EU enlargementEU enlargement

Foreign policy beyond the nation state

April 1, 2014

Foreign policy beyond the nation state

April 1, 2014

OverviewOverview

EU foreign policy

The big bang enlargement

Beyond enlargement: EU foreign policy in the neighborhood

EU foreign policy

The big bang enlargement

Beyond enlargement: EU foreign policy in the neighborhood

Relevance of this caseRelevance of this case

A case for foreign policy from an supranational organization

Soft power, coercion and FP Cooperation & collaboration in FP Overlap between domestic and foreign

policy

A case for foreign policy from an supranational organization

Soft power, coercion and FP Cooperation & collaboration in FP Overlap between domestic and foreign

policy

Historical background:From economic to social & political integration

Historical background:From economic to social & political integration

1952- European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC)

1957 - European Economic Community (EEC)

1987 - Single Europe Act 1993 - The European Union (EU)

1952- European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC)

1957 - European Economic Community (EEC)

1987 - Single Europe Act 1993 - The European Union (EU)

Key EU StructuresKey EU Structures

European Council- sets overall political direction

European Parliament -represents EU citizens

Council of the EU - passes EU laws European Commission - manages day-

to-day business of EU

European Council- sets overall political direction

European Parliament -represents EU citizens

Council of the EU - passes EU laws European Commission - manages day-

to-day business of EU

EU foreign policyEU foreign policy

EU foreign policy is more than the sum total of its member states’ foreign policies.

EU foreign policy is divided between three ‘pillars’:

1st pillar: European Community

2nd pillar: Common Foreign and Security Policy

3rd pillar: Justice and Home Affairs

EU foreign policy is more than the sum total of its member states’ foreign policies.

EU foreign policy is divided between three ‘pillars’:

1st pillar: European Community

2nd pillar: Common Foreign and Security Policy

3rd pillar: Justice and Home Affairs

EU foreign policyEU foreign policy

Lisbon Treaty (2009): goal to provide EU with greater coherence as an international actor through some key reforms:External actionLegal personalityPresidentEuropean External Action Service

Lisbon Treaty (2009): goal to provide EU with greater coherence as an international actor through some key reforms:External actionLegal personalityPresidentEuropean External Action Service

Despite the advances in European integration, EU foreign policy continues to suffer from divisions on many levels of policy-making that undermine the ambition to speak with one voice.

Although the Lisbon Treaty formally dissolves the pillar structure of the Union, the different fields of policy-making remain distinctive.

Despite the advances in European integration, EU foreign policy continues to suffer from divisions on many levels of policy-making that undermine the ambition to speak with one voice.

Although the Lisbon Treaty formally dissolves the pillar structure of the Union, the different fields of policy-making remain distinctive.

Challenges in EU FPChallenges in EU FP

Economic vs Security integration: In the areas of external economic relations,

member states have delegated significant functions to the European Commission (EC), European Parliament (EP) and the European Court of Justice (ECJ).

Foreign affairs and security policy, however, remain essentially intergovernmental.

Economic vs Security integration: In the areas of external economic relations,

member states have delegated significant functions to the European Commission (EC), European Parliament (EP) and the European Court of Justice (ECJ).

Foreign affairs and security policy, however, remain essentially intergovernmental.

Challenges in EU FPChallenges in EU FP

The big bang enlargementThe big bang enlargement

Early 1990s: great strides forward in European integration

Completion of Internal Market, 1992 Maastricht Treaty, 1992 Prospect of enlargement

The key dilemma: widening vs deepening

Early 1990s: great strides forward in European integration

Completion of Internal Market, 1992 Maastricht Treaty, 1992 Prospect of enlargement

The key dilemma: widening vs deepening

Perspectives of the big threePerspectives of the big threeThree largest members had distinct views Germany - widen & deepen France - deepen first UK – widen as way of stopping or even

turning back efforts to deepen

Three largest members had distinct views Germany - widen & deepen France - deepen first UK – widen as way of stopping or even

turning back efforts to deepen

‘United’ Germany regarded widening and deepening of the EU as two complimentary processes, rather than ‘either / or’.

Germany pushes for deepening and enlargement to the east (‘widening’), based on national self-interest and a sense of moral commitment to east central Europeans.

‘United’ Germany regarded widening and deepening of the EU as two complimentary processes, rather than ‘either / or’.

Germany pushes for deepening and enlargement to the east (‘widening’), based on national self-interest and a sense of moral commitment to east central Europeans.

GermanyGermany

FranceFrance

Not against widening but didn’t want it to come at expense of further integration

Concerned that enlargement would dilute the Union

Strict conditions on new membership

Not against widening but didn’t want it to come at expense of further integration

Concerned that enlargement would dilute the Union

Strict conditions on new membership

UKUK

Wanted more flexible union and saw enlargement as way to slow down deepening

Key value saw in EU was free-trade market Also saw importance of ensuring stability in

Eastern Europe As a result became early proponent of

enlargement

Wanted more flexible union and saw enlargement as way to slow down deepening

Key value saw in EU was free-trade market Also saw importance of ensuring stability in

Eastern Europe As a result became early proponent of

enlargement

The Copenhagen criteriaThe EU specified 3 key conditions for

applicants:1. Applicants had to be democracies.2. Applicants had to have functioning market

economies which could compete in the single market.

3. Applicants had to take on all obligations of the EU.

The Copenhagen criteriaThe EU specified 3 key conditions for

applicants:1. Applicants had to be democracies.2. Applicants had to have functioning market

economies which could compete in the single market.

3. Applicants had to take on all obligations of the EU.

Criteria for membershipCriteria for membership

See mix of both “soft power” and coercion Soft power- attraction of membership and

access to economic benefits Coercion - threat of withholding membership

Result: Conditionality creates powerful pressure on

candidates to make significant legal & institutional changes

See mix of both “soft power” and coercion Soft power- attraction of membership and

access to economic benefits Coercion - threat of withholding membership

Result: Conditionality creates powerful pressure on

candidates to make significant legal & institutional changes

Political conditionality Political conditionality

Late 1990s political momentum for EU enlargement increases as a result of:

Series of pro-enlargement presidencies Kosovo war 9/11

Late 1990s political momentum for EU enlargement increases as a result of:

Series of pro-enlargement presidencies Kosovo war 9/11

Widening takes precedenceWidening takes precedence

Key question becomes whether to accept all 10 candidates at once (big bang) or to differentiate between candidates

Proponents of a ‘big bang’ argued that admitting ten countries at once would:

Minimize the problem of exclusion Necessitate only one large-scale adjustment

by the EU

Key question becomes whether to accept all 10 candidates at once (big bang) or to differentiate between candidates

Proponents of a ‘big bang’ argued that admitting ten countries at once would:

Minimize the problem of exclusion Necessitate only one large-scale adjustment

by the EU

Differentiation or not? Differentiation or not?

Those against a ‘big bang’ argued that admitting ten countries at once would:

Reduce pressure on applicants to undertake reforms

Force the front-running applicants to wait for the ‘laggards’

In the end “big bang” wins

Those against a ‘big bang’ argued that admitting ten countries at once would:

Reduce pressure on applicants to undertake reforms

Force the front-running applicants to wait for the ‘laggards’

In the end “big bang” wins

Differentiation or not?Differentiation or not?

Beyond enlargement: EU foreign policy in the neighborhood

Beyond enlargement: EU foreign policy in the neighborhood Serious obstacles for further enlargement: The difficult negotiations over

institutional reforms that resulted in the Lisbon Treaty and the economic recession

Normative appeal of the European Union may be waning in an increasingly multipolar world with rising new powers.

Serious obstacles for further enlargement: The difficult negotiations over

institutional reforms that resulted in the Lisbon Treaty and the economic recession

Normative appeal of the European Union may be waning in an increasingly multipolar world with rising new powers.

The question about what kind of relationship the European Union should build beyond enlargement became a pressing issue.

There was concern that Eastern enlargement could create new divisions in Europe between insiders and outsiders, triggering instability and a growing sense of insecurity in the countries bordering the EU.

The question about what kind of relationship the European Union should build beyond enlargement became a pressing issue.

There was concern that Eastern enlargement could create new divisions in Europe between insiders and outsiders, triggering instability and a growing sense of insecurity in the countries bordering the EU.

In 2004, European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) was set up with the aim to create a ring of well-governed neighbours surrounding the European Union from North Africa, the Middle East to Eastern Europe and the Caucasus.

The EU has also become increasingly involved in diplomatic mediation and crisis management operations in the neighbourhood.

In 2004, European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) was set up with the aim to create a ring of well-governed neighbours surrounding the European Union from North Africa, the Middle East to Eastern Europe and the Caucasus.

The EU has also become increasingly involved in diplomatic mediation and crisis management operations in the neighbourhood.

However, EU foreign policy effectiveness and coherence are put in question:

In Eastern Europe, the democratic transition has stalled in favour of more autocratic regimes.

The EU’s response to the Arab Spring of 2011 and the democracy movements in North Africa and the Middle East has been fragmented.

However, EU foreign policy effectiveness and coherence are put in question:

In Eastern Europe, the democratic transition has stalled in favour of more autocratic regimes.

The EU’s response to the Arab Spring of 2011 and the democracy movements in North Africa and the Middle East has been fragmented.

ConclusionConclusion

Soft power isn’t always as soft as it appears

Period of 2004-2007 capped fundamental reshaping of Europe from Cold War All done with out force or threat of force

Both material and ideational/moral interests played role in enlargement

Soft power isn’t always as soft as it appears

Period of 2004-2007 capped fundamental reshaping of Europe from Cold War All done with out force or threat of force

Both material and ideational/moral interests played role in enlargement