police cooperation and counter terrorism at Maastricht, the Commission has witnessed
a continued development to its formal position regarding such matters. Firstly,
it received a shared right of initiative with the member states as part of the institutional changes agreed at Amsterdam. In the proposed LisbonTreaty, while
a formal sharing arrangement will remain in place, it has been made more complicated for the member states, who will lose their individual right of initiative in
favour of a collective right, with initiatives to be proposed by a quarter of member
UK has left the EU. At any rate, for both Australia and New Zealand it
will be important to pursue a dual-track strategy: cultivating strong
The EU in Australia and New Zealand
economic links with the EU, while also seeking to establish a post-Brexit
trade relationship with the UK as soon as possible.
Prior to the entry into force of the LisbonTreaty, the EU was represented
in third countries by European Commission Delegations, which were not
fully fledged embassies (not being entitled to speak on behalf of the EU
concern with communicating clearly to the inhabitants of the EU is encapsulated in the draft of the LisbonTreaty agreed by the twenty-seven members in October 2007: it ‘consists of some 65,000 words of detailed inserts written in the usually dense and utterly impenetrable legalese of treaty-lingo, and to be appended to the extant treaties’. 17 The EU is a factory for laws and regulations which has created a growing ascendancy for lawyers. All too often they use a nomenclature or jargon that widens the gulf between the EU and the citizen.
A Czech journalist observed
who oppose further sharing
of sovereignty and are concerned about the impact Ireland’s
involvement in the EU is having on Irish identity, values and culture.
The multifaceted nature of Irish public opinion towards the EU was borne
out in the rejection of the Nice Treaty in May 2001 and the LisbonTreaty in June 2008. These votes highlighted the potential emergence of
a new popular scepticism towards
criminal justice. Further strengthening of EU institutions took place with the Amsterdam (1999), Nice (2003) and Lisbon (2009) treaties, the LisbonTreaty giving the EU a consolidated legal personality, strengthening the institutions of the Union (the Council of Ministers was given power to decide policy by qualified majority instead of unanimity in over forty policy areas) and gave legal recognition to the Charter of Fundamental Rights.
The EC Commission was not only a law-initiating body, but was also responsible for enforcing treaty obligations. It could bring
successful at getting its views incorporated into the failed Constitutional
Treaty, even if domestically it seemed to be very defensive in the face of
a Eurosceptic print media, failing to secure public acceptance for its
achievements (Kassim 2004; Menon 2004b). It obtained further objectives
when the more limited LisbonTreaty was negotiated in 2007. However,
the decision to support President George W. Bush’s invasion of Iraq in 2003
had a divisive effect with major partners. The previous major positive
impact on the EU had been Mrs Thatcher’s support for the single
, considering the role of culture, values and attitudes
in determining the degree to which Europeanisation impacts on Ireland.
Nationalism, the focus of this chapter’s first section, has in various guises
continued to be a defining characteristic at both the personal and state levels
and has affected and been affected by the Europeanisation process. The issue
of public attitudes towards the EU is an increasingly salient one following
Ireland’s rejection of the LisbonTreaty in June 2008. Over many years of
membership, Irish public attitudes towards the EU have generally been
Newspapers, magazines and pamphlets have always been central, almost sacred, forms of communication within Irish republican political culture. While social media is becoming the primary ideological battleground in many democracies, Irish republicanism steadfastly expresses itself in the traditional forms of activist journalism. Shinners, Dissos and Dissenters is a long-term analysis of the development of Irish republican activist media since 1998 and the tumultuous years following the end of the Troubles. It is the first in-depth analysis of the newspapers, magazines and online spaces in which the differing strands of Irish republicanism developed and were articulated during a period where schism and dissent defined a return to violence. Based on an analysis of Irish republican media outlets as well as interviews with the key activists that produced them, this book provides a compelling long-term snapshot of a political ideology in transition. It reveals how Irish Republicanism was moulded by the twin forces of the Northern Ireland Peace Process and the violent internal ideological schism that threatened a return to the ‘bad old days’ of the Troubles. This book is vital for those studying Irish politics and those interestedin activism as it provides new insights into the role that modern activist media forms have played in the ideological development of a 200-year-old political tradition.
German philosopher Jürgen Habermas has written extensively on the European Union.
This is the only in-depth account of his project. Published now in a second
edition to coincide with the celebration of his ninetieth birthday, a new
preface considers Habermas’s writings on the eurozone and refugee crises,
populism and Brexit, and the presidency of Emmanuel Macron. Placing an
emphasis on the conception of the EU that informs Habermas’s political
prescriptions, the book is divided into two main parts. The first considers the
unfolding of 'social modernity' at the level of the EU. Among the
subjects covered are Habermas's concept of juridification, the
latter's affinities with integration theories such as neofunctionalism, and
the application of Habermas's democratic theory to the EU. The second part
addresses 'cultural modernity' in Europe – 'Europessimism'
is argued to be a subset of the broader cultural pessimism that assailed the
project of modernity in the late twentieth century, and with renewed intensity
in the years since 9/11. Interdisciplinary in approach, this book engages
with European/EU studies, critical theory, political theory, international
relations, intellectual history, comparative literature, and philosophy. Concise
and clearly written, it will be of interest to students, scholars and
professionals with an interest in these disciplines, as well as to a broader
readership concerned with the future of Europe
Does European integration contribute to, or even accelerate, the erosion of intra-party democracy? This book is about improving our understanding of political parties as democratic organisations in the context of multi-level governance. It analyses the impact of European Union (EU) membership on power dynamics, focusing on the British Labour Party, the French Socialist Party (PS), and the German Social Democratic Party (SPD). The purpose of this book is to investigate who within the three parties determines EU policies and selects EU specialists, such as the candidates for European parliamentary elections and EU spokespersons. The book utilises a principal-agent framework to investigate the delegation of power inside the three parties across multiple levels and faces. It draws on over 65 original interviews with EU experts from the three national parties and the Party of European Socialists (PES) and an e-mail questionnaire. This book reveals that European policy has largely remained in the hands of the party leadership. Its findings suggest that the party grassroots are interested in EU affairs, but that interest rarely translates into influence, as information asymmetry between the grassroots and the party leadership makes it very difficult for local activists to scrutinise elected politicians and to come up with their own policy proposals. As regards the selection of EU specialists, such as candidates for the European parliamentary elections, this book highlights that the parties’ processes are highly political, often informal, and in some cases, undemocratic.