Hakkımda

FİRUZ DEMİR YAŞAMIŞ Siyasal Bilgiler Fakültesi’ni bitirmiştir (1968). University of Southern California’da planlama (kentsel ve bölgesel çevre) ve kamu yönetimi yüksek lisans programlarını bitirmiştir (1976). Siyaset ve Kamu Yönetimi Doktoru (1991). Yerel Yönetimler, Kentleşme ve Çevre Politikaları bilim dalında doçent (1993). Başbakanlık Çevre Müsteşarlığı’nın kuruluşu sırasında müsteşar vekili. (1978-80) UNICEF Türkiye temsilciliği. (1982-84) Dünya Bankası’nın Çukurova Kentsel Gelişme Projesi’nde kurumsal gelişme uzmanı. (1984-86) Çankaya Belediyesi’nin kurumsal gelişme projesini yürütmüştür. (1989-91) Yedinci Kalkınma Planı “Çevre Özel İhtisas Komisyonu”nun başkanlığı. DPT “Çevre Yapısal Değişim Projesi” komisyonu başkanlığı. Cumhurbaşkanlığı DDK’nun Devlet Islahat Projesi raportörü. (2000-1) Çevre Bakanlığı Müsteşarı (Şubat 1998 – Ağustos 1999). Sabancı Üniversitesi tam zamanlı öğretim üyesi. (2001-2005) Halen yarı zamanlı öğretim üyesi olarak çeşitli üniversitelerde ders vermektedir. Şimdiye kadar ders verdiği üniversiteler arasında Ankara, Orta Doğu, Hacettepe, Fatih, Yeditepe, Maltepe ve Lefke Avrupa (Kıbrıs) üniversiteleri bulunmaktadır.
Blogger tarafından desteklenmektedir.

Translate

Toplam Sayfa Görüntüleme Sayısı

EVİM: ARKEON, TUZLA, ISTANBUL, TÜRKİYE

EVİM: ARKEON, TUZLA, ISTANBUL, TÜRKİYE
EV

Bu Blogda Ara

1 Haziran 2025 Pazar

 

 

 

 

 

 

THE FUTURE OF NATO’S ISTANBUL COOPERATION INITIATIVE

 

PROF. DR. FIRUZ DEMIR YASAMIS

 

DIRECTOR OF RESEARCH AND ADVANCEMENT

AMERICAN UNIVERSITY IN THE EMIRATES

UNITED ARAB REPUBLIC

 

PRESENTED IN

 

ISTANBUL COOPERATION INITIATIVE POLICY ADVISORY GROUP (ICI PAG) MEETING

 

 

GRAND TARABYA HOTEL

16-18 NOVEMBER 2014

 

ISTANBUL, TURKEY

 

 

firuz.yasamis@aue.ae

fyasamis@gmail.com

(90) (532) 3619156

(971) (56) 2744538

(971) (4) 4499554


 

Introduction

1.      This paper aims to forecast the future of Istanbul Cooperation Initiative (ICI) established in 2004 to set up a framework for the relations between NATO and some Arabic Gulf countries namely the UAE, Kuwait, Bahrain and Qatar. Oman and Saudi Arabia has the observer status they did not signed the document yet. The intended relations, although not specifically spelled out in writing, covers the areas of security in the Gulf Region in other words Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries.

2.      At the first instance, such a political and military alliance makes sense since the region is oil rich and energy security is a major security concern for most NATO members. On the other hand, secure and safe out flow of oil to the World markets is crucial for the ICI and GCC countries.

3.      The fate of the alliance, realistically speaking, will depend on the success to be achieved on the above stated expectations of the parties. If the expectations are met the Alliance will go ahead and be further enhanced, deepened and solidified. On the contrary, the established system will die down in time. The main expectation for NATO is to help regional security in terms of military training as foreseen in the ICI document, whereas, the main expectation of the ICI countries is the security guarantee offered by NATO to the countries in the region. The partner countries’ top request is the security from external regional threats. On the other hand, all NATO is offering in the security field is “military exercises and related education and training” as stated in Istanbul Cooperation Initiative document. NATO does not have more to offer for regional security.

4.      However, the forecasting the future of the ICI is not that simple. The regional issues are too complex and varied thus making to reach a dependable forecast is almost impossible. This paper will try to examine the issues and factors involved and, if possible, will make policy proposals.

 

Analysis of the Factors Affecting the Future of ICI

5.      There is a drastic improvement for the security concept developed since the end of the World War 2.  The security concepts such as "balance of power" and deterrence representing realist outlook and “collective security", “arms control”, "peaceful coexistence", “non alignment”, “neutrality”, “equal security” and “common security” representing liberal outlooks to the security issues. All these concepts were somehow successful to prevent the emergence of a new World War which will definitely mean the end of human kind on this Globe. The stockpiles of nuclear arsenal are more than enough to destroy everything that we have on this Globe.

6.      Although they were successful in the past, these concepts are now found to be not satisfactory to deal with the security issues in the World.

7.      Firstly, the security threats are not only military nature in our own today. There are new threats to the humanity which are not less significant than any military threat such as: Poverty, ecological and environmental catastrophes, national economic insecurity and instability, corruption and bribery, infectious diseases and environmental degradation, war and violence within States, the spread and possible use of radiological, chemical and biological weapons, terrorism, transnational organized crime, human trafficking, child trafficking, woman trafficking, drug trafficking, food and water security, cyber security and energy security. Therefore, security issues should not confined only to the military threats but should also cover threats mentioned above.

8.      Secondly, even for the military threats a new concept is developed by NATO: The Cooperative Security Concept. This new approach attaches an accelerated priority to the partnership responsibilities requesting more active and functional solutions to the threats against overall security and humanity. Basing upon more constructive dialogue among the partners, the new concepts urges member countries to develop more and better relations with the partners of the NATO in a smart manner since financial possibilities are not abundant anymore.

9.      NATO foreign ministers have established a different “partnership policy” with non-member countries in April 2011 in Berlin which bases upon the decisions accepted in the Lisbon Summit in  addition to the policies pursued since 90s such as “Partnership for Peace” (PfP), “Euro- Atlantic Partnership Council” (EAPC),  “the Mediterranean Dialogue (MD)”, and “the Istanbul Cooperation Initiative” (ICI).

10.   Within this framework there are several positive factors for NATO to contribute to the enhancement of cooperative security concept. First of NATO has deep interest in the regional matters particularly for the Gulf Region. Secondly, NATO is expanding its mission to the region with a desire for a better cooperation with the regional actors with a well established military power, political and organizational structure. “NATO’s training mission in IRAQ”, “ISAF Program” in Afghanistan, “the Mediterranean (MD) Dialogue” and “the Istanbul Cooperation Initiative” (ICI), “Partnership for Peace (PfP) Program”, “the Senior Civil Emergency Planning Committee”, “Individual Partnership and Cooperation” approach, “Tailored Cooperation Packages” and several others are the examples in this regard.

11.   The problems of the Gulf Region cannot be isolated from the problems of the Middle East. The region is producing two third of the oil produced in the World. Therefore, the Region is the essential source of energy for the World economy and particularly important for those countries that is oil dependent thus causing various type of players of the energy game has special interest in the Region.  Players of the game are mainly state actors in the region and outside the region having major interest in the region and non state actors such as al Qaeda, DAESH and other terrorist organizations aspiring a wide range of political ambitions ranging from re-establishment of the Caliphate, to toppling down of the governments in power to the establishment of a new religious state based upon Islamic Shariah principles.

12.   NATO has basic deficiencies as well. Firstly, NATO is based upon regular armies and conventional military principles. Other actors in the region are using asymmetric warfare strategies and tactics. Another main deficiency of NATO is the strong relations between the USA and Israel whereas the partner countries have serious differences of interest and opinion in regional security issues thus creating a lack of trust between the NATO and partner countries in the ICI Program.

13.   However, such a situation may lead to new roles for the European members of NATO. For instance and Turkey could have played a major role in this regard. This role seems do not exist at the moment because of pro-Ikhvan (Muslim Brotherhood) policy of the Turkish Government. Turkey’s backing for Mursi in Egypt has seriously curtailed the potential role of Turkey in the Region.

14.   There are several deficiencies for the ICI countries as well. Especially, the differences in the national security priorities of partner countries reflecting it into differences in foreign policies thus hampering further cooperation among the partners. The support and refuge provided by some partner countries to Ikhvan officials and military and economic aid to DAESH type terrorist organizations through either formal or non-formal channels have become major source of concerns for the partner countries causing lack of trust among the partners. Bahrain, Saudi Arabia and the UAE have recalled their ambassadors from Qatar. Further negotiation to straighten the relations is not progressing effectively at the moment. Proposed and agreed meetings are being postponed or cancelled at the last minutes. Therefore, it would not be mistaken to state that mutual confidence and trust are severely hampered in the region presently.

15.   Iran, which is not a member in the ICI, also is a major player in the region and is a very crucial factor for the assessment of the fate of the ICI. Iran is a Shia based country. On the other hand, the ICI or rather GCC countries are mainly Sunni societies with the exception of Bahrain. Therefore, the relations between Iran and Arabic monarchies in the region are not promising for the future. Iran has strong interest in Bahrain where the majority Shia population is governed by a minority Sunni government. In Syria where the majority of population is Sunni and governed by Esad family who is Alawite a section of Shia sect therefore preferred and supported by Iran whereas Qatar, Saudi Arabia and UAE are against the Esad regime in Syria. Furthermore, the Iran’s tendency to develop nuclear armament and long range missiles are seen as a serious threat not only by Israel but also by Gulf Countries. In addition to these potential security threats, the cyber wars between USA-Israel and Iran and then between Iran and Saudi Arabia are the real examples of animosities among the countries in the region.

16.   Impact of Muslim Brotherhood in the region also contributes considerably to the complexities of relations in the region. The aims of the Ikhvan movement’s are not secret for the countries in the region: to gain political control in Muslim countries by redesigning the political power structure. This objective seemed to be detrimental for the national security of the countries in the region. The Ikhvan Movement is forbidden and people supporting the Movement have been jailed. Claiming that Qatar is supporting Ikhvan Movement by allowing Qaradawi, the leading cleric, and supporters to operate in Qatar, the UAE, Saudi Arabia and Bahrain suspended their political cooperation with Qatar and re-called their ambassador to lower the level of diplomatic relations. Recently, Qatar has expelled some Ikhvan leaders but not Qaradawi who is from Egypt but is a Qatari national living in Qatar for long years. This basic issue is one of the most important factors in creating mutual distrust among the ICI partner countries.

17.   The impact of DAESH has been great in the regional security concerns. Sudden and quick appearance of DAESH and the size of area in Iraq and Syria controlled by DAESH have shocked most of the countries in the region. The whole political and military picture and existing balances have changed. The DAESH is trying to create a new State covering the territories of Syria, Iraq, Jordan and Lebanon. The new State will be governed on ye Shariah basis under the leadership of the re-instituted Caliph. The DAESH case has materialized the potential security dangers by a vivid example. The governments in the region are at further stake. DAESH is now controlling considerable amount of territory in Syria and Iraq with a big ambition on Jordan and then to Lebanon to establish a port on the Mediterranean Sea. Therefore, not Syria and Iraq but also Jordan and Lebanon is under the threat of DAESH militants. Turkey is also threatened by DAESH through its sleeping cells in Turkey. The DAESH success and the lack of any effective western reaction have created serious question marks about the MD and the ICI thus complicating the regional security concerns to the maximum extent possible.

18.   What is happening in Syria -if not anything else- is the basic declaration of nullifying the political borders established in the Middle East by Sykes-Picot Agreement after the First World War. It seems to be almost impossible to return to the old borders in the region and only borders will be changed but new states should be expected to be formed soon. The Kurdish segment of the new states has already established a safe haven in the Northern Iraq and now is trying to establish other milestones/cornerstones of the Great Kurdistan to be established over the territories of Iraq, Syria, Turkey and Iran. The insistence on Kurdish town of Kobani (Ayn al Arab) on the Turkish border proves this intention. Therefore, new states are being planned in the Region at the moment. The lack of vision over Syria’s future seems to be not coincidental but rather intended to allow such a radical transformation in the Region.

19.   Another important concern is the lack of vision of partnership on behalf of NATO and partner countries. For NATO the potential areas/topics of cooperation range from 200 to 500. However, these areas are not spelt out in the legal documents of MD and ICI. Therefore the scope of both MD and ICI is not known by NATO and partner states. Well intentional statements are taking place in the official documents; however, there is no specific action plan to be performed by both parties. This lack of vision over the ICI can curtail the development of cooperation and collaboration among the participating countries and the NATO. Despite these potential areas of cooperation the concept of security guarantees for partner countries is not taking place. Recent events in Egypt and Libya (not a member of MD) are proving that NATO cannot offer a security guarantee for the partner countries which see such a guarantee as the major expectation from the ICI accord. However there are positive examples in military cooperation such as UAE and Qatari planes are attacking against DAESH forces.

20.   Another significant factor in analyzing the fate of ICI is the leadership competitions among the local partners. The non-homogenous political structures and economic conditions in the partner countries are causing the leadership struggles in the Region. This competition negatively affects the cooperation and cooperation for regional security.

21.   The political priorities of the NATO and partner countries are different. The definition of democracy which is one of main anchorage points for NATO is creating confusion among the partners which are mainly in monarchic structure refusing the concept of political parties. Similarly, NATO, in principle, is a strong advocate of not only democracy, but also for individual liberties and the rule of law principle. These conceptual differences are creating obstacles for both sides. On the other hand, the internal stability concerns within the partner countries are the top priority in their national agenda and come before the concerns over democracy and individual liberties. The case of Egypt, Bahrain and Yemen are the examples to be further analyzed in this regard.

22.   Another restraint is coming from the non-NATO member countries such as Russia, China, India and Iran. Iran’s case has been explained earlier. Russia is interested in the region and is playing a decisive role over the Syrian Crisis by supporting the existing regime. Russia seems to be trying to get her influential position before the collapse of the Soviet Union by inserting pressures to the regional security issues. Another player is China which is dependent on oil coming from the Region. Therefore, for her economic security China perceives herself as the natural ally of the countries in the region. If given any chance China seems to be ready to set up political and military institutions with the GCC countries. Likewise, India has similar intentions over the Region. Rapidly growing economy of India also seems to be ready to take further active roles in the GCC region. Therefore, there are players other than NATO in the region which are ready to take initiative and even risks.

23.   I should also take attention to the insufficient amount of concrete projects and implementations carried out by NATO in the Region. Despite 500 potential areas of cooperation, so far no specific project which contributes directly to the enhanced security for the region has been undertaken by NATO with the exception of ICI Center to be established in Kuwait and NATO’s Ocean Shield Operation against the pirates in international waters. However, the number of concrete examples can be increased with the establishment of a common intelligence organization, working on other security issues such as  eradication of poverty, ecological and environmental catastrophes (global warming, climate change, sea level rise), national economic insecurity and instability, corruption and bribery, infectious diseases and environmental degradation, war and violence within States (insurgency and non-stability creating acts of subversive groups), the spread and possible use of radiological, chemical and biological weapons, combating with terrorism and terrorist organizations, transnational organized crime, human trafficking, child trafficking, drug trafficking, food and water security, cyber security and energy security.

24.   The recent policies of the European Union (EU) indicate that the real borders of the EU are not confined to the continent but go further up to the territories of important sources of production materials and other markets. These new policies make EU another major role player in the region. The EU has already opened liaison offices in the capitals of GCC countries. The major obstacle for EU, despite her common defense and foreign policy principles, is the strong ties between Israel and some of EU countries.

25.   The case of Israel should be taken into consideration for a perfect forecasting. Partner countries are strong backer and financer of the Palestine which is having war with Israel. The case of Mescid ul Aksa in Jerusalem is very important for all Muslims and comes second after Mecca in the hierarchy of Islamic holy places. After the occupation of the Palestine by Israel, the relations with Arab countries came to a non-returnable point. Israel is still enlarging its territory against Palestine. The strong ties between Israel and the USA and some EU countries will also contribute to the distrust for regional security cooperation.

26.   Another security issue facing most of the partners in both MD and ICI is the internal threats to the regimes in power. The Arab Spring has shown these threats to whole World. Beginning in Tunisia, the flame of wide spread uprising and political change requests has covered Egypt, Bahrain and Yemen. Governments have been toppled and leaders have been force to leave the countries seeking refuge in other countries. In these countries, internal security is totally collapsed. Only in Bahrain, the regime was successful in staying in the power with the help of the other Sunni government in the region.

27.   The above given examples have created strong suspicions in the partner countries about the real aims of NATO, the USA and other Western countries. Hidden agendas of NATO have been rumored with other conspiracy theories. All these contributed to the mutual distrust between the NATO and partner countries. Naturally the mistrust will result in lesser amount of political cooperation and collaboration for regional security purposes.

28.   It is a known fact that member countries of NATO may have different priorities and interests regarding to the international security issues. The relations with the Eastern Europe (newly independent states of ex-Soviet Commonwealth) countries or with Russia; or relations with China and other emerging powers of Southeast Asia may have more importance when compared to the relations with MD and ICI countries for some members. This affects the fate of the issue or institution in concern simply because NATO decision making procedure is consensus based in other terms the unanimity is the way to decide which is highly unlikely to obtain in some cases. Therefore, issues like MD and ICI might be overlooked by some members thus causing the ineffectiveness in solution finding activities. For instance, Germany declined to accept to make military intervention in several Middle East disputes.

29.   The status of the Israel-Turkey relations is also another factor to be taken into account while forecasting the fate of the ICI. Israel is a strong supporter of the Alliance whereas some NATO members led by the USA have already declared their preference for Israel over her Arab neighbors. However, Turkey’s relations (which has the second biggest army in the Alliance after the USA) with Israel within this context are severely curtailed. The Blue Marmara vessel was carrying humanitarian aid to the Palestinian people who are badly affected by the Israeli embargo was raided by Israeli commandos and 9 Turkish citizens were killed. Turkey’s preference has always been with Palestinians while having good military and political relations with Israel. After the Blue Marmara case the relations were strained and the level of diplomatic representation is lowered.

 

Conclusion and Suggestions

30.   As for the conclusion, two different approaches can be used: pessimist outlook indicating that under the given facts ICI and particularly MD cannot be successful to meet the expectations of both sides and optimist outlook indicating that in international relations incremental approach is the essential mode to develop the relations and having something in the hand is better than having nothing.

31.   Pessimist outlook is attempted to be summarized in an article written by Jean-Loup Samaan titled “NATO in the Gulf: Partnership without a Cause?” Authors says: “Eight years after NATO initiated its engagement with Gulf countries through the Istanbul Cooperation Initiative (ICI), the results have been modest, not to say disappointing … Lessons from its eight years of existence show that the issue at stake is not the purpose of the partnership but rather its methodology”.

32.   However, it should be underlined that ICI and particularly MD does not have clearly spelt out vision, mission and performance indicators. These factors are extremely important to assess the future developments. Therefore, it is suggested that a concrete set of action program along with performance objectives and criteria should be developed jointly with the NATO and partner countries.

33.   There is mistrust among the peoples of the partner countries causing lack of popular support for the cooperation. Public diplomacy can play an important role in informing the public at large on the main characteristics of the partnership program.  

34.   NATO, in general, is based of western political thoughts and principles such as democracy, secularism, human rights and rule of law. On the other hand, the partner countries are monarchic in nature and based upon Islamic Shariah principles. Therefore, a scientific study should be developed to consolidate the western political ideals with the eastern ones. It should be openly declared that security issues are beyond the political regime types and NATO can easily cooperate with the countries based upon Islamic principles. This will help to diminish the deep rooted mistrust between the parties.

35.   Optimist outlook finds the developments as encouraging although not perfect. Basing upon the existing framework a better solution can be found. Optimists believe that smart solutions developed by the NATO are mainly due to the shortage of financial resources. In the Gulf case the financing the regional security is possible due to the richness of the countries involved. Leaving the financial aspects aside, new models of cooperation can be developed.

36.   About a year ago a Conference has been organized by the American University in the Emirates and NATO in Dubai titled as “NATO’s Approach to Gulf Cooperation: Lessons Learned and Future Challenges”.  The e-book with the same title will be published soon by the Emirates Center for Security and Strategic Studies including the papers submitted to the Conference. As indicated in the Conclusion part of the upcoming book a consensus has been achieved in the Conference on the following principles:

 

a)     “Clear progress has already been achieved through the ICI, both in the political dialogue with Gulf countries and in practical dimensions with ICI partners. NATO has increased its offer of cooperation to ICI countries each year since the launch of the initiative in 2004, and with the establishment of a single Partnership Cooperation Menu (PCM) for all of NATO’s partners, it has considerably expanded the number of activities accessible to ICI countries.

 

b)     Although it is sometimes unpredictable and frustrating as an ally, and despite several failures in the past, the USA still has an abiding commitment to shared values of freedom, democracy, human rights and security with NATO members and Gulf countries.

c)      In the future, concrete and practical cooperation projects in areas of interest to the Gulf States should be pursued; i.e. in nuclear security, energy security, maritime security and piracy, and cyber security. This will align NATO’s ICI partnership with the security needs of Gulf States, and will bring benefits to both sides. There should be more formal and regular contacts in this regard in the future.

d)     Economic, financial and budgetary crises are affecting the defense priorities of the USA, which necessarily affect NATO priorities in turn (such as the size and orientation of the US Army, and placing more emphasis on the Middle East and Asia Pacific regions). This does not mean that the United States will lose interest in Europe, but the Middle East and the Gulf will remain important US priorities.  The outbreak of the Arab Spring has already pressure on US policy towards the region, and cooperation will continue to be framed by the Arab-Israeli dispute and the nuclear issue with Tehran. Additionally, the Syrian case will play an important role in the policies of the US toward the Middle East.

e)      There are reservations among the leaders of the Gulf countries concerning the role of NATO in the region. These countries like to see that the NATO and the USA be ready to take more responsibilities for the defense of the Region, not only to the  threats such as anti-ballistic missiles and nuclear and cyber wars but also to regional security threats such as energy security, piracy in high seas, and maritime security. Dealing with these kinds of challenges to regional security seems to be beyond the capacities of the states taking place in the Gulf Region.

f)       NATO should develop a more concrete strategic vision for the security of the Gulf commensurate with the importance of the region, especially to energy security. Partnership must be reciprocal, comprehensive and not unilateral. NATO should not view its regional partners as potential financers, whilst at the same time the ICI/GCC countries should not expect all the major sacrifices and responsibilities to be shouldered by the Alliance alone.

g)     Cooperation and collaboration between the ICI and GCC countries and NATO in future should be based upon the principles of collective security and cost- and burden-sharing.

h)     As agreed at the Chicago Summit in 2012 by the Heads of States and Governments, and clearly stated at the Lisbon Summit, the vitally important energy security component of NATO’s policies and activities require further deliberation and elaboration.

i)       NATO activities must not be perceived as being intrusive, and the Alliance mustn’t be seen as seeking to take advantage of the current phase of domestic changes taking place in a number of countries in the Middle East. Such misperceptions could backfire and undermine many years of work undertaken jointly by NATO and the ICI countries to correct such misperceptions, build mutual understanding and trust, and thereby contribute to long-term regional security and stability.

j)       NATO should give priority to public diplomacy to eliminate misperceptions and conspiracy theories in the region. Gulf public opinion must be better-informed concerning NATO policies toward the region. There is a need to continue building trust and to maintain a dialogue-based public diplomacy strategy alongside NATO’s cooperative activities with ICI countries.  NATO and the US have lost credibility and trust among some groups in the Middle East—especially as a result of previous administrations’ unilateral actions. This can feed conspiracy theories and perceptions of a “hidden agenda.” However, public diplomacy can play a very effective role in combating such views.”

37.   This paper aimed at forecasting the future of the ICI. Theoretically speaking, the answer to be given to the question is dependent upon the strategies used in the game by the parties involved. The available strategies are: maximax principle, maximin principle, minimax principle, zero sum principle, win-win strategy and randomization principle.

38.   The “maximax principle” aims at achieving the best of the best possible outcomes. The “maximin principle” is designed for pessimist players; instead of expecting the best of best the player aims at the best of the worst possible outcomes which can also be called as the “opportunity cost” to minimize the regret at the end. Some players may choose the “zero-sum game” (win-lose) strategy which produces no value added at the end of the game. However, it is possible to change the zero game strategy into win-win strategy allowing each player to benefit from the game. However, in most of the cases the randomization strategy is chosen by the players. No clearly defined strategy exists for the players.

39.   To me, it looks like the last strategy of randomization is being used by the parties involved meaning that there is no clear strategy (or, methodology) used.

40.   If I am asked which option I would vote for, my answer would be: “I am an optimist”.

 

 


 

REFERENCES

 

 

Aaron, D. And others. “The Future of Gulf Security in a Region of Dramatic Change: Mutual Equities and Enduring Relationships”. The RAND Corporation. ISBN: 978-0-8330-5913-0.

 

Altay, Ş.V. “A  Statement on Energy Security”.     Paper submitted to the Conference on “NATO’s Approach to Gulf Cooperation: Lessons Learned and Future Challenges”. 22 October 2013. Dubai.

Borgomano-Lou, L. “NATO’s Mediterranean Dialogue and the Istanbul Cooperation Initiative: Prospects for Development”. NATO Research Paper. NDC. No 21. 2005.

 

Dolatyar, M. “Sustainable Security in the Middle East: NATO’s Role?”. Turkish Policy Quarterly. Vol. 10. No 3.

Hunter, R. E. “Building Security in the Persian Gulf”. RAND Corporation. 2010. ISBN 978-0-8330-4918-6.

Jørgensen, J. A. “The Mediterranean Dialogue and Istanbul Cooperation Initiative”. 2013. http://dpsa.dk/papers/Troubled%20Partnerships%20in%20the%20Middle%20East(1).pdf

 

Kishk, A.M. “Reinforcing Security between the GCC States and NATO: Propositions and Obstacles”. Paper submitted to the Conference on “NATO’s Approach to Gulf Cooperation: Lessons Learned and Future Challenges”. 22 October 2013. Dubai.

Larrabee, F.S. “NATO’s Role in the Middle East and the Arabian Gulf”. Paper submitted to the Conference on “NATO’s Approach to Gulf Cooperation: Lessons Learned and Future Challenges”. 22 October 2013. Dubai.

Mölder, H. “The Evolution of NATO’s Partnerships Strategy: Peace or Clash of Civilizations?” Paper prepared for the 6th Pan-European Conference on International Relations in Turin from 12 to 15 September 2007 (Session 1-23: Cooperation and Conflict in Transatlantic Relations).

 

Moore, R.R. “Lisbon and the Evolution of NATO’s New Partnership Policy”. Perceptions, Spring 2012, Volume XVII, Number 1, pp. 55-74.

 

Razoux, P. “What Future for NATO’s Istanbul Cooperation Initiative?”. NATO Research Paper. NDC. No 55. 2010.

 

Schwarz, R. “NATO and Gulf Regional Security Cooperation”. Paper submitted to the Conference on “NATO’s Approach to Gulf Cooperation: Lessons Learned and Future Challenges”. 22 October 2013. Dubai.

Volker, K. “Keynote Address to the Conference”. Paper submitted to the Conference on “NATO’s Approach to Gulf Cooperation: Lessons Learned and Future Challenges”. 22 October 2013. Dubai.

Yasamis, F. D. (ed) “NATO’s Approach to Gulf Cooperation: Lessons Learned and Future Challenges”. To be published soon by ECSSR in the UAE.

 

Yenigun, C. “Gulf Security, NATO and the Istanbul Cooperation Initiative”. Paper submitted to the Conference on “NATO’s Approach to Gulf Cooperation: Lessons Learned and Future Challenges”. 22 October 2013. Dubai.

      

Hiç yorum yok: