The Cyprus Talks 2015–2017: Their Course, the Outcome, and Consequences for the European Union

Przemysław Osiewicz
{"title":"The Cyprus Talks 2015–2017: Their Course, the Outcome, and Consequences for the European Union","authors":"Przemysław Osiewicz","doi":"10.14746/rie.2020.14.9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The main aim of the article is to present political consequences of the failure of the Cyprus talks 2015–2017 for the European Union. Although its institutions and representatives were engaged in the negotiation process there, the issue seems to be more complex when it comes to defining what their role was. One can find the answer to such a question analysing the course and the final outcome of the negotiation process in Cyprus. \nThe main research question are as follows: What was the course of bicommunal negotiations? What brought the negotiations to a halt in 2017? How did the European Union engage in the process? What are political consequences of the talks failure for the European Union? The selected method is sources analysis and the technique is qualitative content analysis. On this basis one can study, for example, selected speeches, declarations as well as official documents. As regards the main sources, these are selected EU and UN documents, monographs, and academic articles.","PeriodicalId":34804,"journal":{"name":"Rocznik Integracji Europejskiej","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Rocznik Integracji Europejskiej","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14746/rie.2020.14.9","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

The main aim of the article is to present political consequences of the failure of the Cyprus talks 2015–2017 for the European Union. Although its institutions and representatives were engaged in the negotiation process there, the issue seems to be more complex when it comes to defining what their role was. One can find the answer to such a question analysing the course and the final outcome of the negotiation process in Cyprus. The main research question are as follows: What was the course of bicommunal negotiations? What brought the negotiations to a halt in 2017? How did the European Union engage in the process? What are political consequences of the talks failure for the European Union? The selected method is sources analysis and the technique is qualitative content analysis. On this basis one can study, for example, selected speeches, declarations as well as official documents. As regards the main sources, these are selected EU and UN documents, monographs, and academic articles.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
2015-2017年塞浦路斯会谈:进程、结果和对欧盟的影响
本文的主要目的是介绍2015-2017年塞浦路斯谈判失败对欧盟的政治后果。虽然它的机构和代表参与了那里的谈判进程,但在确定它们的作用时,问题似乎更为复杂。通过分析塞浦路斯谈判进程的过程和最后结果,可以找到这个问题的答案。主要研究问题如下:两族谈判的过程是怎样的?是什么让谈判在2017年陷入停顿?欧盟是如何参与这一进程的?谈判失败对欧盟的政治后果是什么?选择的方法是来源分析,技术是定性内容分析。在此基础上,人们可以研究,例如,精选的讲话、宣言和官方文件。至于主要来源,这些是精选的欧盟和联合国文件、专著和学术文章。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
18 weeks
期刊最新文献
Mieczysław Stolarczyk, Główne tendencje ewolucji globalnego i europejskiego systemu międzynarodowego w okresie pozimnowojennym i ich niektóre implikacje, Mysłowice 2022, ss. 561. „America First”. Relacje administracji Trumpa z Unią Europejską Regresywna koncepcja Unii Europejskiej na przykładzie dyskursu prowadzonego przez Prawo i Sprawiedliwość Zwrot praktyczny w studiach europejskich – założenia i możliwości zastosowania German reactions to political changes in Italy after 2016
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1