеет высокий потенциал экономического и инвестиционного развития. Особое внимание уделяется существующим препятствиям в приграничном российско-монгольском сотрудничестве и анализируются пути их преодоления. Сделан вывод, что Республика Бурятия среди приграничных регионов РФ является основным торгово-экономическим партнёром Монголии, развивает культурные, образовательные и гуманитарные связи. The article discusses the main directions, trends and prospects of cross-border and regional cooperation between Mongolia and Russia (on the example of the Republic of Buryatia). A historical excursion of cross-border cooperation was given, which made it possible to reconstruct the long-standing trade, economic and good-neighborly ties between Russia and Mongolia. Based on statistical data, an analysis of the dynamics of bilateral trade, investment cooperation and the current state of trade and economic cooperation of the Republic of Buryatia and Mongolia was carried out. It has been established that in the context of implementing the trilateral economic corridor of «Russia-Mongolia-China», cross-border cooperation between Mongolia and the Republic of Buryatia has a high potential for economic development. Attention has been paid to the existing obstacles in the cross-border Russian-Mongolian cooperation and the ways of overcoming them. It is concluded that the Republic of Buryatia among the border regions is the main trade and economic partner of Mongolia, and develops cultural, educational and humanitarian ties.

Background The European Neighborhood Policy (ENP) focuses on security, migration, and economic stability. Strengthening health systems can contribute to these aims by building local resilience and institutions; however, little is known about the EU’s health policy and impacts in the Southern Neighborhood (Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Palestine, Egypt, Libya, Tunisia, Algeria, Morocco). This paper examines the role of health in the ENP and what is known about the health-related impacts of EU actions in this region. Methods This is a qualitative case study of the EU’s ENP commitments, outcomes, and impacts (2004-2024) in nine middle-income Southern Neighborhood countries. A scoping review of empirical evidence included 5 scholarly databases and grey literature published. Retrieved publications and the ENP documents were thematically analysed with WHO’s health systems building blocks and the alignment between the ENP and practice was assessed. Results ENP health actions have evolved from public health and selected communicable diseases (2004), to health service delivery, vaccine supply, and occupational health (2021). The review included 19 publications (2004-2024). Publications most often addressed the financing (n = 14 papers) and service delivery (n = 9) aspects of health systems (not mutually exclusive), and only once addressed workforce and health information. Publications addressed mostly intentional EU health actions in the region; 4 papers reported unintentional effects. Conclusions The limited scope of health actions in the ENPs suggests health may be instrumentalised to pursue the EU’s security and stability goals. The type of EU health actions reported most often in the literature were consistent with the ENP health priorities. There is no systematic evaluation of the impacts of the EU’s health-related commitments in the ENPs. To build resilience and trust in the region, future EU action should support a range of WHO building blocks and mitigate potential negative effects. Key messages • The EU’s health commitments in the European Neighborhood Policy evolved from public health & communicable diseases (2004), to health service delivery, vaccine supply, & occupational health (2021). • There is no systematic empirical evaluation of the impacts of the EU’s health-related commitments in the European Neighborhood Policy.

The European Union (EU) is a unique player in the Western Balkans, where it has employed a wide array of foreign policy instruments since the 1990s such as diplomacy, trade, financial assistance, civilian missions, military missions, and enlargement, which is the EU?s most successful foreign policy tool. The region is an inspiring case for studying the EU?s transformative power. The undeniable success of the EU?s Enlargement Policy in influencing transitions of Central and Eastern Europe countries has inspired research of the Europeanization, or the EU?s transformative power in relation to candidate countries, and its impact on their political and economic reforms during the accession process. Since then, the EU?s global transformative power has been in crisis. The European Neighbourhood Policy was reviewed in 2015, aiming not any more towards the transformation of neighbouring states, but rather at fostering their resilience. Similarly, the 2016 Global Strategy for the European Union?s Foreign and Security Policy set the principled pragmatism as a guideline. Moreover, the EU?s transformative power towards member states is questioned after two initiatives to trigger Article 7 TEU procedures against Poland and Hungary. What about the Europeanization of the Western Balkans? Despite the fact that the EU has been the main driver of change, the Europeanization of this post-conflict region has been slow. According to Freedom House, after substantial progress from 2004 to 2010, the Western Balkans has declined six years in a row, and its average Democracy Score in 2016 is the same as it was in 2004. With the exception of Albania, the scores of all countries are declining, not improving. The EU?s security-democratisation dilemma strongly affects its transformative power in the Western Balkans. By prioritising effective government rather than democratic governance, the EU has helped stabilise non-democratic and corrupt regimes rather than transforming them, legitimising Balkan "stabilitocrats".

Fedor Fedorovich Martens is a widely recognized international lawyer who organized and conducted a number of international conferences, the author of studies in the field of international law, a high-ranking employee of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Empire. The activity of F.F. Martens was devoted to a fairly extensive research literature. Historians assess his personal qualities differently, but agree on the diplomatic and legal practice of F.F. Martens. The value of the diaries of F.F. Martens lies in the fact that they contain assessments of the activities of Russian and foreign diplomats, other statesmen and the organization of foreign policy of the Russian Empire as a whole. The analysis of the diary entries of F.F. Martens allows us to identify his personal position, which sometimes differed markedly from what he wrote in official documents reflecting the formal business side of the issue. This makes it possible to introduce significant elements in understanding how the practice of appointments and personnel decisions in the sphere of Russias foreign policy was formed. F.F. Martens criticized the principles on which the practice of appointments and personnel decisions in the sphere of Russias foreign policy was based, noting the phenomena that hindered a successful implementation of the foreign policy of the Russian Empire.

The growing number of coalition governments in European states, many of which are minority governments, raises questions about how they form and function. The case of Denmark, where such governments have long become a part of political everyday life, helps to identify the main specific features of foreign policy portfolio allocation in the cabinet and the Danish parliament, since the Kingdom is one of the most successful examples of cooperation between the government and parliament in the field of foreign policy and defence. The article analyses the mechanisms and factors for the foreign policy portfolio allocation in 2001-2023, taking into account successive "blue" and "red" party blocs. Various theories of coalition formation and portfolio allocation in coalition governments are used to explain the distinguishing features of such allocation at a particular historical stage. In addition, general features of the development of the Danish political system at the present stage, the main trends and prospects for this development are considered. The authors conclude that when allocating portfolios in the government, preference is given to "junior" coalition partners, while in parliament - to "senior" ones; the opinion of the Danish People's Party is taken into account by coalition partners without the Party’s inclusion in the government; the choice is given in favour of popular and authoritative politicians constituting the foreign policy elite of Denmark over the past three decades; the functioning of the Foreign Policy Committee provides some kind of balance of power in the Danish Parliament on foreign and defence policy. It is also found out that the strategies for coalition formation and foreign policy portfolio allocation do not significantly differ between the "blue" and "red" party blocs, but follow the same logic aimed at maintaining the stability of the minority government’s position.

This chapter considers the relationship between the legislative and executive branches on foreign policy matters. The Constitution assigns both Congress and the president important powers in the realm of foreign and military policy. Article I of the Constitution gives Congress the power to declare war, to raise armies, to regulate commerce with foreign nations, and, in the case of the Senate, the power to ratify treaties and concur in the appointment of ambassadors. It is Congress, moreover, that must appropriate the funds to pay for military and foreign policy initiatives. Over the decades, however, Congress's ability to contend with the executive in the foreign policy realm has gradually declined as presidents have used their power of initiative to marginalize the legislative branch.

The article analyses the importance of the ideological factor in the shaping of US foreign policy in the late 20th and early decades of the 21st centuries. The role of ideology in US foreign policy is outlined in historical retrospect. It is pointed out that after the collapse of the Soviet Union, the USA faced the problem of finding a new ideological doctrine that would replace the anti-Communist doctrine of the Cold War era. The key aim was to substantiate the country’s claims to geopolitical dominance and the creation of a unipolar world, which took shape as early as in the 1990s. During that period, the ideological basis of US foreign policy were the concept of democratic enlargement by A. Lake and, for the post-Soviet states, the concept of geopolitical pluralism by Z. Brzeziński. In the early 21st century, democratic enlargement was supplemented by the concepts of humanitarian intervention and regime change, whose purpose was to ideologically substantiate the policy of largescale military interventions that were launched in the late 1990s – early 2000s. The author analyses the attempts of the US leadership to deviate from the so-called reset policy by Barack Obama, as well as the announced abandonment of the policy of interventions in the course of Donald Trump’s first presidential term. In addition, the role of ideology in the country’s foreign policy during Joe Biden’s presidency is studied. The author comes to the conclusion that the current US foreign policy is extremely ideologized. The steps taken by the US leadership in the sphere of foreign policy are rather based on ideological stereotypes than on the analysis of the actual state of affairs on the global stage. According to the author, the dominant ideology makes the stabilization of the system of international relations impossible. In conclusion, the author attempts to determine prospects for US foreign policy taking into account a major recent event, i.e. D. Trump’s victory in the US presidential election.

Abstract. This article uses the European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) as a case study to conceptualize and to define further the characteristics of the European Union as an international actor in the making. It builds upon discourse analysis and field research to argue that the European Union can be best understood as a ‘Pioneer Europe’ looking for new ways of doing foreign policy, thus experimenting its policies abroad and constantly learning from the successes and failures of its own policies. The article highlights in particular the discrepancies between a policy discourse mainly developed around the notion of the EU as a ‘soft power’ and implementation in the field reflecting the various tensions inherent to a policy which, at the image of the EU, still encounters difficulties to define itself.

This chapter deals with the pitfalls and pathways of research design aimed at the study of the European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) and maps out the literature on questions of knowledge ambition, research ontology and epistemology, and choices of approaches to the research object. We include a review of traditional research designs in ENP research, through a systematic meta-analysis of a selection of the most-cited articles on the ENP. Inspired by earlier work on awareness of research design in EU studies, ENP research is categorised according to typical choices of research design in the form of dichotomous trade-offs. The chapter then discusses how individual contributions to this volume deal with research design challenges of the past and present innovative ways of studying the revised ENP.

Poland-Ukraine relations, which have a long tradition, are characterized by the existence of complex and multifaceted processes and events. Both peoples, Polish and Ukrainian, have a long experience of interacting and functioning in common state structures, a common enemy in the struggle for independence, loss of statehood and its restoration. The history of bilateral relations is rich in dramatic and even tragic events that left a traumatic mark in the collective memory of the two nations. Due to the situation created in Ukraine today, the attention of the world community is not only focused on this country, but also on all participants in the resolution of the crisis. Among the latter, Poland is especially noteworthy, which has always actively participated in the fate of Ukraine. Therefore, when analyzing Polish-Ukrainian relations, it is worth paying equal attention to both the historical experience of relations between these countries and their current situation. On the one hand, Poland was the first to recognize Ukraine's independence, on the other hand, it did not support the creation of a military-political union. When L. Kuchma came to power in Ukraine, the Poland-Ukraine declaration on strategic cooperation was signed. Warsaw set a course to bring Kyiv closer to Europe. With all the possible support of the EU's enlargement policy, Poland already in 2001 proposed to the EU its vision of the concept of relations with Ukraine, Belarus and Russia, which was based on the idea of ​​creating a "ring of friendly countries". Through close cooperation on the borders of the European Union, in the field of politics, security, economy and culture. Today we can declare a high level of cooperation between Poland and Ukraine. Traditionally, relations in the political and economic spheres come to the fore. The priorities of Polish foreign policy for 2012-2016 state that Ukraine is an important strategic partner of Poland, which, in turn, supports the aspirations of Ukrainian society in the European Union and the deepening of relations between NATO and Ukraine. There was the 2004 "Orange Revolution" in Ukraine. Pro-Western candidate V. According to Yushchenko, Poland acted as Ukraine's "advocate" in the European Union. First, "on November 17, 2004, at the initiative of the Polish side, the European Parliament adopted a resolution calling for a fair and transparent second round of elections." In addition, Poland supported the invitation of Ukraine to the EU as soon as possible. When Yushchenko came to power, one of the main topics of bilateral cooperation was the issue of dependence on Russian gas supplies. However, the gas crisis of 2009 showed that dialogue with Russia is necessary. Polish political scientists positively evaluated the role of Warsaw in the Orange Revolution. Poland was given credit not only for normalizing the political situation in Ukraine, but also for demonstrating its role in the European Union. As Warsaw pointed out, democracy in Ukraine was recognized "not so much as a European, but as a Polish success". The next step in the activation of relations between Poland and Ukraine was the initiation of the Eastern Partnership project (2009), which was connected with the idea of ​​increasing the effectiveness of the "European Neighborhood Policy". Poland attached special importance to holding the Eastern Partnership Summit on November 28, 2013 in Vilnius. It was expected to become a landmark moment in the life of the Eastern Partnership, after the initialing of the Association Agreements with the European Union and 6 countries. The "Eastern Partnership" (Georgia, Moldova, Azerbaijan, Ukraine, Armenia, Belarus) was supposed to take place. However, at the Vilnius Summit, the Association Agreement and the EU Free Trade Area were initialed only with Georgia and Moldova, and an agreement on visa facilitation between the EU and Azerbaijan was signed. No documents were signed regarding Ukraine, Armenia and Belarus. Today, the Polish minority in Ukraine occupies an important place in the structure of Polish-Ukrainian cooperation. The ability to fulfill the needs of the Polish minority depends on the quality of interstate relations. Also, interstate cooperation helps to establish contacts between Polish and Ukrainian societies as a whole. Over the past two decades, Poland and Ukraine have taken a number of measures to bring each other closer together, the results of which were: visa-free border crossing for Polish and Ukrainian citizens, a network of Polish consular offices in Ukraine, developed international rail and bus services, legal seasonal employment opportunities for Ukrainian citizens in Poland. According to the data of the Polish Institute of Public Affairs, every tenth citizen of Ukraine visited Poland after 1991. Another important aspect of political relations between Poland and Ukraine is security policy. As the Polish researcher A. Yevski notes, "the development of Polish-Ukrainian military cooperation was a natural continuation of good neighborly relations between the countries." Security cooperation between Poland and Ukraine was aimed at NATO's eastern expansion and further integration.

Abstract. This article examines the EU’s most prominent policy tool (short of further enlargement) intended to help stabilize and secure relations with its bordering states: the European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP). Dealing with the problem of regional stabilization has been a central rationale of the ENP and in what follows we consider how the ENP’s concern with this problem has been pursued through the framework of political dialogue with partners, focusing particularly on cooperation in external relations. There are undoubted benefits which the ENP brings to this policy domain, however the initiative is also saddled with three sets of problems. The first relates to the question of local relevance and ‘value-added’, and is a concern largely for the ENP partners. The second is the challenge of policy coherence and is played out at the EU level and among EU Member States. The third is how the ENP relates to important regional actors (principally the USA and Russia) who have the potential to both facilitate and frustrate the initiative. These three challenges frame the context for two brief regional snapshots of the ENP in action, looking at EU security relations with the South Caucasus (and Georgia more specifically) and the Middle East.

Potentially, the participation of small and medium-sized businesses in cross-border cooperation in the border regions of the country should intensify its development, bring specificity to it. However, the analysis showed that there is no noticeable specificity in the dynamics of employment in the field of small and medium-sized businesses in non-priority geostrategic border areas in comparison with other regions of Russia, incl. the crisis year 2020. As in the country as a whole, the development of small and medium-sized businesses in these border areas is difficult, unstable, multidirectional, moreover, in line with the longterm tendency towards its curtailment. Against the background of a generally unfavorable economic, including entrepreneurial, climate, the specifics of the functioning of small and medium-sized businesses in the border areas are hardly distinguishable. This lack of distinction confirms the low estimates of the degree of openness of the Russian economy, the fact that a significant part of the border regions are depressed. With a low level of openness, the potential opportunities from cross-border and other economic cooperation with foreign countries in such Russian territories are poorly realized and play a secondary role. Nonpriority border regions to a greater extent perform “barrier functions” due to geostrategic reasons, rather than the functions of economic growth points.

Populist parties in government, such as Lega and Fidesz, have a declared interest in European Union (EU) foreign policy in the Southern Neighbourhood. Their main focus is on migration control, border management and security issues for these countries. It is thus relevant to investigate to what extent populism is shaping the development of the European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) as it evolves from a normative-based policy towards a much more ‘interest-based’ policy. This article will examine the implications of Italian and Hungarian populist pressure on the ENP in third country contexts, using Tunisia and Egypt as in-depth case studies. The article also aims to contribute conceptually to current debates on the de-Europeanisation -or not- of EU foreign policy. The two cases illustrate how, under the influence of member states with populist radical right parties (PRRPs) in government, informal and illiberal Europeanisation is not a contradiction in terms but a real possibility.

Power concentration in the hands of Xi Jinping, Chinese Communist Party General Secretary, can be interpreted not only as a reaction to the power fragmentation and the intra-party factionalism that developed under his predecessor, but also as a way to strengthen and stabilise China’s authoritarian polity. In the realm of foreign and security policy, it can also be understood as the result of China’s awareness of both the growing transnational security risks that it is facing and the need to better address the new international tasks and responsibilities it needs to fulfil as a great power. Since 2012, Xi has embarked on sweeping institutional reforms that have contributed to centralising and better coordinating foreign and security decision-making. Yet, although more integrated, China’s authoritarian system has remained fragmented, including in the realm of foreign and security policy, an area where decision-making processes are still highly opaque.