Lessons to be learned from the EUpolicy towards Mercosur
Russia and China, as well as partners in Latin-America, deserve a clear
European strategy. Africa has, unfortunately, been absent from the EU’s
strategic agenda for years and needs to be reengaged … The Union can be a
global actor considering we possess the objectives, principles and instruments.
Unfortunately the political will is often lacking and the question is whether
the EU Member States will take action to change this. (Moratinos 2010)
The views of Miguel Angel Moratinos, Spanish
1996: 149) that links all those relevant actors within the network, it enables us to analyse the adaptation of national EUpolicy-making processes more systematically over time and on a comparative basis. Third, the framework places a greater emphasis on the flexible and fluid relationships that connect actors within policy-making processes. By conceptualising this interaction through informal roles, patterns of resource exchange, and strategic networking, it aids understanding of the dynamic nature of domestic adaptation and provides potential explanatory variables
This book is about the European Union's role in conflict resolution and reconciliation in Europe. Ever since it was implemented as a political project of the post-World War II reality in Western Europe, European integration has been credited with performing conflict-resolution functions. The EU allegedly transformed the long-standing adversarial relationship between France and Germany into a strategic partnership. Conflict in Western Europe became obsolete. The end of the Cold War further reinforced its role as a regional peace project. While these evolutionary dynamics are uncontested, the deeper meaning of the process, its transformative power, is still to be elucidated. How does European integration restore peace when its equilibrium is broken and conflict or the legacies of enmity persist? This is a question that needs consideration. This book sets out to do exactly that. It explores the peace and conflict-resolution role of European integration by testing its somewhat vague, albeit well-established, macro-political rationale of a peace project in the practical settings of conflicts. Its central argument is that the evolution of the policy mix, resources, framing influences and political opportunities through which European integration affects conflicts and processes of conflict resolution demonstrates a historical trend through which the EU has become an indispensable factor of conflict resolution. The book begins with the pooling together of policy-making at the European level for the management of particular sectors (early integration in the European Coal and Steel Community) through the functioning of core EU policies (Northern Ireland).
This book explains how the relationship between the European Union (EU) and Africa has evolved in the first decade of the twenty-first century. For this, it treats the EU as a 'bilateral donor', focusing in particular on the new partnership agreement between the EU and the African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) group of countries. It also treats the EU as a 'collective actor', paying special attention to the Joint Africa–EU Strategy (JAES) and a number of EU policies that affect African development beyond aid. The book first sketches the evolution of EU–Africa relations, between the adoption of the Cotonou Agreement in June 2000 and the third Africa–EU Summit held in Tripoli in November 2010. The evolution of EU-Africa relations should be set against two tracks. The first track concerns the programme managed by the European Commission. In this case, the most important change is certainly the adoption of the Cotonou Agreement, which marked a fundamental departure from the principles of the long-standing Lomé Convention. The second track concerns the attempt to create a continent-wide policy towards Africa, under the slogan 'one Europe, one Africa', which started with the first Africa–EU Summit held in Cairo in April 2000. The book also presents some contending explanations, drawing on studies of EU external relations as well as offering a perspective of Africa. It examines a number of policy areas, ranging from more established areas of cooperation to new areas of concern, such as migration, energy, climate change and social policies.
This monograph seeks to examine the motivations for the European Union’s (EU) policy towards the Common Market of the South (Mercosur), the EU’s most important relationship with another regional economic integration organisation. This monograph argues that the dominant explanations in the literature -- balancing the US, global aspirations, being an external federator, long-standing economic and cultural ties, economic interdependence, and the Europeanization of Spanish and Portuguese national foreign policies – fail to adequately explain the EU’s policy. In particular, these accounts tend to infer the EU’s motives from its activity. Drawing extensive primary documents, this monograph argues that the major developments in the relationship -- the 1992 Inter-institutional Agreement and the 1995 Europe Mercosur Inter-regional Framework Cooperation Agreement – were initiated by Mercosur and supported mainly by Spain. This means that rather than the EU pursuing a strategy, as implied by most of the existing literature, the EU was largely responsive.
other EU member states, enabling us to speculate about the generalisability of the findings presented here. Finally, it ends by presenting a number of key recommendations for enhancing the coordination and projection of UK and Irish EUpolicy in the future.
Key research findings
The study set out to address three research questions:
1 How was the national EUpolicy process adapted by Blair and Ahern in an attempt to project policy preferences more effectively
As two of the longest-serving prime ministers in Europe, Tony Blair and Bertie
Ahern were in power during one of the most tumultuous periods of European
integration. This book offers an insight into how they responded to the demands
and opportunities of European Union (EU) membership at the national level.
Drawing on extensive interviews with key figures, it explores how the two
leaders sought to radically reshape the EU national policy-making process in the
UK and Ireland in order to further their strategic policy agendas. The book
therefore asks three key questions. How did the national EU policy process
change between 1997 and 2007? To what extent did the UK and Irish policy
processes converge or diverge? Did the reforms enhance the projection of
national policy? These empirical and comparative questions are related to
broader theoretical and conceptual debates concerning Europeanisation. By
employing conceptual and analytical frameworks, the book considers what these
reforms tell us about the nature of the ‘EU effect’ in different member states.
Do governments simply adjust to EU-level pressures for change or try to adapt
strategically in order to maximise their influence? Are the changes attributable
to political agency or do they derive from longer-term structural developments
1 How was the national EUpolicy process adapted by Blair and Ahern in an attempt to project policy preferences more effectively?
2 How can we evaluate the impact of adaptation on the capacity of the UK and Irish governments to coordinate and project EUpolicy?
3 To what extent was adaptation driven by wider domestic reform processes or developments at the EU level?
From these we are able to
. The reduction of
public expenditure, and the creation of jobs are among the major Dutch
domestic policy goals. Only if EUpolicies are supportive of these will they
In the second pillar (CFSP) the Dutch have shown a strong support for
peace-keeping activities under the Petersberg missions and for various
forms of aid to conflict-ridden countries, e.g. the former Yugoslavia. The
fight against poverty by means of international aid should prevent, or
reduce the influx of refugees and immigrants into the Union. The Dutch
government also supports the
business has resulted in relatively separate groupings
emerging: each dealing with particular areas of business. Refinement has
been evident as practices and processes for handling business have become
fully established. Centralisation has seen a closer involvement of the core
executive on key issues. Decentralisation has taken place on specific issues
as departments, territorial ministries and, more recently, devolved administrations have become more involved in the handling of EUpolicy (on
devolution see Bulmer et al. 2002; Burch et al. 2005; Bulmer et al. 2006).