Borders, ethno-national tensions, and minorities : the case of the border between the Baltic States and Russia

Within a hard border system of international relations and especially in Eastern Europe, the problems of nationalities stimulate internal tensions, the politicization of ethno-national identities and even justifications for the imperial claims of former imperial actors, as demonstrated the Ukrainian crisis, particularly the \u201cpiloted\u201d secession of Crimea and increasing pressures on Eastern Ukraine. After this crisis it became evident that the political use of minorities as a tool of pressure is one of the most effective in order to influence other states or even change their territorial and border status. Despite the fact that EU\u2019s integration process has helped to transform border conflicts and tensions in Europe towards a more peaceful situation, having a positive effect on border disputes transformation, this effect is far from automatic, especially at the external dimension because the impact of integration is complex, multifaceted and controversial. In fact, the same EU\u2019s concept of political integration, based on a rigorous system of inclusion and exclusion, defined by full membership status and by fortified external borders, remains a tool of an old concept of territoriality which is still related to territorial and ethno-national disputes. In other words, there are circumstances in which the impact of EU\u2019s integration process and borders is to hinder cross-border cooperation and to create new border disputes or exacerbate old contrasts. Threats from the East are still relevant to the security of the Baltic States. The \u201cold threats\u201d associated with military aggression did not disappear but former core of the Empire has another means of influence than invasion or \u201clittle green men\u201d: it could play national minority card using \u201chybrid warfare\u201d. Hostile propaganda, covert tactics, the use of mechanisms for supporting cultural programs with a political purpose, massive disinformation campaign and psychological pressure are permanent possibilities of security threat that were launched long ago and could inspire minority ethnic groups to create domestic disturbances, especially in Latvia and Estonia, where thousands of inhabitants have Russian citizenship and compactly reside in ethnic enclaves. Latvia has received special Russian attention because of its strategic location, as well as for having the largest Russian minority of the three Baltic states. Particularly dangerous is the case of \u201cterritorialized\u201d minorities as those concentrated in Eastern part of Estonia and Latvia, close to the Russian border. In the recent past Russia has demonstrated an ability to annex territories and create puppet states and dependent regions such as Eastern Ukraine, Crimea, Abkhazia, South Ossetia and Transdniester, using the ambiguous policies of protecting \u201ccompatriots\u201d. Moreover, it should be noted that the lines of contemporary borders between Russia, Belarus and the Baltic States have long been the subject of territorial disputes between neighbouring governmental entities and ethnic groups. The attempt could be to exploit the issue of cross-border minorities in order to point out - according to the Westphalian logic and practice - the historical continuity of territory. The main problem is that the EU and Western Allies are not ready to counter the \u201chybrid warfare\u201d against the Baltic States