Search

This paper will address the issue of change in international institutions and governance brought about by the global war on terrorism. It will apply the concept of new multilateralism as an analytical tool in order to map out an emerging qualitatively different approach to international organization. New multilateralism is most obvious and pronounced in Europe whose regional order traditionally has been highly institutionalized. European regional integration unfolding within the institutional domain of EU Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) will serve as a critical case study of the trend towards the establishment of new patterns of governance in the international system. The argument will proceed in the following way. First, the concept of new multilateralism will be discussed in reference to John Ruggie’s original definition of multilateralism as a generic principled institutional form in international life. Second, the paper will explore recent developments in the foreign policy domain of the European Union as an institutionalized intergovernmental political process. It will address the trend towards flexible forms of commitment and participation under the CFSP mechanism as an instance of the new multilateralism in international relations. The new multilateralism of the post-9/11 period, this paper will argue, continues the historical tradition of classical multilateralism by reflecting (in Ruggie’s words) American hegemony rather than American hegemony and by revealing the adaptive and reproductive capacities of international institutions. Similarly to classical multilateralism, it does not necessarily generate formal organizations but continues to respond to a demand for institutionalization of relations in the international system. In contrast to classical multilateralism, new multilateralism is based on a network of bilateral arrangements. In the spirit of multilateralism, it evokes a principled code of conduct, however, outside existing international institutions: it creates coalitions of the willing. New multilateralism is bilateral in approach and multilateral in cooperative action and outcomes. Thus, it accelerates transformation rather than stabilize international relations (which classical multilateralism did). It substitutes governance outcomes resulting from the existing universalist multi-purpose international institutions by single-purpose short-term arrangements in a variable geometry of participating countries. Without substantively changing the standards of international organization, new multilateralism reverses the attained level and patterns of complicated multilateral diplomacy. It is based on straightforward means-ends bilateral relationships resulting in flexible multilateral coalitions. Coalitions of the willing are increasingly being established as a multilateral response to international threats. They have become a source of governance in the international system. From the perspective of European regional integration, the continued institutionalization of a possibility for enhanced foreign policy and defense cooperation under CFSP, in parallel to the consolidation of strategic bilateral relationships and participation in ad hoc international coalitions, exemplifies a new pattern of regional relations produced by new multilateralism. The Convention on the Future of Europe reflects and reinforces that trend by creating new opportunities for variable-geometry coalitions within an otherwise highly structured institutional mechanism. This example indicates that the nature of European and with it, international, governance is changing. Regions no longer represent a formally institutionalized geopolitical environment. They are becoming increasingly defined in terms of threats, vulnerabilities, and capacities for response by flexible ad hoc security arrangements. The paper will conclude that the coalitions of the willing have emerged as a new multilateral source of authority and legitimacy in the international system beyond international organizations. Arguably, this change in the pattern of international governance is essentially deeper than the nature and scope of institutional change brought about by the end of the Cold War. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

It is argued that the US and the EU are conducting their foreign policies in very different ways, indeed Robert Kagan has suggested that they could be shaping two different world orders. This paper is interested in examining how far these apparently divergent conceptual approaches translate into clearly dissimilar policy practices. Beyond the much discussed US-EU positions on Iraq, does the EU have something qualitatively and quantitatively different to offer to the concept and practice of transnational governance? This paper analyses these issues through an investigation of the different elements of the Euro-Mediterranean partnership programme, to explore how far the EU is offering a new approach to transnational governance and how far it might be considered to be re-branding old approaches to north-south cooperation. The Euro-Mediterranean partnership offers a good practical example of what EU countries are doing at the regional level. Essentially, the Euro-Mediterranean partnership is an ambitious regional cooperation programme covering all aspects of the social, economic and political relations between the EU and the states of the southern shores of the Mediterranean. But what does the partnership imply in practice? Can the various programmes that the EU proposes to implement ensure economic development, manage social tensions and strengthen political and security institutions in a way that is beneficial for both parties, and for citizens as well as for states? Conceptually, there are obvious tensions between the strategic aims of EU engagement with Mediterranean partners. On the one hand the EU is attempting to strengthen existing illiberal state institutions in North African and Middle Eastern countries, in order to gain more effective cooperation with the EU on emigration control and anti-terrorist policies. On the other hand it is keen to promote power-sharing and good governance in countries which are essentially run on a non-democratic basis. In practice it is not at all certain that even if these conceptual difficulties can be solved, the various national and sub- or supra-national institutions involved in this programme can address the momentous technical challenges of multi-layered transnational governance that are intrinsic to this type of endeavour. Hence, this paper investigates how far this alleged partnership embodies new and effectives means of trans-national governance, and how far it merely repackages old realist principles and tools of north-south cooption. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

On the first of May 2004 ten new member states will join the EU. Yet, another enlargement process has passed largely unnoticed. For the first time in the history of international organization an international institution seeks to formally adhere to another international body. Indeed, the EU is preparing itself to adhere to the European Convention on Human Rights, the Council of Europe?s main human rights protection instrument. How does it come that an international body seeks accession to another one, especially while large pans of international relations theory assume that international institutions, at the most, provide for increasing cooperation and interdependence between their contracting parties, and refuse to consider international institutions as actors of international relations and, more precisely, of the configuration of European (supranational) governance? If the Draft Constitutional Treaty elaborated by the Convention for the Future of Europe states that: ?the Union shall seek accession to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedom?, this paper argues that the Member states have been pushed to proceed to such an EC accession to the ECHR as a result of the rather turbulent interaction between the European Court of Justice and the European Court of Human Rights. EU member states merely follow the way paved by the European Courts. The interaction between supranational courts has progressively entangled their respective organizations and their member states in a jurisprudential cobweb via both courts? case law politics. Put differently, this paper argues that supranational actors are able to influence norms, have interests and seek for power. Remarkably, the protection of human rights did not get lost over institutional rivalries, There are now two courts at a supranational level that protect human rights and they both play a major role in the process of European integration. Their interaction has progressively lead to a dynamic of convergence that has transformed two separate legal orders into one single, but highly fragmented supranational constitutional space of multiple hierarchies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The purpose of this paper is to examine the implications of the growing internationalisation of renewable electricity issues, with particular reference to the transatlantic (or European Union - United States) relationship. The paper begins by identifying future trends on the internationalisation of electricity issues, the contribution of renewables and the importance of the transatlantic relationship. The potential for conflict and cooperation between the European Union and the United States on renewable electricity issues ? and the accompanying costs and benefits ? is then investigated. The paper concludes by highlighting the importance of having an international institution with broad participation take a lead in investigating this issue further. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

During the Cold War Nordic cooperation blossomed and Nordic identity was strong but defence was left outside of the Nordic framework. After the end of the Cold War, Nordic cooperation waned and it was largely replaced by cooperation within the EU framework. During the past couple of years, however, the Nordic defence cooperation has been boosted by a number of initiatives and common projects. The paper tries to analyse this recent rise of Nordic defence cooperation. Theoretically the article revolves around the question of how material and identity factors explain security cooperation in today's Europe. During the Cold War it was easy to explain that identity was important in low politics cooperation between the Nordic countries but geostrategic factors and national interests based upon them determined (the lack of) defence cooperation. Even today, Nordic defence cooperation is justified more by costefficiency and geographical proximity than by common identity. The argument of the paper is that Nordic identity nevertheless plays an important role in motivating defence cooperation. It is not driven by pure cost-efficiency or strategic calculation. The role of identity needs however to be understood not as a kind of independent force but as part of the political process. Nordic identity explains the rise of Nordic defence cooperation in three ways: it facilitates informal cooperation between defence officials at various levels, it is easy to sell it politically to domestic audiences and it is not seen as contradicting European or NATO cooperation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper analyses effective multilateralism in the light of the cooperation of the European Union (EU) and the United Nations (UN) in crisis management and in the United Nations Security Council Reform. In the first part of the paper, I will focus on effective multilateralism and in which terms the EU puts into practice the recognition of the UN as the core of the multilateral order. In the second part, I will focus on crisis management and the United Nations Security Council Reform as tools for effective multilateralism. In the third part I will draw some conclusions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Within the EU-China strategic partnership, signed in 2003, closer security cooperation is envisaged, but progress in this field has been little in this field. If the two security strategies - the ESS and the Chinese Paper on the New Security Concept, as well as the papers of the three major Member States of the EU, are compared, a lot of common terminology can be found.However, the connotation of these terms differ due to the differences in paradigms regarding the nature of governance of their national entities and of the international system, including the role for the US. Cooperation will therefore be most likely in the new fields of security cooperation such as pandemics, environmental threats and disaster relief. Based on this analysis, the paper will outline the opportunities and limits for EU-China security cooperation, in particular in an US-China-EU triangle ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper focuses on the process of Eastern enlargement rather than its outcome: how and why did the Eastern EU Enlargement happen? The outcome of the integration process is known to everybody - the EU has expanded from 15 members to 25, but the dynamics and the nature of the process itself is less clear. It is suggested in this paper that the concepts of capacities and preferences can provide useful insights when trying to answer the question posed above. In order for any enlargement round to take place it is necessary to reconcile all the existing preferences regarding enlargement. The main argument of this paper is that the preferences of the candidate countries and member states, and their conformity with the institutional and organisational capacities of the EU itself, were among the major determinants of the pace and nature of the Eastern enlargement round. I draw on two basic approaches to the analysis of international organisation - rationalist and sociological institutionalism - to explain the formation of multiple preferences and how these preferences determine the outcomes of the enlargement negotiations. In this regard, I find that rationalist approaches based on cost-benefit assumptions and bargaining theory can provide a better account of diverging member states preferences regarding "terms and conditions" of enlargement, on the one hand, and susceptibility of applicant states' preferences to the influences from the EU, on the other. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

On May 1, 2004, ten new member states will join the European Union. However, this new round of enlargement will not be extended to the European Monetary Union (EMU) immediately. But when they do, how will it affect the sustainability and economic performance of the EMU? As we know from International Relations (IR) theory, international cooperation becomes increasingly difficult to maintain as the number of participating states expands. Although the IR literature tells us that hegemony and/or institutions are necessary for ensuring international cooperation, this papers argues that the EMU?s strong and egalitarian institutional setup, not the hegemony of Germany (and/or France), provides the EMU with a high probability of survival and good economic performance in the foreseeable future, whether it counts twelve member states or 25. The argument developed herein is corroborated by the examination of not only the performance of the EMU in its first five years of existence but also by analyzing the sustainability and performance of three other monetary unions created in the post-World War II period: the African CFA Franc Zone, the East African Community, and the East Caribbean Currency Union. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Public diplomacy is typically defined as how a nation's government and/or society projects itself to external audiences in ways that improve these foreign publics' perception of that nation. In the long run, successful public diplomacy should result in augmented soft power and favorable policies towards the nation that engages in it. An entity like the EU necessarily encompasses multiple levels of public diplomacy - subnational, national, transnational, and supranational. Do the various aspects of the EU's multi-leveled public diplomacy form a coherent overall message, or do they work against each other? This question is important both practically and theoretically. Practically, the EU is struggling to make its presence known on the international stage as one of the most important players in world politics. It is undeniably the greatest example of voluntary international cooperation among states in modern times, and a major normative power with significant influence in the areas of humanitarian aid, climate change, multilateralism, human rights, and development, among other things. Yet, it is not yet fully on the radar for many. In a 2005 Gallup poll, for example, only 38% of those surveyed in North America had heard of the EU. This paper argues that EU public diplomacy, taken as a whole, sends conflicting messages because national-level public diplomacy rarely includes the EU in its messages to foreign publics. This limits and dilutes the visibility of the EU. On a theoretical level, EU public diplomacy provides a strong example of norm diffusion and identity creation. In the context of an evolving actor that is in many ways still very new, I suggest that the European experience shows that external image and internal identity are mutually constitutive. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The MERCURY project examines, critically and globally, the EU?s contribution to multilateralism. Its primary research questions are: 1) how should we understand multilateralism, both historically and in contemporary terms? 2) does the EU live up to its ambitions? 3) what lessons can be drawn from Europe?s experience of promoting multilateralism. This paper reviews the main findings from MERCURY?s programme of research into the evolution of the concept and practice of multilateralism. The project assessed multilateralism in historical and comparative perspective, examined forms, models and cases of multilateralism, and investigated alternative approaches, such as unilateralism and bilateralism. It also explored the development of EU doctrine on multilateralism. MERCURY?s main conclusions are that 1) multilateralism is still defined in multiple ways, particularly in different part of the world; 2) all major powers seek multilateralism only as one strategy among many; 3) demand for effective multilateralism now extends beyond trade and security to climate change, disease control and migration. The EU shows consistency in the principles it promotes in all of these policy areas, but it has yet to develop a coherent doctrine of multilateralism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A key aspect in the dynamics of the "liberal" world order is the crisis of authority over global governance and political economy resulting from the relative decline of "the West". In their quest for sustaining liberalism as a norm and a force in world ordering, the United States and the European Union need to accomplish a strategic shift by making their partnership more effective, and, consequently, by reshaping their leadership role in international relations. Referring to multipolarisation in power structure, eclecticism in institutional governance, crisis in the world economy and finance and ideational confrontation over values, the paper will assess the strategies available for the transatlantic partners for making the necessary adaptations and compromises in what has been an established and successful post-war liberal world order, which is undergoing a post-cold war era of prolonged uncertainty brought about by globalisation and power transitions. The status and strength of liberalism is appraised within four dimensions of international order: power, governance, values and political economy. Despite power transition and the stagnation of the spread of democracy, the Western powers have been able to maintain the core of liberalism in global governance and political economy as the rising powers find absorption into the legacy order beneficial for them. A concluding question remains, whether, as an outcome of choices, or mixing, made by the liberal transatlantic powers among strategies of binding, bargaining, balancing and persuasion, with varying priorities between the goals of performance and redistribution, liberalism will engulf or accommodate the changes underway, or a modified liberal order will take form or a new and different model of world order will emerge in the longer term. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The establishment of the World Trade Organization (WTO) and the European Union (EU) evoke the problems of why states cooperate, integrate, and choose certain cooperation and integration designs. Power-based analysis is inadequate because power is merely a means and has no intrinsic orientation. Neoliberal's interests-based analysis unsatisfactorily explains cooperation and integration designs due to the problem of underspecified national interests. Based on Bourdieu's Structuralist Constructivism, this paper argues about the independent effect of state regimes and international regimes, and the constitutive and causal nexuses of regimes, interests and power. Regimes define interests and corridor actions in a certain issue area; interests motivate states to act; power enables to act. As ideas can extend across boundaries, states may have typical state regimes and interests. State regime typicality disposes states to build closer amicable relations. Intersubjective state regimes allow states to identify each other as friends. Common interests motivate state to formally cooperate and form a pluralistic community. At a deeper level, collective regimes condition states to identify each other as a part of themselves, nurture we-feeling, and integrate themselves by forming a collective government and an amalgamated community. Only by understanding those nexuses and the distribution of typical regimes, the problems of state cooperation, state integration, and cooperation and integration designs can be satisfactorily understood. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Taking an institutional point of view, this paper explores how both the changing EU and UN contexts are influencing EU-UN relations. First, it discusses how the emergence of a multipolar world has affected the promotion of „effective multilateralism?. Then it explores the impact of the Lisbon Treaty on the EU's actorness within the UN context, more specifically in the UN General Assembly and UN Security Council. Doing so, it develops the argument that the EU has been giving a rather institutional answer to the external challenges its faces, focusing on its external representation. In redefining itself by focusing on the question who is representing the EU, the EU has been prioritizing the internal context over the external one and form over content. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The debate on shifts in governance and the changing authority of the state is not only relevant for environmental governance on land, but also for environmental governance of the marine environment. Seas and oceans are transboundary spaces which require international cooperation between states and cooperation between states, market and civil society. Drawing on the work of Rosenau and using the concept sphere of authority, this paper studies the shifts in governance and changing authority of the state in one particular maritime sector, i.e. offshore oil and gas production on platforms. More specifically, oil and gas platforms in the North Sea, one of the busiest seas in the world. In the North Sea, offshore oil and gas production has expanded since the early 1970s. Moreover, platforms have been governed by states through the regional Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the North-East Atlantic since the late 1970s. However during the 1990s, other spheres of authority within the industry and between the industry and national governments started to emerge. These spheres of authority have not only caused shifts in governance, but also increased sharing of authority between state and private actors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Two EU tools were adopted to enhance cooperation among EU Member States in the case of crises and emergencies (natural, industrial or man-made) occurring both inside and outside the EU borders: First, the EU has developed a new tool in the field of civil protection which has been managed by the Directorate General Environment of the European Commission under the label of the Community Civil Protection Mechanism (CCPM) since 2001. Second, the Emergency and Crisis Coordination Arrangements (CCA) under the responsibility of the European Council level have been developed since 2005. It is puzzling first to observe the co-existence of two EU structures, with theoretically similar functions, namely protecting the population. Second, it is even counterintuitive, as the first organizational structure created is commission-based, whereas in the field of security at the EU level, it is the responsibility of the Council. Using a sociological neo-institutionalist approach based on the concept of "divergent isomorphism", the paper explains who and which sources of EU integration process have led to this puzzling situation. Two case studies are presented using process-tracing to demonstrate that two different pre-existing organizational models were copied to create the EU structures of emergency management: that of the Community Marine pollution framework for the CCPM and that of NATO for the CCA. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The European Union is not yet "good enough at multilateralism" and plays only a limited role thus far in international organisations. The latest attempts for constitutional change (Constitutional Treaty and Treaty of Lisbon) reflect the consensus among EU member states that a modified setup is necessary to live up to the Union's ambitions. The authors argue that the EU's capability to act effectively within multilateral frameworks is to a great extent dependent on the efficiency of its institutional architecture. The paper analyses relevant provisions of the Treaties of Nice and Lisbon (with a focus on CFPS) in order to identify existing problems and to assess the new setup in view of the EU's capability for internal coordination and external representation. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The EU-Russian energy dialogue was set up by the European Union and Russia in 2000. Despite the initial optimism and ambitions on both sides its progress has so far remained limited and no energy partnership emerged. Nor did this cooperation alleviate the fears of instabilities in gas and oil supply. However, energy remains one of the key issues of EU-Russian relations and continues to generate a lot of activities. Moreover, the dialogue between the producers and consumers attracts growing attention at the global level. In this situation it is of utmost importance to explore the reasons for the lack of progress in the EU-Russian energy dialogue. The paper first explores the evolution of EU views on energy cooperation, showing how it has precluded cooperation. It then addresses the developments in Russian thinking on energy cooperation to demonstrate its present incompatibility with that of the EU's. Finally, it looks at the institutional aspects of the energy dialogue, which are also responsible for the current failure of the dialogue. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

How can the international community deal with the uncertain risks of newly emerging technologies? The question of anticipatory risk regulation remains one of the most intractable problems in global governance. Existing international institutions are often limited in their coverage of new risks; international governance architectures are often fractured and ineffective; and significant time lags persist between the emergence of new risks and institutional policy responses. National institutions tend to be earlier in identifying and managing technology risk; but they largely follow domestic imperatives and do not necessarily take into account the need for internationally coordinated political responses. This paper examines the question of anticipatory risk governance within the context of emerging nanotechnologies. It investigates the peculiar regulatory challenges that emerging nanosciences and technologies pose; analyses existing policy responses in the two leading nanotech areas: the United States and the European Union; and identifies key barriers to the development of a more internationally coordinated and convergent risk governance approach. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper examines developments in EU Member States’ counter-terrorism policies in the last decade. Most EU initiatives to develop a common European capacity to prevent terrorism from the mid-1990s have aimed at improving cooperation among the Member States. Concerned onlookers still wait for these efforts to produce intended results. While these problems can be attributed an unwillingness to suspend the sovereign prerogative in national security matters, another related reason is arguably that the Member States have very different national counter-terrorism legacies. Previous empirical research on counter-terrorism within the EU only gives some guidance as to whether this would be a reasonable claim. First, it has yet presented few comparable indicators of Member States’ counter-terrorism policies. All previous studies draw on case studies or, at best, comparative case studies, rendering longitudinal systematic comparison within and across polities difficult. Second, most previous research has primarily focused on an overly narrow conception of counter-terrorism policy. Urging the need for systematic studies in this area, the objective of this study is to develop a conceptual framework and an analytical method to study counter-terrorism policies of EU Member States. We proceed in two steps. First, we define counter-terrorism policy as a two-dimensional concept combining Member States’ positioning on (a) counter-terrorism ambitions and (b) civil rights ambitions. Striking a balance between these core values is the most critical challenge in the liberal democratic response to terrorism. Second, we estimate all Member States’ positioning in this two-dimensional space over time (1996-2006) by resorting to paneldata obtained from various EU bodies following key conventions related to counter-terrorism cooperation in Europe. These data will enable us to analyze the correlation between the fight against terrorism and the civil rights ambitions of the Member States. Adjacently we will be able to show how national experiences of terrorism affect cohesion and diversity among EU Member States. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper discusses the possible place of the Organisational Theory in the European Studies literature.Specifically, it makes three contributions to this literature: first, it presents a general framework to apply theStructural Contingency Theory branch of the Organisational Theory to European integration. Secondly, it arguesthat some well-known theoretical approaches to European integration can be placed in this framework asapplications of the Structural Contingency Theory. Thirdly, from within the framework in question, the paperapplies Donaldson's SARFIT model to the European integration process for the first time in the literature. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The feeling of exceptionalism of the European Union, due to its internal make-up as an integrated bloc of nations, has helped to develop a foreign policy which has been labelled inter regionalism. Two generally accepted propositions (arguments) regarding European inter regionalism are the following: 1) the EU is applying soft power in its foreign relations with developing nations due to its internal make-up, which influences actorness; and 2) European leadership among those nations would lead necessarily to the establishment of a more stable, peaceful, and democratic world order. The paper tests these two propositions, as well as the impact of inter-regionalism in South American integration ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

One of the undertheorized aspects of international diffusion of transitional justice is the ability of domestic elites to use international tools and institutions designed to bring justice and provide reconciliation for very different local purposes, such as getting rid of domestic political opponents, obtaining international financial aid, or as a proxy for admission to such prestigious international clubs as the European Union. To explain theoretically the domestic political use of international justice, this paper introduces a new theoretical look at international justice mechanisms of compliance. I first present three alternative mechanisms of strategic compliance - coercion, legitimacy, and imitation. I then identify specific domestic political conditions that influence which mechanism of compliance domestic actors undertake and what consequences these alternative strategies have for international justice policy outcomes. I illustrate the theoretical model with empirical evidence from international justice efforts in Serbia, Croatia and Bosnia. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

From the second half of the Nineties, many scholars of international relations, development and comparative politics were interested in democracy promotion which constitutes one of the main features of international organizations (IO) and Western governments foreign policy since the end of the Cold War. Among their works, only those devoted to the political conditionality of the European Union (EU) towards European Central, Eastern and South-Eastern official or potential candidates do challenge to some extent the endogenous paradigm of comparative politics according to which « democracy is a domestic affair par excellence» (Schmitter, 2001). However, this literature does not pay attention to the imposition of democracy by occupying foreign powers. In fact this scenario of democratization has been completely ignored by scholars even if the two thirds of free political regimes registered by Freedom House, at the end of the Nineties, resulted from direct or indirect intervention of external actors (Whithehead, 2001). Our paper will deliver the preliminary results of a three years project (2007-2010) devoted to this topic. Firstly, il will provide a compilation of occupying foreign powers tentatives to impose democracy to a country since l945, with the results of the latter : success ( institution of a stable liberal or consolidated democracy); mitigated success (establishment of a stable hybrid regime); failure ( installation of an unstable hybrid regime or illiberal democracy replaced by an authoritarian regime). Secondly, it will suggest hypotheses susceptible to explain these varying outcomes while evaluating if the latter validate the traditional endogenous theories of democratization. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Does opting out from selected policy areas in the EU affect a member state's general status as an attractive cooperation partner in the informal negotiation processes in the EU Council of Ministers? A common argument in both political and academic debates has been that a likely effect of standing outside the Euro would be loss of status and influence generally in the EU. Opting out would be perceived as free-riding - a norm violation - which would lead to bad reputation and exclusion from informal cooperation networks.This paper tests the proposed free-rider effect by comparing the network capital - a member state's set of cooperation partners - of Euro-insiders and Outsiders in the Council working groups. It uses survey data of 130 member state representatives in 2003, in which questions about cooperation patterns in the Council were asked. The findings speak strongly against the free-rider hypothesis as the Euro-outsiders are highly ranked in terms of network capital and subjective evaluations indicate that the opt-outs do not affect the cooperation patterns other than marginally. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Observers of the EU's development cooperation policy have noted that the EU has increasingly focused attention on wealthier developing nations and the near-abroad, promoted neoliberal approaches to development, and subordinated development objectives to foreign and security policy considerations. These trends in development policy have drawn attention away from the world's poorest countries and have limited the poverty eradication orientation of EU policy. This paper examines how the way the European development network has been integrated into the EU's political system has shaped the ability of development NGOs to influence the direction that EU development policy has recently taken. The analysis suggests that the development network's role as an intermediary between the European Commission and NGOs seeking funding for project implementation has led the network to concentrate on its administrative functions at the expense of its advocacy work. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Have small states become more influential in a complex multi-actor governance system, and are there special ways of exerting influence for small states in the EU? According to some scholars small states can become more influential in an international system where sovereignty is under challenge and large multilateral institutions - the EU being the most obvious example - are assuming greater importance. Based on literature about small states in international relations, literature about asymmetric negotiations, and more EU specific literature, I elaborate a theoretical framework and argue that a combination of, firstly, framing; secondly, supplying information within specific issue-areas (with the help of experts); thirdly, striving for norm-compliance and acting as mediators (which is supposedly easier for smaller member states); and fourthly, using institutional opportunities within EU decision-making procedures, contribute to the influence capacity of smaller states. Hence, it is not size per se but the strategic actions of small states trying to promote national interests within an international organization that are interesting. Small states are not necessarily smarter but they have to act strategically - smart - in order to be influential. In addition, small states' experiences as mediators and of negotiating from a weaker position create advantages that large states don't have despite relative voting strength and more material resources. Swedish experiences as Presidency of the EU Council of Ministers and in the transparency area, illustrate the theoretical argument in this paper. These experiences are compared with the French Presidency and French interests, opening up for a wider discussion about size, influence, framing, and political reputation in international cooperative arrangements. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper analyzes the potential impact of the EU's European Neighborhood Policy on democracy and human rights in the partner countries. On the one hand, the political conditionality advocated in the ENP documents is consistent with the general approach the EU has taken toward the institutionalization of its relations with nonmember countries. A data-based analysis of the political impact of Partnership and Cooperation Agreements with the Eastern European ENP countries and of the Barcelona Process shows, however, that political conditionality has been neither consistent nor effective and there are no reasons to believe that this will change under ENP. I argue that this is not primarily due to the inconsistency of political conditionality but to the combination of weak external incentives and high domestic adaptation costs. A case study of Belarus illustrates this conjecture. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents a conference paper titled "The War on Terror, Intelligence and US Unilateralism: Why 9/11 Made No Difference" prepared for presentation at the "2005 Annual Meeting of the International Studies Association" in Honolulu, Hawaii. It argues on paying closer attention to the logic of linkage politics especially the issue of credible commitments. It discusses international intelligence cooperation after September 11 specifically to the responses of the European Union and Russia.

Based on the complementarities of role theory and risk choice theory, a combined theoretical framework is generated by hypothesizing mutually causal relationships among roles, risk choices and foreign policy behavior. Through the lens of systemism, this article argues that roles and risk choices are two key determinants of European foreign policy and their maximum explanatory power occurs in combination. EU trade policy toward China since the mid-1990s illustrates that the role conceptions and prescriptions of the EU primarily explain the choice of its cooperative diplomatic rhetoric. Simultaneously, the risk-taking preferences within the EU account for its inconsistent and less constructive behavior. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Over the past 30 years, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) have established themselves as an important actor group in international environmental governance. This paper compares the US and EU approaches to integrating non-state actors and civil society into global governance by examining: (1) how these actors have been included in the decision-making process (such as through participation in official country delegations at UN meetings, ability to communicate their positions and ideas at negotiating sessions) and (2) how these actors have been included in the implementation (such as through being assigned specific roles in carrying out the recommendations in agreements). The paper analyzes the effects of these NGO participation strategies for groups of countries in the South. The surge of NGOs in developing countries in the 1990s was a response to signals from funders in the North. How has this affected the political environments in Southern countries and what ability have Southern NGOs had to affect global environmental decision-making? [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article seeks to explain variance in the relationships between international organisations. Empirically, the article examines the degree of co-operation and conflict in the interaction between the European Union (EU) and the Council of Europe (CoE) in the field of human rights promotion and protection in Europe. Drawing on organisation theory and International Relations (IR) literature on institutional interaction, the article argues that, depending on their intensity, challenges to organisations' interests lead to different types of institutional interaction (ranging from disruptive to synergistic). The theoretical propositions are tested in three case studies on the interaction between the CoE and the EU concerning the establishment of the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, the investigation of CIA activities in Europe and the conducting of 'joint programmes'. The case studies show how challenges to the CoE's organisational interests by the EU triggered inter-organisational conflict, whereas the lack of such challenges led to a mutually beneficial interaction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The significance of increasingly institutionalised cooperation remains contested â€" whether governments comply with international rules when it is costly to do so and thus whether there has been a transfer of political authority beyond the state. Although ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The question of European energy security has brought attention to the strategic significance of Southeastern Europe as a transport hub of natural gas and a key region for European energy security. The questions how to secure natural gas quantities sufficient for increasing European needs and how to reduce energy dependency on Russia led to pipeline projects aiming to provide the European market with non-Russian natural gas. This allowed for the emergence of a new field of Greek-Turkish cooperation. The Turkey-Greece-Italy (TGI) Interconnector project aspires to bring Azerbaijani, Iranian, Turkmen, Kazakh, Egyptian and even Iraqi natural gas to Europe. It also also comprises an example of the paradigmatic shift that has characterized Greek-Turkish relations since the late 1990s. To meet increasing natural gas demand and reduce energy dependency on Russia, European authorities need to promote the realization of projects contributing to the diversification of natural gas supply, alongside improving its relationship with Russia, two targets which are not necessarily mutually exclusive. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on the international identity of the European Union (EU) through the link between security, integration and identity. It mentions that the notion of international identity is an attempt to think about how the EU is constituted, constructed and represented internationally. It offers a distinction between the levels where the EU plays different roles as a security actor. It also provides information on EU foreign policy. It claims that the EU narrative about EU-United Nations (UN) relations shape the international identity of EU.

The article focuses on the dynamics of political bargaining in the settling of disputes regarding compliance with international agreements. It presents the types of third-party dispute resolution namely interstate dispute settlement and supranational dispute settlement. It discusses the dispute settlement systems and compliance bargaining in the World Trade Organization (WTO) and the European Union (EU). It demonstrates how the structure of dispute settlement affects international cooperation.

The article provides a comparison between the European Union and Asian regional institutions such as ASEAN and APEC. It looks at the relations of the EU with the wider world. It cites the reasons behind the establishment of the ASEAN in 1967. It defines the main differences between a cooperation and an integration.

The article explores the opportunities and constraints of European Union (EU) agenda-setting in the negotiations between the EU and South Africa using an adaptation of Robert Putnam's two- (extended to three-) level game model. It provides an outline of the negotiations leading to the Trade, Development and Co-operation Agreement (TDCA). It details the strengths and weaknesses of using the adapted version of the three-level game model.

The article focuses on the importance of transatlantic cooperation in preventing terror financing. According to the author, the European Union (EU) is an indispensable partner for the U.S. because of its global reach and legal ties that bind its member states and third countries. The article adds that EU countries can offer reliable structures and processes to government that can supply capacity to law enforcement, intelligence services and judiciaries.

Prior to September 11, scholarly discussions concerning multilateral regimes to govern the movement of people among states in North America centered on the desire to facilitate flows. Common macro-economic interests for more open migration among NAFTA countries press for a more Ricardian approach to migration management similar to that utilized for trade and capital flows. Although dialogue regarding migration regimes has been most rigorous in the European Union, strong interests exist among North American countries to craft policy in the EU mold. However, the events of September 11 not only served to table existing plans for multilateral negotiations regarding migration, but also appeared to completely alter the strategic environment. After 9/11, recognition among policy makers in the U.S. and Canada of the close link between migration control and counter-terrorism prompted widespread acceptance of the view that increasing security is a precondition for openness to migration. Yet, as an inherently global phenomenon it would appear that security could be increased not only through new domestic policies, but also through increased multilateral cooperation. Is such cooperation likely in the area of migration and border control in North America, and are NAFTA countries moving toward a more European approach toward migration and border management? Early evidence shows us that although some cooperation has already been initiated, disparity of interests among North American states presents a significant political obstacle to regime formation, as do the logistical challenges facing Canada, the United States, and Mexico. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The predominant theory of international cooperation is bargaining theory which explains outcomes based on the rational weighing of initial state preferences. I argue that diplomats as actors in an "epistemic community" are instrumental in affecting cooperative outcomes in the European Union beyond what bargaining theory would predict. Through historical process-tracing, this article examines the diplomatic processes during deliberation over the Common Foreign and Security Policy of the 1992 Maastricht Treaty. Analysis of EU documentation and interviews suggest that the processes of negotiation among diplomats which occurred during the two-year lead up to the Maastricht IGC were critical in determining outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper is concerned with the political economy of British trade union policy towards the European Union from the 1960s to the current period. It aims to evaluate trade union policy through the theoretical lens of World Order analysis in International Political Economy (Cox 1981; Lipietz 1992; Gamble and Payne 1996; Payne 2005). The paper seeks to develop three related arguments. First, focusing on the TUC and abstracting from important political and sectoral divisions within the British union movement, while assuming unions to be informed, rational agents in the pursuit of labour interests, it is argued that union assessments of the EC (later the European Union (EU)) have been fundamentally determined by the broader political economy environment or structure in which they have acted to promote these interests. Teague and Grahl have argued that British trade union policy towards the EC has been largely determined by an underlying attachment to a model of national political economy. This, they claim has underscored a pervasive and enduring scepticism towards the European project. Second, in line with world order analysis, it is contended that there has been a fundamental shift in the political economy environment associated with neoliberal globalisation. This shift can be dated from the early 1970s and was marked, not least, by the ending of the thirty-year post-war boom, itself structured around the so-called ‘Keynesian Golden Age’. While his analysis has been strongly contested (Teague and Grahl 1992; Rosamond 1993), Dorfman (1977) suggests the broad parameters of this shift, particularly in so far as it was identified as a source of national economic instability and crisis, was recognised by trade union leaders and key policy actors at the time. This paper seeks to affirm Dorfman’s analysis, claiming that the 1970s marked the beginning of a fundamental (and positive) re-evaluation within the union movement of the efficacy, from a general labour interests viewpoint, of Britain’s integration with Europe. It therefore challenges Teague and Grahl’s insistence on an enduring commitment to national political economy by British trade union policy makers.Third, changing union attitudes and policy towards the EC/EU reflect the structural shift in the political economy. This shift has centred on neoliberal globalisation and the internationalisation of the (competition) state (Cox 1981; Lipietz 1992; Cerny 1997). Under such conditions, national-level demand-led social democratic projects have been largely undermined by the pervasive imperatives of international competitiveness imposed by globalising structures and agents. Against this structural backdrop, British union attitudes to the EC/EU â€" at least in so far as the EC/EU represents forms of governance through which the wider political economy can be regulated â€" fundamentally altered, becoming consistently positive despite the vicissitudes of the European project itself. During the Keynesian ‘golden age’, British unions analysed Europe from a default position of pragmatic scepticism, a position informed by the assumptions of ‘naïve’ national Keynesianism and its efficacy (Teague and Grahl 1992). By contrast, since the mid 1970s the British unions have increasingly evaluated engagement and integration with the EC/EU from a position predicated on and informed by the crisis of Keynesianism as a national political economy. In view of national Keynesianism’s crisis under globalisation, positive engagement with the EC/EU became the new default policy position of the union movement especially at TUC level around which on-going division caused by political and sectoral factors oscillated... ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Commission and the Council of European Union have recently started to work on a common concept of "Security Sector Reform" (SSR) so as to be able to cooperate more closely when engaging in 'fragile states'. By mid 2007, we have two separate concept papers and an increasing record of EU missions in the Balkans, sub-Saharan Africa, the Middle East and in Afghanistan, which have the objectives of either reforming the police or the justice systems, key aspects of SSR. This paper has three aims: first, it discusses the similarities and differences in the two concept papers and then it outlines a framework for understanding the competing interests, ideas and institutions that are shaping the evolution of this policy-area by taking into account divergent hypotheses present in competing paradigms. The third aim is to examine the manner and extent to which the EU is applying the principle of "ownership" to some of the most recent and ongoing missions that it is undertaking in the Balkans and in sub-Saharan Africa. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Terrorism, both domestic and international, has always been a threat to the security of states and citizens in Europe. Before 9/11, policy and legal solutions were developed primarily at the national level for specifically internal terrorist threats. After the terrorist attacks of 9/11, there was a new impetus for increasing cooperation among the member states of the European Union, to “Europeanize” the fight against terrorist actors. Despite much official discussion, however, substantial obstacles remain in place at the national level that prevent complete and effective forms of cooperation to combat terrorism within the EU. This paper explains what those obstacles are and whether the likelihood they will be overcome in the near future.For example, in 2002, the EU member states intensified cooperation in the area of Justice and Home Affairs through the establishment of the European Arrest Warrant. However, several governments did not implement the necessary legislation establishing it on time or has been deemed unconstitutional, such as in Germany and Belgium. This failure to implement legislation on time stems from the inability to agree upon a common definition of terrorism and the appropriate methods to fight it, which differ remarkably among the member states. Controlling for other factors, these differences reflect the different norms concerning the role of the state and criminality that are thoroughly institutionalized at the national level. My paper outlines the nature of these differences and how they have prevented EU member states from complying with their supranational legal obligations. Unless these obstacles are identified and addressed by EU governments and institutions, the ability to effectively fight transnational terrorist organizations within the EU will be hampered. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]