|
|
|
|
CIAO DATE: 06/06
July 2005
Contributors
Abstracts
No and after: options for Europe RICHARD WHITMAN
The French and Dutch 'no' votes in referendums on the European Union Constitutional Treaty have thrown the EU into turmoil. The messages from both referendums are that public dissatisfaction with European integration is widespread and there is a disjuncture between the views of citizens and those of elites.
The original purpose of the process that produced the Constitutional Treaty was to bring the EU closer to its citizens. However, the text that was negotiated was an unwieldy document intended to satisfy diverse requirements but difficult to explain concisely. After the completion of negotiations some governments, for reasons of political expediency, took decisions to hold referendums on the treaty, but the future of The Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe that took three years to complete is now uncertain. Furthermore, member states are divided about whether to press ahead with ratification after the two recent 'no' votes. What is the range of alternatives to member states if they wish to salvage the treaty or component parts? Finding a way through this current situation is the task the British government faces as it takes on the EU presidency from 1 July 2005.
Footfalls echoing in the memory. Britain and Europe: the historical perspective VERNON BOGDANOR
Britain's difficulties with the European Union have deep historical roots. The events of the Second World War served to emphasize Britain's separation from the continent. Because Britain was fortunate enough not to share the wartime experiences of the continent, it was not exposed to the ideology of European unity, an attempt to transcend the forces of nationalism that had twice involved the continent in ruinous wars.
A missed opportunity? New Labour's European policy 1997–2005 JULIE SMITH
When Tony Blair took office in 1997, he was seen as the most pro-European prime minister since Edward Heath and New Labour was seen as committed to the EU. Yet the record on Europe remains mixed. In its first term the government began to play a more constructive role in European integration than its Conservative predecessors had done. Blair agreed to the Treaty of Amsterdam, made the Franco-British St Malo Declaration with President Chirac of France and launched a 'step change' initiative on the UK's relations within the EU, notably predicated on enhanced bilateral relations with other member states. Blair was also deeply committed to the Atlantic alliance, arguing that the UK could be a bridge between the US and Europe. This suggestion was tested to the utmost during the Iraq war, when Atlanticism seemed to prevail. By 2005, Blair was working with a range of colleagues from across the EU, demonstrating his continued commitment. However, New Labour, fearful of the Eurosceptic press and public in the UK, failed to win the voters over to the European cause: after eight years in office, the government has still not held the long-promised referendum on entry into the Euro.
Getting the best of both worlds? Britain, the EU and migration policy ANDREW GEDDES
In perhaps unexpected ways Britain has become quite closely linked to key aspects of EU migration and asylum policy. This could be a rather surprising outcome given that the UK is outside Schengen, opted out of the free movement, asylum and migration provisions of the Amsterdam Treaty and remains fixed on the maintenance of border controls at ports of entry to the UK. However, the differential and conditional engagement that has developed with EU migration and asylum policy has been described by Tony Blair as 'getting the best of both worlds'. What could it mean to get the best of both worlds? Can the 'two worlds' of Britain and Europe be so neatly distinguished? To answer these questions the article surveys the extent of British engagement with EU migration and asylum policy and explains when, how and why the UK has opted into key aspects of it, particularly the more coercive components concerned with asylum and border controls.
Reforming economic governance in Europe: exploring the road to effective coordination PAOLA SUBACCHI
The European Union is at a crossroad. In recent years it has been going through a major review of its institutional design without, however, clearly defining its role and scope. The credibility of its institutions is adversely affected by the widening gap between ambitious economic goals and the dismal performance of the economy in some member countries. Structural reforms have been progressing at a painfully slow pace. Popular support has been decreasing alarmingly. The need to confront poor economic performance and to embark on urgent market-structural reforms, as well as the problem of harmonizing national interests with those of the EU as a whole, have highlighted how the institutions and processes can be dovetailed. This article aims at contributing to the debate on economic governance and policy coordination in Europe. Looking at the genesis and the recent reform of the Stability and Growth Pact, it focuses on how the European Monetary Union macroeconomic policies are likely to be governed in the future and what the possibilities are for establishing effective economic and monetary governance. The Pact represents the most developed, albeit controversial, attempt to provide a framework for coordination of policies among sovereign states. Such coordination should help to achieve an appropriate fiscal–monetary mix, enhancing the credibility of monetary policy by insisting that member states governments do not spend more than they can finance through taxation. The Pact's recent revision is certainly the first step in the right direction, especially because it links macroeconomic stability with the goals of the Lisbon Agenda–job creation, market-structural reforms and social cohesion.
The outsiders: the European neighbourhood policy KAREN E. SMITH
* In May 2004, the European Union acquired not just ten new member states but several new neighbours. At about the same time, it began to flesh out a European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) to bring some order to the EU's relations with its old and new neighbours and to ensure that the newly enlarged EU would be surrounded by a 'ring of friends'. The ENP is also supposed to stave off further enlargement to eastern Europe. However, several problems with the ENP are evident. It requires much of the neighbours and offers only vague incentives in return, making it unlikely that the ENP can meet its core objectives. Furthermore, the ENP is ambiguous about where the EU's borders will end, and it is already apparent that such ambiguity is not helping to foster reform in eastern Europe. Either the EU should say 'no' to further enlargement, so the ENP becomes the framework for relations with the neighbour for the foreseeable future, or it should say 'yes' to eventually letting in a specified number of neighbours which then move out of the ENP.
Europe and the new balance of global order HANNS W. MAULL
The European Union has become an important shaping factor in international relations, but how and under what conditions it can exercise influence and contribute constructively to global order are still not well analysed. In fact, the EU's contribution may resemble more that of a force in physics than of a great power in the traditional sense of international relations (which the EU is not, and will not become in the near future), and its influence depends probably more on what the EU represents and how well it manages its own realm, rather than on what it can do externally. In this sense, European influence in international relations presently benefits from past achievements, and may therefore have peaked if the twin challenges of enlargement and national structural deficiencies are not addressed effectively. But even if the European Union does master those challenges successfully, and thus manages to sustain and perhaps even enhance its influence as a force in international relations, it will still have to proceed cautiously and clearly focus its attempts on shaping its external environment and contributing to a 'concrete' or 'civilized' global order. In a global setting that, despite appearances to the contrary, seems characterized by a diffusion rather than a concentration of power and by strong tendencies towards entropy rather than order, the EU can and will probably not remain America's principal ally in sustaining Pax Americana. Nor does it seem likely to become an equal partner in a constructive, balanced transatlantic relationship, let alone a great power capable of challenging, perhaps together with others, America's apparent pre-eminence. The most plausible assumption for the EU's future role in the new balance of global order is that of a 'civilian force' with a regional focus. It may best be able to contribute to global order by managing its own realm well, promoting the normative and institutional infrastructure for civilized international relations, not least in the sense of functioning statehood, and working towards effective multilateralism.
The strategic culture of the European Union: a progress report PAUL CORNISH
and GEOFFREY EDWARDS2This article re-examines the EU's character and potential as a strategic actor, setting that analysis in the context of the debate on strategic culture. The definition of strategic culture as the political and institutional confidence and processes to manage and deploy military force, coupled with external recognition of the EU as a legitimate actor in the military sphere, lends itself to a reappraisal around four core questions. First, military capabilities: establishing a European strategic culture is vital in order to rationalize the acquisition of capabilities necessary for the range of humanitarian and peacekeeping tasks envisaged. Equally, without military capabilities, all talk of a strategic culture would ring hollow. This article discusses how much closer the EU has come to acquiring those essential capabilities. Second, while the EU has gained significant experience of, albeit limited, military/policing experiences and established a growing reputation and some credibility for ad hoc action, to what extent and in what quarters have these experiences engendered a sense of reliability and legitimacy for autonomous EU action? Third, given that so far operations in the Democratic Republic of Congo and the Balkans have depended on an integrated civil–military effort, do the policy-making processes of the EU now ensure the appropriate level and depth of civil–military integration? Finally, considering that EU operations have been limited in time and scope, and that much of the EU's work in the Balkans has depended upon cooperation with NATO, what can be said of the evolving relationship between the EU and NATO?
Leadership coalitions and change: the role of states in the European Union JOSEF JANNING
The role of states in the European Union has not diminished over the history of the organization's institutional development. On the contrary: since the fall of the Berlin Wall, member-state influence over Union affairs actually seems to have grown. This is attributable both to the weakening of the supranational elements and to the expansion of intergovernmental activity in key policy areas. Added to this, the growth in the number of EU member states, and the diversity that now exists in an EU of 25, have reinforced the network of relationships, both bilateral and multilateral, between member states. Consequently, the EU has both centripetal and centrifugal forces at work, with member states drawn together in a continuing formal integration process and driven towards building tactical associations among themselves.
This article discusses the relationship between the formal and the informal layers of integration in Europe, and points to the changing constellations and coalitions among the current member states. Special attention is given to the cleavages that emerged between the EU governments over the negotiations on treaty reform, from the Treaty of Maastricht to the Treaty on the European Constitution. With regard to the power structure within the EU, the article outlines the perspectives of a 'Big Three' core coalition as successor to the Franco-German motor.
The European contribution to global environmental governance JOHN VOGLER
The European Union has become an increasingly central player in international environmental politics. Its role, especially as a protagonist to the United States, has been highlighted by the way in which it successfully led the campaign for ratification of the Kyoto Protocol. The 2005 UK presidency has made climate change one of its twin priorities along with African development, and it is with this in mind that the article discusses the way in which the Union can be considered an international environmental actor in its own right and the various contributions that it makes to global environmental governance. While the EU is well known as a trade actor the complexities of its role as an environmental actor, operating under shared competence between the member states and the Community, are less well understood. Despite the inherent difficulties it has been surprisingly effective, although in areas such as climate change there is a need for strong presidential leadership.
The EU's most evident field of activity has concerned the many multilateral environmental agreements in which it has come to play a leading role. However, this does not exhaust its contribution to global environmental governance that extends to the dissemination of norms and the incorporation of partners in its accession and neighbourhood policies. Sustainable development is also a key area of internal and external Union endeavour at the WTO and elsewhere, although there are continuing contradictions arising from its agricultural and fisheries policies. Finally, the Union's credibility will rest upon its ability to implement its environmental commitments and this is nowhere more evident than in its new emissions trading system. This is the centrepiece of the EU's commitment to the Kyoto Protocol and it is the need to co-ordinate the Union's diplomacy in the extension of the climate change regime, to include the United States and the developing countries, that the UK presidency must address.
Kosovo 1945-2005 CHRISTOPHER CVIIC
Book reviews
International Relations theory
International ethics
International law and organization
Foreign relations
Conflict, security and armed forces
Energy and environment
History
Europe
Russia and Eurasia
Middle East and North Africa
Sub-Saharan Africa
Asia and Pacific
North America
Latin America and Caribbean
Other books received