Fandom

VroniPlag Wiki

Quelle:Gd/Sagramoso 2003

< Quelle:Gd

31.268Seiten in
diesem Wiki
Seite hinzufügen
Diskussion0

Störung durch Adblocker erkannt!


Wikia ist eine gebührenfreie Seite, die sich durch Werbung finanziert. Benutzer, die Adblocker einsetzen, haben eine modifizierte Ansicht der Seite.

Wikia ist nicht verfügbar, wenn du weitere Modifikationen in dem Adblocker-Programm gemacht hast. Wenn du sie entfernst, dann wird die Seite ohne Probleme geladen.

Angaben zur Quelle [Bearbeiten]

Autor     Domitilla Sagramoso
Titel    The UN, the OSCE and NATO
Sammlung    The South Caucasus: a challenge for the EU
Herausgeber    EU Institute for Security Studies
Beteiligte    Pavel Baev, Bruno Coppieters, Svante E. Cornell, David Darchiashvili, Arman Grigorian, Dov Lynch, John Roberts, Domitilla Sagramoso, Brenda Shaffer und Arif Yunusov
Ort    Paris
Datum    Dezember 2003
Nummer    65
Seiten    63-89
Reihe    Chaillot Papers
ISSN    1017-7566
URL    http://www.iss.europa.eu/uploads/media/cp065e.pdf

Literaturverz.   

nein
Fußnoten    ja
Fragmente    5


Fragmente der Quelle:
[1.] Gd/Fragment 036 109 - Diskussion
Zuletzt bearbeitet: 2013-12-16 22:16:06 Guckar
Fragment, Gd, Gesichtet, SMWFragment, Sagramoso 2003, Schutzlevel sysop, Verschleierung

Typus
Verschleierung
Bearbeiter
Graf Isolan
Gesichtet
Yes.png
Untersuchte Arbeit:
Seite: 36, Zeilen: 109-113
Quelle: Sagramoso 2003
Seite(n): 84, Zeilen: 5-12
----

51 At the Prague summit, NATO launched the Individual Partnership Action Plan (IPAP), an individual cooperation plan designed specifically for each individual partner and intended “to prioritise, harmonise and organise all aspects of the NATO-Partner relationship in the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council (EAPC) and PfP framework”. Azerbaijan and Georgia are part of this program. See Prague Summit declaration - http://www.nato.int/docu/pr/2002/p02-127e.htm. (12.12.2007)

At the Prague summit, NATO launched the Individual Partnership Action Plan (IPAP), an individual cooperation plan designed specifically for each individual partner and intended ‘to prioritise, harmonise and organise all aspects of the NATO-Partner relationship in the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council (EAPC) and PfP framework’.44 Azerbaijan and Georgia formally applied for IPAP in 2003 and their applications are currently under consideration.

44. ‘Report on the Comprehensive Review of the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council and Partnership for Peace’, NATO, Prague, 21 November 2002; available at http://www.nato.int/docu/basictxt/b021121a.htm.

Anmerkungen

Aktualisiert und doch immer noch weitgehend wortwörtlich übereinstimmend. Ohne Hinweis auf eine Übernahme.

Sichter
(Graf Isolan) Schumann

[2.] Gd/Fragment 036 11 - Diskussion
Zuletzt bearbeitet: 2013-12-16 21:29:34 Guckar
BauernOpfer, Fragment, Gd, Gesichtet, SMWFragment, Sagramoso 2003, Schutzlevel sysop

Typus
BauernOpfer
Bearbeiter
Graf Isolan
Gesichtet
Yes.png
Untersuchte Arbeit:
Seite: 36, Zeilen: 11-19
Quelle: Sagramoso 2003
Seite(n): 83, 84, Zeilen: 83:23-30.39-40 - 84:1-3
Armenia’s cooperation with NATO remained more limited than it of Georgia and Azerbaijan, partly because of its reliance on Russia for military assistance and partly because of its poor relations with Turkey, a NATO member state and neighbour. However, after Javier Solana’s visit to Yerevan in February 1997, Armenia decided to enhance its cooperation with NATO by participating in military training exercises and developing a peacekeeping contingent to participate in UN operations. As a result of increased US military assistance to Azerbaijan after the 11th September, Armenia decided to expand its cooperation with NATO, and expressed its desire to hold a NATO PfP exercise in 2003; and to obtain NATO assistance in the areas of civil emergency planning and peacekeeping.50

50 Baev, Cornell – The South Caucasus. ISS, Dec. 2003. pp. 83-84

[Seite 83]

Armenia’s cooperation with NATO remained more limited, partly because of its reliance on Russia for military assistance and partly because of its poor relations with Turkey, a NATO member state and neighbour. However, after Javier Solana’s visit to Yerevan in February 1997, Armenia decided to enhance its cooperation with NATO by participating in military training exercises and developing a peacekeeping contingent to participate in UN operations.42

[...] As a result of increased US military assistance to Azerbaijan after 11 September, Armenia decided to

[Seite 84]

expand its cooperation with NATO, and expressed its desire to hold a NATO PfP exercise in 2003 and to obtain NATO assistance in the areas of civil emergency planning and peacekeeping.43


42. Inga Paliani, ‘EAPC and PfP Enhancements in Promoting Security: The Caucasian Perspective’, NATO-EAPC Research Fellowship, 2000-2002, Final Report, p. 20.

43. ‘Statement by his Excellency Vartan Oskanian, Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Armenia’, NATO, Brussels, 7 December 2001; available at http://www.nato.inte/docu/speech/2001/s011207aa.htm.

Anmerkungen

Art und Umfang der Übernahme bleiben ungekennzeichnet.

Sichter
(Graf Isolan) Schumann

[3.] Gd/Fragment 037 03 - Diskussion
Zuletzt bearbeitet: 2013-12-16 22:17:44 Guckar
Fragment, Gd, Gesichtet, SMWFragment, Sagramoso 2003, Schutzlevel sysop, Verschleierung

Typus
Verschleierung
Bearbeiter
Graf Isolan
Gesichtet
Yes.png
Untersuchte Arbeit:
Seite: 37, Zeilen: 3-28
Quelle: Sagramoso 2003
Seite(n): 85, 86, Zeilen: 85:4-19; 86:10-12.15-34
At the same time, NATO’s such a close cooperation with Georgia and Azerbaijan, created high expectations of the countries’ governments that NATO would resolve their security challenges. However, it was confusion that NATO would become the new guarantor of peace and security in the region, or even, would assist in the resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh, Abkhaz or South Ossetian conflicts.

NATO has regularly condemned the use of force in the region and expressed its support for the territorial integrity of the South Caucasian states. However, NATO countries have refrained from getting directly involved in conflict resolution, deferring to other international organizations such as the OSCE or the UN. Not only did NATO not intervene to stop the violence or to impose a settlement in Nagorno-Karabakh, South Ossetia and Abkhazia, as it did in Bosnia and Kosovo, but it has not become involved in peacekeeping operations at all along the various cease-fire lines. In all fairness, it must be said that when these conflicts erupted, NATO did not yet have a mandate to intervene in out-of-area operations and conduct peace support operations. It took three years of bloody fighting and ethnic cleansing in Bosnia for NATO to conduct its first air strikes against Serb positions in the summer 1995.

Despite NATO’s positive and increased involvement in the region, major shortcomings remain. First of all, NATO managed to address only peripherally the main security threats and challenges effecting countries in the region - i.e. unresolved conflicts, open borders, weak and corrupt state structures, inefficient armed forces, and arms and drug smuggling. NATO’s limited involvement in the South Caucasus, especially as far as peace support operations are concerned, contrasts sharply with the organization’s deep involvement in other parts of Europe, particularly in former Yugoslavia. Only more recently, and within the context of the war on terror, have crucial security issues been addressed, such as the enhancement of border controls. Despite their high value, the NATO PfP and IPAP programs remain limited instruments for resolving the region’s pressing security needs.

[Seite 85]

Despite NATO’s positive and increased involvement in the region, major shortcomings remain. First of all, NATO managed to address only peripherally the main security threats and challenges affecting countries in the region – i.e. unresolved conflicts, open borders, weak and corrupt state structures, inefficient armed forces, and arms and drug smuggling. NATO’s limited involvement in the South Caucasus, especially as far as peace support operations are concerned, contrasts sharply with the organisation’s deep involvement in other parts of Europe, particularly in former Yugoslavia. Only more recently, and within the context of the war on terror, have crucial security issues been addressed, such as the enhancement of border controls. Their high value notwithstanding, NATO’s PfP programme and the EAPC remain limited instruments for resolving the region’s pressing security needs, in spite of NATO’s efforts to improve the countries’ military and security structures.

[Seite 86]

This – rightly or wrongly – created high expectations among partner countries, especially Georgia and Azerbaijan, that NATO would resolve their security challenges. [...] Such cooperation has led to confusion and created great expectations among South Caucasian states that NATO would become the new guarantor of peace and security in the region and even assist in the resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh, Abkhaz and South Ossetian conflicts.

NATO has regularly condemned the use of force in the region and expressed its support for the territorial integrity of the South Caucasian states. However, NATO countries have refrained from getting directly involved in conflict resolution, deferring to other international organisations such as the OSCE or the UN for the peaceful resolution of the disputes. Not only did NATO not intervene to stop the violence or to impose a settlement in Nagorno-Karabakh, South Ossetia or Abkhazia, as it did in Bosnia and Kosovo, it has not become involved in peacekeeping operations along the various cease-fire lines. In all fairness, it must be said that when these conflicts erupted NATO did not yet have a mandate to intervene in out-of-area operations and conduct peace support operations. It took three years of bloody fighting and ethnic cleansing in Bosnia for NATO to conduct its first air strikes against Serb positions in the summer of 1995.

Anmerkungen

Ohne Hinweis auf eine Übernahme.

Sichter
(Graf Isolan) Schumann

[4.] Gd/Fragment 040 29 - Diskussion
Zuletzt bearbeitet: 2013-12-16 21:39:12 Guckar
Fragment, Gd, Gesichtet, SMWFragment, Sagramoso 2003, Schutzlevel sysop, Verschleierung

Typus
Verschleierung
Bearbeiter
Graf Isolan
Gesichtet
Yes.png
Untersuchte Arbeit:
Seite: 40, Zeilen: 29-33
Quelle: Sagramoso 2003
Seite(n): 88, 89, Zeilen: 88:34-40 - 89:1-4
The NATO has been hampered in its efforts to address the security challenges by a series of factors: the limitation of mandates, lack of adequate resources, internal disagreements among member states and the absence of strong political will to become more deeply engaged in the region. The west has tended to devote most of its attention to other regions of the world, such as the Balkans, Central Europe, etc; and has failed to devote to the [South Caucasian region the attention and resources it requires.] [Seite 88]

International organisations such as NATO, the UN and the OSCE have been hampered in their efforts to address the security challenges by a series of factors: the limitation of their mandates, their lack of adequate resources, internal disagreements among member states and the absence of strong political will among member countries of the various organisations to become more deeply engaged in the

[Seite 89]

region. These organisations have tended to devote most of their attention to other regions of the world, such as the Balkans, Central and Eastern Europe or Africa, and have failed to devote to the South Caucasian region the attention and resources it requires.

Anmerkungen

Ohne Hinweis auf eine Übernahme.

Sichter
(Graf Isolan) Schumann

[5.] Gd/Fragment 041 01 - Diskussion
Zuletzt bearbeitet: 2013-12-16 21:40:23 Guckar
Fragment, Gd, Gesichtet, SMWFragment, Sagramoso 2003, Schutzlevel sysop, Verschleierung

Typus
Verschleierung
Bearbeiter
Graf Isolan
Gesichtet
Yes.png
Untersuchte Arbeit:
Seite: 41, Zeilen: 1-4
Quelle: Sagramoso 2003
Seite(n): 89, Zeilen: 1-9
[The west has tended to devote most of its attention to other regions of the world, such as the Balkans, Central Europe, etc; and has failed to devote to the] South Caucasian region the attention and resources it requires. However, it would be unfair to place the blame for the difficulties faced by the region entirely on the west. The three South Caucasian states bear the greatest share of responsibility for the outbreak of the various conflicts and for failing to resolve their most pressing security needs. These organisations have tended to devote most of their attention to other regions of the world, such as the Balkans, Central and Eastern Europe or Africa, and have failed to devote to the South Caucasian region the attention and resources it requires.

However, it would be unfair to place the blame for the difficulties faced by the region entirely on the international organisations. The three South Caucasian states bear the greatest share of responsibility for the outbreak of the various conflicts and for failing to resolve their most pressing security needs.

Anmerkungen

Ohne Hinweis auf eine Übernahme.

Sichter
(Graf Isolan) Schumann

Auch bei Fandom

Zufälliges Wiki