Ambitions yet unrealized: Romania’s status and perceptions from the immediate eastern neighbourhood

References

• Acharya, A. 2007. “The Emerging Regional Architecture of World Politics”. World Politics 59 (4): 629–52. doi:10.1353/wp.2008.0000.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barnett, M., and R. Duvall. 2005. “Power in International Politics”. International Organizations 59, no. 1: 39–75. doi:10.1017/S0020818305050010.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bechev, D. 2009. “From Policy-Takers to Policy-Makers? Observations on Bulgarian and Romanian Foreign Policy Before and After EU Accession”. Perspectives on European Politics and Society 10, no. 2: 210–24. doi:10.1080/15705850902899248.
   Google Scholar
• Brooks, S.G., and W.C. Wohlforth. 2015. “The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers in the Twenty-first Century”. International Security 40, no. 3: 7–53. doi:10.1162/ISEC_a_00225.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carr, E. H. 1964. The Twenty Year’s Crisis, 1919-1939. New York: Harper Perennia.
   Google Scholar
• Chapnick, A. 1999. “The Middle Power”. Canadian Foreign Policy Journal 7, no. 2: 73–82. doi:10.1080/11926422.1999.9673212.
   Google Scholar
• Checkel, J. 2001. “Why Comply? Social Learning and European Identity Change”. International Organization 55, no. 3: 553–88. doi:10.1162/00208180152507551.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dinnie, K. 2015. Nation Branding. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Dungaciu, D., and L. Dumitrescu. 2019. “Romania’s Strategic Initiatives in the Black Sea Area: From Subregionalism to Peripheral Regionalism”. Southeast European and Black Sea Studies 19, no. 2: 333–51. doi:10.1080/14683857.2019.1623983.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duque M G. (2018). Recognizing International Status: A Relational Approach. International Studies Quarterly 62 (3): 577–592. doi:10.1093/isq/sqy001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elgström, O., and N. Chaban. 2015. ”Studying External Perceptions of the EU: Conceptual and Methodological Approaches.” In Perceptions of the EU in Eastern Europe and Sub-Saharan Africa: Looking in from the Outside, ed. V. Bachmann and M. Muller, 17–33. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Elgström, O., and M. Smith. 2006. The European Union’s roles in international politics. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. 2022. Team Europe’s Official Development Assistance reaches €70.2 billion in 2021 ( Press Release, July 18, 2022). https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/IP_22_4532
   Google Scholar
• European External Action Service. 2021. Black Sea Synergy. Accessed July 9, 2022. https://www.eeas.europa.eu/eeas/black-sea-synergy
   Google Scholar
• Eurostat. 2021. GDP per capita, consumption per capita and price level indices. Accessed July 9 2021. https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=GDP_per_capita,_consumption_per_capita_and_price_level_indices
   Google Scholar
• Finance, B. 2022. Global Soft Power Index 2022. Accessed July 9, 2022. https://brandirectory.com/softpower/map.
   Google Scholar
• Ghincea, M. 2021. Zeitenwende. Time for a reassessment of Romania’s foreign policy? Friedrich Ebert Stiftung Analysis, 2021. http://library.fes.de/pdf-files/bueros/bukarest/18580.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Götz, E. 2021. “Status Matters in World Politics”. International Studies Review 23, no. 1: 228–47. doi:10.1093/isr/viaa046.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hurrell, A. 2006. “Hegemony, Liberalism and Global Order: What Space for Would-Be Great Powers?”International Affairs 82, no. 1: 1–19. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2346.2006.00512.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hurrell, A. 2007. “One World? Many Worlds? The Place of Regions in the Study of International Society”. International Affairs 83, no. 1: 127–46. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2346.2007.00606.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ivan, R. 2012. ”Black Sea Regional Leadership in Romanian Foreign Policy Discourse.” In New Regionalism or No Regionalism?: Emerging Regionalism in the Black Sea Area, ed. R. Ivan, 155–72. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Jervis, R. 2017. Perception and Misperception in International Politics. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Joja, I. 2019. Romania’s Strategic Culture, 1990-2014. New York: Columbia University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Jordaan, E. 2003. “The Concept of a Middle Power in International Relations: Distinguishing Between Emerging and Traditional Middle Powers”. Politikon 30, no. 1: 165–81. doi:10.1080/0258934032000147282.
   Google Scholar
• Keohane, R.O., and J. Nye. 1977. Power and Interdependence. Boston: Little, Brown.
   Google Scholar
• Lopes da Silva, D., N. Tian, A. Marksteiner, and X. Liang. 2022. Trends in world military expenditure, 2021 (SIPRI Fact Sheet 2022). Accessed July 9, 2022. https://www.sipri.org/sites/default/files/2022-04/fs_2204_milex_2021_0.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Lucarelli, S. 2014. “Seen from the Outside: The State of the Art on the External Image of the EU”. Journal of European Integration 36, no. 1: 1–16. doi:10.1080/07036337.2012.761981.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lucarelli, S. 2013. Perceptions of the EU in international institutions. In Routledge Handbook on the European Union and International Institutions, ed. K.E. Jørgensen. ed. K.V. Laatikainen, 429–44. Abingdon: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Mearsheimer, J. 2014. The Tragedy of Great Power Politics. New York: W. W. Norton & Company
   Google Scholar
• Moga, T.L., N. Bureiko, and L.M. Simionov. 2021. “Constructing Romania’s Foreign Policy and Security Role in its Eastern Neighbourhood: The cases of Moldova and Ukraine”. Southeast European and Black Sea Studies 21, no. 4: 615–38. doi:10.1080/14683857.2021.1960692.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Murray, M.K. 2019. The struggle for recognition in international relations: Status, revisionism, and rising powers. New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Nitoiu, C., and T.L. Moga. 2021. “Change and continuity in Bulgaria and Romania’s Foreign Policies Post-EU Accession”. European Politics and Society 22, no. 2: 277–94. doi:10.1080/23745118.2020.1729053.
   Google Scholar
• Ojanen, H. 2001. “Participation and Influence: Finland, Sweden and the Post-Amsterdam Development of the CFSP”. Occasional Papers 11. https://www.iss.europa.eu/sites/default/files/EUISSFiles/occ011.pdf; (Accessed July 9, 2022).
   Google Scholar
• Paul, T.V., D.W. Larson, and W.C. Wohlforth. 2014. Status in World Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Presidential Administration. 2020. National Defence Strategy. Accessed July 9, 2022. https://www.presidency.ro/files/userfiles/Documente/Strategia_Nationala_de_Aparare_a_Tarii_2020_2024.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Renshon, J. 2017. Fighting for Status: Hierarchy and Conflict in World Politics. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Risse, T. 2001. “Let’s Argue: Communicative Action in International Relations”. International Organization 54, no. 1: 1–40. doi:10.1162/002081800551109.
   Google Scholar
• Robertson J. (2017). Middle-power definitions: confusion reigns supreme. Australian Journal of International Affairs 71, no. 4: 355–370. 10.1080/10357718.2017.1293608
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Romanian Government. 2021. Program de Guvernare 2021-2024 [Government programme 2021-2024]. Accessed July 9, 2022. https://gov.ro/fisiere/programe_fisiere/Program_de_Guvernare_2021%E2%80%942024.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Romanian Ministry of Foreign Affairs. 2021.Raport Național privind asistența oficială pentru dezvoltare acordată de România în anul 2020 [National Report on official development assistance granted by Romania in 2020]. Accessed September 30, 2022. https://www.mae.ro/sites/default/files/file/anul_2022/2022_pdf/raport_na%C8%9Bional_aod_2020_ro.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Steinmetz, R., and A. Wivel. 2010. ”Introduction.” In Small states in Europe. Challenges and opportunities, ed. R. Steinmetz and A. Wivel, 3–14. Farnham: Ashgate Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Thorhallsson, B. 2006. “The Size of States in the European Union: Theoretical and Conceptual Perspectives”. Journal of European Integration 28, no. 1: 7–31. doi:10.1080/07036330500480490.
   Google Scholar
• Thorhallsson, B. & Steinsson, S. 2017. Small State Foreign Policy, Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics, March 8. http://uni.hi.is/baldurt/files/2018/09/Small-State-Foreign-Policy-5404.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Toje, A. 2008. America, the EU and Strategic Culture: Renegotiating the Transatlantic Bargain. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Department of State. 2021. U.S. Relations with Romania. Accessed July 9, 2022. https://www.state.gov/u-s-relations-with-romania/
   Google Scholar
• Väyrynen, R. 1971. “On the Definition and Measurement of Small Power Status”. Cooperation and Conflict 6: 91–102. doi:10.1177/001083677100600109.
   Google Scholar
• Walt, S.M. 1987. The Origins of alliances. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Waltz, K.N. 2010. Theory of International Politics. Long Grove: Waveland Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wivel, A. 2010. ”From small state to smart state.” In Small states in Europe. Challenges and opportunities, ed. R. Steinmetz and A. Wivel, 15–29. Farnham: Ashgate Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Wohlforth, W.C., B. de Carvalho, H. Leira, and I.B. Neumann. 2018. “Moral Authority and Status in International Relations: Good States and the Social Dimension of Status Seeking”. Review of International Studies 44, no. 3: 526–46. doi:10.1017/S0260210517000560.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wrange, J., and R. Bengtsson. 2019. “Internal and External Perceptions of Small State Security: The Case of Estonia”. European Security 28, no. 4: 449–72. doi:10.1080/09662839.2019.1665517.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zbinden, M. 1998. Implications of the intergovernmental conference and the Treaty of Amsterdam for small EU member states. In Small states inside and outside the European Union, ed. L. Goetschel, 207–41. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
   Google Scholar