Sasse is a nonresident senior fellow at Carnegie Europe. Her research focuses on Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union, EU enlargement, and comparative democratization.
Gwendolyn Sasse is a nonresident senior fellow at Carnegie Europe. Her research focuses on Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union, EU enlargement, and comparative democratization.
Sasse is the director of the newly founded Centre for East European Research and International Studies (Zentrum für Osteuropa- und internationale Studien, ZOiS) in Berlin.
She is also professor of comparative politics in the Department of Politics and International Relations and the School of Interdisciplinary Area Studies at the University of Oxford, where she also works on ethnic conflict, minority issues, migration, and diaspora politics.
Prior to her 2007 arrival in Oxford, Sasse was a senior lecturer in the European Institute and the Department of Government at the London School of Economics.
Her most recent books include The Crimea Question: Identity, Transition, and Conflict (Harvard University Press, 2007), which won the Alexander Nove Prize awarded by the British Association for Slavonic and East European Studies; Europeanization and Regionalization in the EU’s Enlargement to Central and Eastern Europe: the Myth of Conditionality (Palgrave, 2004; co-authored with James Hughes and Claire Gordon); and Ethnicity and Territory in the Former Soviet Union: Regions in Conflict (Frank Cass, 2001; co-edited with James Hughes). She has also published extensively in academic journals.
Sasse is a member of the Advisory Council of the European Centre for Minority Issues in Flensburg, Germany. She comments regularly on East European politics, in particular Ukraine, in U.S., British, and European media outlets.
An agreement to alleviate the conflict in eastern Ukraine has broken down. How can the peace process be revived?
Five Carnegie Europe scholars discuss how the migration and refugee crisis is affecting different parts of the globe.
Even before the results of Ukraine’s recent local elections have been published, flawed conclusions are emerging from the postelection analysis.
The October 25 local elections in Ukraine are a major test of the country’s political mood, and the results will affect ongoing reform processes for the foreseeable future.
The first anniversary of Crimea’s annexation is an occasion to refocus on Ukraine’s central challenge: the need to implement domestic reforms and limit Russian leverage.
The pro-European result of Ukraine’s parliamentary election paves the way for structural reforms, but it does not point toward a resolution of the conflict with Russia.
Ukraine’s forthcoming parliamentary election is essential for rebuilding the country, but its short-term effect will be to entrench existing divisions between east and west.
For the first time in months, diplomatic links have been established between Ukraine and Russia. Do the two sides have the perseverance to continue this dialogue?
If Ukraine’s president-elect wants to end his country’s violence, he must concentrate his efforts on diplomatic talks that started in a halfhearted manner before the election.
Ukraine’s presidential election can offer a voice to millions of hitherto silent Ukrainians. It may also be the only way to halt the country’s spiral of violence.