Proceso de negociación franco-alemán para la creación de una moneda única (1990-1998)

El interés de este estudio de caso es mostrar y analizar las diferentes dinámicas políticas y económicas que se produjeron a lo largo de las negociaciones entre Francia y Alemania para la creación de una moneda única, el euro, durante la creación del Tratado de Maastricht, en el periodo 1990-1998. En este trabajo se muestra cómo convergen las posturas alemana y francesa y a la vez se diferencian en el transcurso de las negociaciones. Además, se analiza cómo dos Estados con posturas distintas lograron llegar a mutuos acuerdos por un objetivo superior a ellos, el cual beneficiaría a toda una región. Este análisis se desarrolló desde la perspectiva teórica de Andrew Moravcsik, basándose en los conceptos de Preferencias Nacionales y Negociaciones Interestatales.

The sultans of swing: Turkey's stance on integration with the European Union. OSW Point of View Number 37, November 2013

Despite a rise in anti-EU rhetoric and a growing assertiveness in Ankara’s relations with Brussels, Turkey will continue to seek closer integration with the European Union in the coming years. The current stalemate in the accession process has been a source of irritation to Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s government. Nonetheless, a complete collapse of accession talks would be a much worse scenario for the ruling AKP party. Currently, the government is primarily interested in keeping the negotiation process alive, rather than hoping to gain full membership any time soon. Erdoğan’s government will likely seek to continue the accession talks because the AKP is acutely aware of their importance for the country’s domestic politics, for its the economy, and – although to a lesser extent – for Turkey’s international standing. The opportunity to capitalise on this process will encourage the Turkish government to avoid crises in its relations with the EU, or to at least mitigate the impact of any potential diplomatic fallouts.

Unraveling EU Policies: the ““Common Basic Principles”” and the ““European Integration Fund”” as a technology of government

this paper is about EU “soft policies” on immigrant integration. It analyzes the “Common Basic Principles” (CBPs) and the “European Integration Fund” (EIF), two devices that have been recently established within this framework. It adopts the theoretical perspective of the “anthropology of policy” and “governmentality studies”. It shows the context of birth of the aforementioned devices, as well as their functioning and the assessment done by the actors implied in the elaboration/implementation/evaluation of the related policies. It is based both on documentary research as well as direct observation and interviews done to the actors implied. It concludes that the PBC and the EIF should be considered as a “technology of government”, that strives to align the conduct of the actors with the governmental aims, as well as it produces specific practices and knowledge. It also underlines an intrinsic feature of many policies: their “congenital failure”, since they are (often) disputed and resignified by situated actors, who are embedded in asymmetrical power relations.

Central Europeans towards Integration with the European Union: A Study of Public Opinion, Social Attitudes and National Identities

Since the turbulence of 1989, the countries of Central and Eastern Europe have striven to "return to Europe". Agreements have been signed with ten post-communist countries, beginning in 1991 with Czechoslovakia (before its division), Hungary and Poland. Since that time several countries have expressed a desire to become members of the EU. In 1997 the European Commission announced its opinion on the applications for EU membership of the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, Slovakia, and seven other applicant countries. The Commission recommended the commencement of negotiations on accession with the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Poland, and Slovenia. Mr. Kucia's report, presented in the form of a series of manuscripts totalling 91 pages, written in English and Polish and including many pages of tables and graphs, presents the results of a study of public opinion on European integration in four countries of Central Europe (CE): the Czech Republic (CZ), Hungary (H), Poland (PL), and Slovakia (SK). The research results are primarily based on a public-opinion survey known as the Central and Eastern Eurobarometer (CEEB). CEEB has been conducted on behalf of the European Commission in the Central and Eastern European countries each year in autumn since 1990. Below is a very small selection of Mr. Kucia's research findings. Throughout the 90s people in the four countries increasingly saw their countries' future tied up with the EU, since economic and political connections to the EU were growing and prospects for EU membership were increasing. Regional co-operation within CE did not gain much popular recognition. However, initially high levels of enthusiasm for the EU were gradually superseded by a more realistic approach or even scepticism. Poland was the exception in this respect; its population was more positive about the EU in 1996 than ever before. Mr. Kucia concludes that, since the political "elites" in CE are more positive about the EU than the people they serve, they should do their best to bring people round to their beliefs, lest the project of European integration become purely the business of the elites, as Mr. Kucia claims it has been in the EU up till now. He accuses the governments of the region, the EU authorities and the media of failing to provide appropriate information, especially about the two subjects which most affect them, association with the EU and the PHARE assistance programme. Respondents were asked to rank in order the countries or regions they saw their country's future most closely tied up with. In the period 92-96 the EU received the highest ratings in all of CE. The ratings were highest in CZ in 92 and 93 (46%) and in Poland in 96 (46%). They were the lowest in Hungary (22% in 94). After the EU came "Other Western European countries (non EU)", that is Austria, Sweden and Finland (before they joined the EU in 1995), Switzerland and Norway. Mr. Kucia puts the high ratings of these countries down to historical connections and geographical proximity, particularly in the case of Austria. The USA always came second in Poland, and in Hungary too its standing has always been higher than in CZ or SK. Indeed Mr. Kucia suggests that the USA's standing is disproportionately low in especially the CZ. Germany was nominated frequently by Hungarians, though in the CZ and SK, figures have been consistently low (1-2%). "Other CE/EE countries" increased their ratings in all of CE except Poland between 92 and 96. With regard to these last figures, Mr. Kucia makes an interesting note. Assuming that for the respondents in the four countries this category covered the Visegrad 4, least support was found in Poland, whose government was the most in favour of close political co-operation within the V4, while most support was in evidence in CZ and SK, for whose governments V4 was simply not a priority. Again, there is evidence of a divide between the political elites and the people. Russia has occupied a consistently modest rank. It was the highest in PL, fairly low in H and SK and the lowest in CZ. The Slovak government's policy of closer ties with Russia is reflected in a growth in the figures from 2% in 93 to 6% in 95. Every year the spontaneous answer "we should depend on ourselves" appeared, which Mr. Kucia interprets as either a sign of isolationism and disillusionment or as a call for self-reliance. Unfortunately he regards both these tendencies as unfeasible in the uniting Europe. Moving to more general conclusions, Mr. Kucia finds that the concept "Central Europe" does not have much meaning for Central Europeans. He believes that this is probably due to the failure to establish a viable regional co-operation network. Group discussions also revealed that people thought themselves European as a consequence of being Czech or Polish etc. Thus European identity is based on national identities. Generally within the surveyed period, the numbers of those who said they often think themselves European decreased, while the numbers of those who said they never think themselves European increased from 41% in PL, 36% in CZ, and 30% in H in 1990, to 67% in CZ, 58% in PL, and 51% in H in 1995.

Lisbon Fado: The European Union under Reform

From the Introduction. To address the uncertainties surrounding the Treaty of Lisbon, this book examines several issues from various angles. Regardless of the results of the second referendum in Ireland and the pending ratifications in Poland, the Czech Republic and Germany, the European Union (EU) will not be the same after the Lisbon Treaty. If it comes into effect, Europeans will enter into a new stage in the deepening of the integration process; if it is rejected, the first decade of the 21st Century will represent a period of institutional stagnation in Europe’s integration. Nonetheless, the chapters in this book share the consensus that, despite its limitations, the Lisbon Treaty will make the EU decision making process more efficient, enhance regional democracy and strengthen its international voice.

The European Union as a System of Differentiated Integration: Interdependence, Politicization and Differentiation. IHS Political Science Series No. 137, 10 July 2014

This paper conceptualizes the European Union (EU) as a system of differentiated integration characterized by both variation in levels of centralization (vertical differentiation) and variation in territorial extension (horizontal differentiation) across policy areas. Differentiation has been a concomitant of deepening and widening and has increased and consolidated as the EU’s powers, policy scope, and membership have grown. Turning to explanation, the paper attributes the pattern of differentiated integration in the EU to the interaction of interdependence and politicization. Differentiation among the member states (internal differentiation) results from supranational integration under conditions of high interdependence and politicization. By contrast, external differentiation (the selective policy integration of non-member states) occurs in highly interdependent but weakly politicized policy areas. These constellations are illustrated in case studies of differentiation in the internal market, monetary union, and defence.

North Rhine-Westphalia and the European Union. ZEI Discussion Paper C232, 2015

Keynote speech at the Final Ceremony of the ZEI Class of 2015. On the occasion of the Final Ceremony of the ZEI Master of European Studies “Class of 2015”, Prime Minister Hannelore Kraft congratulated the this year’s graduates and at the same time the ZEI and its staff for its past twenty years of innovative and successful academic work. Twenty years in which the European Union has succeeded in making progress in many areas, like Economic and Monetary Union, EU enlargement, introduction of the Euro and the changing role of the regions in the EU. North Rhine-Westphalia, the 8th largest region in the EU, is conducting proactive policy both in Berlin and in Brussels and combines European and regional politics in many areas. The European Union has to face new challenges, which can be only solved successful and confidence building as a common and even closer Union.

Fiscal Integration in the European Union : assessment of different proposals

This paper explores the fiscal situation of the European Union as well as the different approaches proposed for achieving fiscal policy coordination among the member states. Furthermore, it works through the need of fiscal integration as a pressing matter in order for the European Union to achieve its aim of functioning as an efficient single market and economic unit. In order to do so, it analyzes the theoretical lines of the Modern Money Theory as a possible framework for further integration, and it evaluates the different proposals made for fiscal integration so that it can give an assessment regarding their compatibility with this theory.

And We’d Like to Thank…::Romania’s Integration into the European Union, 1989-2007

Conditionality is formally a key determinant of many non-member states’ relations with the EU. It is particularly so for states intent on membership. As the case of Romania shows, the EU’s use of conditionality is far from consistent. Relations can develop and accession take place without the requisite conditions being met. This follows from the use the EU makes of the flexibility evident in its evolving and generally vague definitions of the conditions that need to be met. Hence it was often extraneous factors over which Romania had either limited or no influence that were responsible for key developments in relations. These factors include the geopolitical and strategic interests of the EU and its member states, the actions of the Commission and the agenda-setting and constraining effects of rhetorical commitments and timetables, and the dynamics of the EU’s evolving approach to eastern enlargement.

The role of European Union integration in post-communist democratization in Bulgaria and Macedonia

Cette recherche porte sur la dimension interprétative de l'intégration européenne et sur son rôle dans la démocratisation au sein des pays postcommunistes. Je focalise mon attention sur la signification pour les gens desdits pays que revêtent la participation politique, la compétence politique, et l’action collective. Cette signification prend forme selon des circonstances spécifiques, agencées par les relations de pouvoir asymétriques avec l’Union européenne (UE). J’examine la littérature sur le rôle de l'intégration européenne dans la démocratisation des pays postcommunistes et je distingue deux paradigmes théoriques principaux : un premier qui met l'accent sur le processus institutionnel, l’autre sur le processus instrumental stratégique. Au sein de ces deux approches, je présente différents auteurs qui voient l'UE soit comme un facteur pro-démocratique, soit comme un facteur antidémocratique dans le contexte postcommuniste de transition politique. Cette recherche ne suit pas théoriquement et méthodologiquement les études contenues dans la revue de la littérature. Plutôt, elle s’appuie sur un modèle théorique inspiré des recherches de McFalls sur la réunification culturelle allemande après 1989. Ce modèle, sans négliger les approches institutionnelles et stratégiques, met l’accent sur d'autres écoles théoriques, interprétatives et constructivistes. Mes conclusions se basent sur les résultats de séjours d'étude dans deux pays postcommunistes : la Bulgarie, membre de l'UE depuis 2007, et la Macédoine, pays-candidat. J’ai recours à des méthodes qualitatives et à des techniques ethnographiques qui triangulent des résultats puisés à des sources multiples et variées pour exposer des trajectoires dynamiques de changement culturel influencées par l'intégration européenne. Les conclusions montrent sous quelles conditions les idéaux-types de changement politique conventionnels, soit institutionnel ou stratégique, représentent des modèles utiles. Je présente aussi leurs limitations. Ma conclusion principale est que l'intégration européenne représente un phénomène complexe dans le monde des significations. C’est un facteur qui est simultanément un amplificateur et un inhibiteur de la culture politique démocratique. Les gens créent des sous-cultures différentes où des interprétations multiples du processus d'intégration européenne mènent à des effets dissemblables sur la participation politique, la compétence et l’action collective. La conversation discursive entre les gens qui composent de telles sous-cultures distinctes peut produire des effets divergents au niveau national. Cette recherche n’est pas une analyse de l’UE comme mécanisme institutionnel ; elle ne pose ainsi pas l’UE comme une institution qui détermine directement le processus de démocratisation postcommuniste. Plutôt, elle s’intéresse au processus d’intégration européenne en tant qu’interaction qui affecte la culture politique au sein des pays postcommunistes, et à la manière dont cette dernière peut agir sur le processus de démocratisation. Mon point d’intérêt central n’est donc pas l’européanisation ou le processus de devenir « comme l’Europe », à moins que l’européanisation ne devienne une composante de la culture politique avec des conséquences sur le comportement politique des acteurs.