The Decision on Turkish EU accession in December 2002: The logic of anarchy, collective action problems and rhetorical action

Studies of the EU accession of the East and Central European Countries have stressed the importance of neo-liberal institutionalism as an explanation for Member State preferences. In this paper it is argued that Member States’ preferences over Turkish EU accession are better explained by power politics and neo-realism. It seems therefore that Turkey’s way to the EU follows another path than the East and Central Countries. Turkish accession raises the question of the EU’s role in a uni-polar world order – whether the EU should develop into an independent actor on the world stage or not. However, when it comes to the interaction among the Member States in order to decide on when to open accession negotiations with Turkey the constitutive values of the EU seriously modify the outcome that pure power politics would have let to.

The New EU’s External Action: A significant step forward towards the EU’s single voice?ction problems and rhetorical action

The aim of this paper is to analyse the main agreements on the EU’s External Action agreed within the European Convention and the IGC taking into account why, how and who reached the consensus on them. In other words, this paper will explore the principles followed in order to improve the instruments of the EU’s External Action such as authority, coherence, visibility, efficiency and credibility.

The Voting Practice of the Fifteen in the UN General Assembly: Convergence and Divergence

The EU has, since the early days of the Community, had the ambition to speak with ‘a single voice’ in international fora, in particular in the United Nations’ General Assembly. This aspiration, which has become more pronounced since the inauguration of the CFSP, has not always been easy to achieve due to domestic or international level factors affecting the EU member states. However, in the last decade there has been a dramatic increase in convergence in the Fifteen’s voting record. This paper contemplates the underlying reasons for such a convergence

Relaciones UE-Ucrania 1991-2003: Una política de reacción

El estudio revisa la evolución de los instrumentos de la acción exterior de la CE/UE hacia Ucrania desde la independencia de este país, en diciembre de 1991. Las principales conclusiones del estudio son: 1) Ucrania ha ido ascendiendo de manera lineal en la agenda de política exterior de la Unión. 2) La prioridad que ha guiado la acción exterior hacia Ucrania ha sido el mantenimiento de la estabilidad en este país para evitar las externalidades negativas que su desestabilización podría comportar para la seguridad de la Unión. 3) Aunque el interés securitario ha sido fundamental a lo largo de todo el período analizado, la agenda de seguridad de la UE se ha ampliado considerablemente. 3) La política de la UE hacia Ucrania se ha guiado más por la reacción ante los acontecimientos en el contexto europeo e internacional que por un diseño o estrategia clara hacia este país. 4) La política de vecindad intenta paliar este déficit de estrategia.

Pour une nouvelle gouvernance de l’aide européenne

Les pays de l’Union européenne (UE) devraient-ils ‘re-nationaliser’ l’aide communautaire ? Alors que l’Europe s’apprête à ouvrir un nouveau chapitre dans son développement institutionnel, la gouvernance de l’aide communautaire ne fait l’objet que d’une modeste attention. Elle souffre cependant de nombreux dysfonctionnements et incertitudes institutionnelles. Malgré de bonnes intentions et une générosité indéniable, de nombreuses occasions ont été manquées pour donner un nouveau souffle au dispositif communautaire d’aide au développement. Cet article analyse la gouvernance de l’aide européenne dans le cadre des débats sur la refonte des institutions européennes et l’efficacité de l’aide au développement. Il soutient que les réformes du dispositif communautaire d’aide au développement adoptées depuis 1998 n’adressent que partiellement les questions de fond quant aux relations ambiguës entre politique étrangère et coopération au développement et les conséquences de celles-ci sur son architecture institutionnelle. Le dispositif communautaire oscille entre deux modèles, celui de l’autonomie de la politique de coopération et celui de l’intégration de celle-ci à la politique étrangère. Le deuxième modèle semble cependant prendre le dessus, plus par défaut que para dessein. L’élaboration d’une Constitution pour l’Europe élargie requiert que s’ouvre le débat sur l’impérieuse nécessité de repenser la gouvernance de l’aide européenne et les réformes institutionnelles et administratives que celle-ci exige

Tres comicios y un islote: Europa hacia el Magreb en el año 2002

Presenta un análisis comparado de las reacciones europeas ante las elecciones en el Magreb y ante la crisis del islote de Perejil con el objetivo de entrever el complejo y no siempre coherente proceso de toma de decisiones en el seno de la UE.

The European Union Perception of Cuba: From Frustation to Irritation

On Friday May 16, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Cuba summoned the newly-appointed charged’affairs of the European Commission in Havana and announced the withdrawal of the application procedure for membership in the Cotonou Agreement of the Africa, Caribbean, and Pacific (ACP) countries, and in fact renouncing to benefit from European development aid.1 In a blistering note published in the Granma official newspaper of the Cuban Communist Party, the government blamed the EU Commission for exerting undue pressure, its alleged alignment with the policies of the United States, and censure for the measures taken by Cuba during the previous weeks.2 In reality, Cuba avoided an embarrasin flat rejection for its application. This was the anti-climatic ending for a long process that can be traced back to the end of the Cold War, in a context where Cuba has been testing alternative grounds to substitute for the overwhelming protection of the Soviet Union

II Cumbre UE-ALC: un encuentro sin estrategia

El proceso de asociación estratégica birregional entre la Unión Europea y América Latina y el Caribe es un ejemplo claro de un intento de cooperación encuadrado en la óptica del neoliberalismo institucional, tanto en su forma –el establecimiento de un mecanismo de acercamiento entre dos regiones del mundo- como en su contenido, manifiesto en el amplio y variado temario plasmado en los acuerdos del Compromiso de Madrid. Sin embargo, si se abordan los resultados del encuentro desde esta misma óptica encontramos que en la Cumbre se desaprovechó una oportunidad de afianzar las relaciones entre ambas regiones, poniendo en riesgo el soft power que ejerce la UE respecto a ALC, a raíz de la decepción de las administraciones latinoamericanas en función de la satisfacción de sus demandas, que ha sido baja.

The CFSP/ESDP, Parliamentary Accountability, and the ´Future of Europe´ Convention debate

This paper examines the importance that the current Convention on the Future of Europe is giving (or not) to the question of democratic accountability in European foreign and defence policy. As all European Union (EU) member states are parliamentary democracies1, and as there is a European Parliament (EP) which also covers CFSP (Common Foreign and Security Policy) and ESDP (European Security and Defence Policy2) matters, I will concentrate on parliamentary accountability rather than democratic accountability more widely defined. Where appropriate, I will also refer to the work of other transnational parliamentary bodies such as the North Atlantic Assembly or NAA (NATO´s Parliamentary Assembly) or the Western European Union (WEU) Parliamentary Assembly3. The article will consist of three sections. First, I will briefly put the question under study within its wider context (section 1). Then, I will examine the current level of parliamentary accountability in CFSP and defence matters (section 2). Finally, I will consider the current Convention debate and assess how much attention is being given to the question of accountability in foreign and defence policies (section 3). This study basically argues that, once again, there is very little interest in an issue that should be considered as vital for the future democratic development of a European foreign and defence policy. It is important to note however that this paper does not cover the wider debate about how to democratise and make the EU more transparent and closer to its citizens. It concentrates on its Second Pillar because its claim is that very little if any attention is being given to this question

The Cooperation on Justice and Home Affairs and the Enlargement of the European Union

This working – paper will be focused on three key issues: • How will affect the enlargement to the Justice and Home Affairs Cooperation. Especially, the absortion of Schenguen Agreements and the overall JHA by the candidate countries. • The enlargement impact over the European Immigraton Policy and the specific policies carried out by the EU Member States. The main question is the free movement of persons safeguard, in order to protect external borders of European Union. • An analysis of September, 11 attacks against U.S.A might be necessary to understand the future changes on JHA policy.

The Czech Republic in the European Union: A Problematic Member State?

A comparison between Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic concerning regional cooperation, European Enlargement and further integration and relations with Germany might lead to the conclusion that the Czech Republic, once Member State of the European Union, might be more prone to cause tensions and problems than the other two countries

The Role of Parliaments in European foreign policy

This book addresses the debate on the democratic deficit of European foreign and defence policies. This debate revolves around two dimensions. The first one has to do with the accountability of CFSP institutions. Is the current degree of parliamentary oversight of these policies the most appropriate? Has the disengagement of national parliaments regarding European foreign policy been counterbalanced by giving sufficient powers to the European Parliament? And, regarding the European Security and Defence Policy (ESDP), are national parliaments effectively controlling it? The second dimension of the debate is related to the wider question of whether the European Parliament is capable of legitimising EU policy outcomes. In the absence of a Europe-wide demos and of a true party system, what interests do Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) represent when dealing with foreign policy issues? Are there transnational cleavages in foreign policy or are they mainly national? Furthermore, is the European Parliament developing a transnational, autonomous stance on foreign policy issues, different from that of the Council or the Commission? The present volume is the result of the 2nd Meeting of the FORNET Working Group on “Evolution and Accountability of CFSP Institutions” organised by the Observatory of European Foreign Policy (Research line of the Institut Universitari d’Estudis Europeus), which took place in Barcelona, the 4 and 5 March 2005.

An Instrumental analysis of the European Union´s capability to act in conflict response

Since its origins, the European Union has striven to be an actor on the International scene and a place in conflict Management. Yet the EU’s lack of activity cannot be justified by a mere lack of capacities. The EU counts with numerous political, economic, and, since 2003, civil and military instruments that should allow it to precede a comprehensive conflict response. This publication consists of a description of these instruments and an analysis of the final use that the Union makes of them in the different stages of a conflict. Examples will show us the EU’s main weakness in providing a comprehensive and timely response when a conflict breaks out.

Spain in Europe 2004-2008

In March of 2004, the Observatory of European Foreign Policy published a special monograph about Spain in Europe (1996-2004) in digital format. The objective of the monograph was to analyse Spain’s foreign policy agenda and strategy during the period of José María Aznar’s presidency. As the title suggests, one of the initial suppositions of the analysis is the Europeanization of Spanish foreign activities. Is that how it was? Did Aznar’s Spain see the world and relate to it through Brussels? The publication was well received, considering the number of visits received and above all the institutions which asked to link the publication to their web pages. Among these, the EUobserver published the introduction to the piece in English titled Aznar: thinking locally, acting in Europe (described by the EUobserver as a paper of utmost importance). The fact that the elections were held three days after the tragic events of the 11th of March dramatically increased interest in Spain and the implications for Europe. This publication is the second of its type, in this case analysing the period of the Zapatero government (2004-2008). Once again the starting premise (the Europeanization of the agenda and the methods employed) has been considered by the analysts. And once again the articles collected in this publication serve to “triangulate” the analysis. Spain and Europe are two vertices (more or less distant, in essence and in form) which the authors handle in their analysis of the case (third vertex).

España en Europa 2004-2008

En marzo de 2004 el Observatorio de Política Exterior Europea publicó, en versión digital, un monográfico especial sobre España en Europa (1996-2004). Su objetivo era analizar la agenda y la estrategia de España durante el período de José María Aznar en materia de relaciones internacionales. Como bien indicaba el título de aquella publicación, uno de los supuestos de partida del análisis era la europeización de la actividad internacional de España. ¿Era así?, ¿la España de Aznar veía el mundo y se aproximaba a él a través de Bruselas? Aquella publicación tuvo una buena acogida, a la vista de las visitas recibidas y sobre todo de las instituciones que nos pidieron vincular dicha publicación a sus páginas web y, entre ellas, hay que destacar que EUObserver publicó como comentario su artículo introductorio, en versión inglesa, Aznar: thinking locally, acting in Europe (calificado por EUObserver como lectura de máxima relevancia). El hecho de que las elecciones de 2004 se celebraran tres días después de los trágicos acontecimientos del 11-M hizo que el interés por España y por su proyección europea e internacional aumentara de manera destacada. La presente publicación constituye un segundo ejercicio de dicho tipo, en este caso para analizar el período del gobierno Zapatero (2004-2008). Una vez más, el supuesto de partida (la europeización de la agenda y del método) está en la mente de los analistas. Y una vez más los artículos recogidos en esta publicación hacen el ejercicio de “triangular” el análisis. España y Europa son dos vértices (más o menos alejados, en el fondo y en la forma) que los autores manejan en sus análisis de caso (tercer vértice)