The literature on diplomatic recognition of states has not paid much attention to international organisations and their parliamentary bodies, like the EU and the European Parliament. In this paper, we seek to address this knowledge gap, which is important for understanding better the role of international organisations in diplomatic state recognition and conflicts over it, which abound in the wider EU neighbourhood (e.g. Kosovo, Palestine, East Europe/ Eurasia). Drawing on preliminary evidence (Kyris and Luciano 2021), we assume that supranational parliaments show an agency in recognition matters when they express recognition positions through own tools, e.g. parliamentary resolutions, and especially where such positions differ to those expressed through other bodies of the organisation. Here, we probe these assumptions in more detail to explore in more depth how regional parliaments express recognition positions. In order to do so, we conduct a study of the EP’s approach towards Kosovo, which we assume to be typical of the agency of the parliament in recognition matters. We conduct the case study using process tracing and for analysis we draw on text data and elite interviews. Our preliminary findings suggest that MEPs' nationality, membership of political groups, committees and delegations shaped their attitudes towards recognition. In the end, however, the rule of QMV allowed the assembly to collectively express support for Kosovo’s recognition, unlike EU institutions which take consensus-based decisions. In this way, the study contributes to understanding what enables recognition through supranational assemblies and how this process takes place.

After decades-long trade and cooperation through two cross-points, the borders between Armenia and Turkey were closed due to the First Nagorno-Karabakh War between Armenia and Azerbaijan in 1993. Since 2021, Armenia and Turkey is in another round of diplomatic attempts for normalization. One of the most crucial aspects of normalization is the possibility of opening of borders. Two border cross-points in question are located in Kars and Iğdır in Turkey. The first cross-point is the Doğu Kapı/Akhuryan railway crossing-point located at the Akyaka town in Kars, Turkey and Akhurik in Gyumri, Armenia. The second cross-point is Alican/Margara land crossing-point located at the Karakoyunlu town in Iğdır, Turkey and Armavir region of Armenia. In this article, I aim to discuss the previous engagement prior the closure of borders and elaborate the opportunities a possible opening brings. I complement this discussion with the expectations and concerns of local population. The article is based on existing research of non-governmental organizations and development agencies as well as fieldwork conducted in Kars and Iğdır with the local population between 2022 and 2023.

This paper looks at the ambivalent relationship between Turkish foreign policy and ontological (in) security debates. By periodising the Turkish foreign policy in line with the ontological (in) security modalities it had employed and conceptualising the relationship between foreign policy decisions and elite narratives drawing on ontological security considerations, we will aim to uncover the relevance of the ontological security conceptual framework for Turkish foreign policy. This endeavour will also introduce a critical engagement with the ontological security conceptual framework which fails to address the complex relation between the domestic and international

In October 2000 the UN Security Council passed on Resolution 1325 on Women, Peace, and Security as the first UNSC resolution to specifically focus on women and security issues, moving from a state-centered concept of security to a human security concept. Specifically, UNSCR 1325 reaffirms the critical role of women in the prevention and resolution of conflicts and requires the increased participation of women in these processes. Since its passage, the WPS agenda has been applauded for applying a gendered lens to security policies and practices and is likewise criticized for its application (or lack thereof) by traditional state security actors. Within the EU, most countries have adopted UNSCR 1325 affirming their commitment to gender security and recognizing the disproportionate impact of armed conflict on women and girls. However, the implementation of the WPS agenda within EU security sectors remains inconsistent among countries and is yet to fully materialize. Through the example of Greece, I argue that traditional security perspectives currently miss destabilizing trends by partially adopting a gendered lens to EU security priorities. I then offer a normative framework for identifying gaps and opportunities with the WPS agenda for the EU’s security prerogatives to provide more cohesive, inclusive, and preemptive approaches to security decision-making.