To what extent do the EU's relations with the BSEC foster a dynamic of pluralistic regional cooperation in the Black Sea region? A case-study analysis

乌克兰危机和俄罗斯领导的欧亚经济联盟（EAEU）的出现引发了关于地区主义的重大争论，这些争论一直将黑海地区视为两种竞争的欧洲和欧亚地区模式（即欧盟的东部伙伴关系和EAEU）之间的连续后苏联空间。因此，后苏联国家仍然受制于俄罗斯和西方狭隘的霸权地缘政治利益。然而，这些争论忽略了俄罗斯和欧盟之间以黑海经济合作组织（BSEC）形式存在的重叠，该组织的成员范围从西巴尔干半岛到高加索地区，包括俄罗斯本身、土耳其和三个欧盟成员国。这是有问题的，因为它掩盖了黑海经合组织推动的建立信任和部门/行业驱动的合作倡议，从而限制了对区域主义的研究，以支配性的区域机构，而不是重叠的组织行为体的多方面挂毯。本研究调查在何种程度上欧盟与黑海经合组织的关系，通过欧盟的黑海协同政策（BSS）的案例研究，促进在黑海地区的区域合作的多元动力。本研究通过分析欧盟、黑海经合组织及其各自统治精英的主要政策的内容和话语，评估了黑海经合组织促进多元化合作的程度。与黑海安全局和黑海经合组织部门工作组从业人员的访谈证实了这一点。因此，这项研究旨在促进对扩大后苏联地区主义，从而传统的理解区域治理的研究。

The Ukraine crisis and the emergence of the Russian-led Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) has sparked significant debates on regionalism, which have continuously represented the Black Sea region as the contiguous Post-Soviet Space torn between two competing European and Eurasian regional models, namely the EU's Eastern Partnership and the EAEU. Hence, Post-Soviet states remain subjugated to the narrow hegemonic geopolitical interests of Russia and the West. Yet, these debates overlook the overlaps between Russia and the EU in the form of the Black Sea Economic Cooperation (BSEC), whose wide-reaching membership spans from the Western Balkans to the Caucasus, including Russia itself, Turkey and three EU member states. This is problematic as it overshadows the BSEC-driven initiatives towards trust-building and sectoral/industry-driven cooperation, thus limiting the study of regionalism to the overarching regional institutions, as opposed to a multi-faceted tapestry of overlapping organisational actors. This research investigates the extent to which the EU's relations with the BSEC fosters a pluralistic dynamic of regional cooperation in the Black Sea region through the case-study of the EU's Black Sea Synergy Policy (BSS). By analysing the content and discourse surrounding key policies of the EU, the BSEC and their respective ruling elites, this research evaluates the extent to which the BSS fosters pluralistic cooperation. This is supported by interviews with practitioners in sectoral working groups from both the BSS and the BSEC. This research thus seeks to contribute to the growing research on the broadening of Post-Soviet regionalism and thus conventional understandings of regional governance.