“Moral Power” of the EU through the European Neighborhood Policy

Author(s):  
Syuzanna Vasilyan
2016 ◽  
Vol 60 (1) ◽  
pp. 93-102
Author(s):  
E. Dovbysh

Local authorities have to deal with a large part of practical work in promotion of the European integration project. Today, cities together with other actors are involved in the EU political process. This involvement leads to modification and enrichment of the European political space and increases the viability of supranational institutions. Cities extend the range of available channels for representation of citizens’ interests. Participation of cities in the decision-making improves the quality of these decisions and the legitimacy of supranational institutions, which is especially important in the context of the debate on the democratic deficit in the EU. Cities and other subnational actors can be active at the pan-European level and national levels. They use different "access points" at the European level, such as the Committee of the Regions, the European associations of cities, representations of local authorities in Brussels. The role of cities is especially evident in the Europe 2020, Cohesion Policy and the European Neighborhood Policy. European cities are involved in the elaboration of national reform programs. Cities and their associations can offer their assessments and visions of development to the Commission. Participating in the elaboration of national reform programs cities get a chance to influence the agenda of national development. This can indirectly affect the implementation of the Europe 2020 and dynamics of the European integration process as a whole. The participation of subnational actors – regions and municipalities – is important for realization of the Cohesion Policy objectives. Cities are particularly relevant for this policy, because they can become a ground for social conflicts and unrest. New tools, such as JESSICA and Integrated Territorial Investment, pay significant attention to local level politics in Europe. The European Neighborhood Policy has an important local dimension. There are such city-oriented programs as COMUS, The Covenant of Mayors, CIUDAD and projects of cross-border coordination. Examples show that cooperation between cities is successful, if it is based on the mutual interest in solving common problems. The Treaty of Lisbon has opened new opportunities to cities' participation. European institutions are now obliged to consult with the Committee of Regions on the issues that have a strong effect at the local and regional level. However, the involvement of cities into integration practices of the EU is still limited. This is due to both, the fundamental problem of the EU organizational design, and the lack of effective channels for representing urban interests at the European level.


Author(s):  
A. Strelkov

The European Neighborhood Policy and the Eastern Partnership (EaP) heralded the willingness of the EU to create a comprehensive concept for developing relations with the post-Soviet states. The politics of Europeanization (the export of specific forms of the EU political organization) served as a basis for this concept. Liberalization of the visa regime, cooperation with the EU agencies, “Action plans”, adaptation of the acquis communautaire and financial aid, – all these elements are the instruments of Europeanization. The author comes to a conclusion that within the EaP framework, the acquis adaptation will be piecemeal, and Europeanization will be of a limited, “sectoral” character.


Author(s):  
Al Eassa Lina

Resilience has become a priority for the EU in its 2015 European Neighborhood Policy review (ENP), It refers to building state and societal resilience of the Union as a whole, its members and the EU׳s neighbors including Jordan, a strategic southern partner of the EU. In this regard, the EU Building resilience in Jordan in response for crises as the Syrian refugee crisis seems workable but the EU needs to foster it. Thus, this paper’s question is How can the EU foster resilience after it has become a priority in its 2015 (ENP) review in case of Jordan? While many scholars like David Chandler argues that the EU could foster resilience in its neighboring countries by making it a local self-governing project and not an external imposed project where the EU has the mission of monitoring and assessment, in this paper, based on document analysis from official websites for the EU and Jordan including their official bilateral and multilateral agreements and textual analysis of the current literature on building resilience I argue that fostering resilience requires both presenting resilience as a self-governing project with a greater engagement of the Jordanian government, local community and its civil society, at the same time , it needs a better mechanism for the EU in monitoring and assessment, and more importantly helping Jordan to establish the best institutional design that could foster state and societal resilience in Jordan.


2011 ◽  
Vol 36 (2) ◽  
pp. 127-155 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katharina Eisele ◽  
Anja Wiesbrock

AbstractIn 2004, the EU launched the European Neighborhood Policy (ENP) with the objective of avoiding new dividing lines between the EU and its neighbors in the East and the South. This was offered as an alternative to full EU membership. The ENP is intended to bring about prosperity, stability, and security. In this context, the EU has agreed on a number of Action Plans on a bilateral basis with twelve ENP partner states. The mobility of persons is a key policy priority in the framework of the ENP, which is substantiated by the conclusion of 'mobility partnerships' with Moldova (2008) and Georgia (2009). Even though the Action Plans have been negotiated on the basis of 'joint ownership', it is arguable that EU interests have come to dominate the cooperation. The question arises to what extent these policy plans are beneficial for the neighboring countries and individual migrants. This article focuses on the rules and policy priorities contained in the Partnership and Cooperation Agreements, the Action Plans, the visa facilitation and readmission agreements, as well as the mobility partnerships concluded with Moldova and Georgia. The analysis unfolds that the main emphasis of the ENP is on border control and the fight against irregular migration, whereas little has been done to enhance legal migration opportunities. Therefore, we argue that the ENP falls short of meeting the objective to create cooperation based on mutual interest and joint ownership.


Author(s):  
Michał Rulski

Ukraine is the largest country that is included in European Neighborhood Policy. That is why the European Union should spotlight relations with this eastern partner, especially by foreign policy instruments like association agreement. The focus here is on the EU’s involvement in the Ukrainian crisis in period from Maidan revolution at the end of 2013, which was occasioned by the rejection of the association agreement with the EU by President Viktor Yanukovych, and to the presidential election in 2014. The main issue is to evaluate the EU’s scope to stabilize the political environment in the nearby neighborhood and eliminate threats, which are the results of war between Ukraine and Russia.


2018 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 9-20
Author(s):  
Ladislav Cabada ◽  
Šárka Waisová

Abstract Even after achieving its goals, i.e. the entrance of member states into NATO and the EU, the Visegrad Group has managed to profile itself as a significant collective actor. Analyses to date clearly show that the group is able to function as a distinct and even key actor in various policies, including those within the EU; this statement is without doubt valid primarily for the region of the European neighborhood policy and the Eastern partnership, but also for enlargement policy and its clear targeting of the Western Balkans. We can also observe a highly proactive approach in issues linked to security, primarily in the energy sector and recently also cyber security. Nonetheless, all of these and many other significant V4 activities have been overshadowed of late by dispute between the group and a significant portion of members states on perspectives regarding the migration crisis including the tools to deal with it or preventive measures to prevent it from continuing or repeating. This stance on the issue, however, can be seen as proof of the relative power and success of the V4.


2009 ◽  
Vol 61 (4) ◽  
pp. 427-454
Author(s):  
Branislav Radeljic

The end of the Cold War brought a period of stability and safety, which gave an additional stimulus to the European Union to play a key role in the international security arena. However, due to the potential risk of importing instability, the European Council adopted the European Security Strategy in 2003 under the title A Secure Europe in a Better World, the first strategic vision of the Member States. The European Neighborhood Policy is designed to avoid new dividing lines between the enlarged EU and its neighbors to the east and on the southern and eastern shores of Mediterranean. Accordingly, tackling the issue of terrorism in terms of the new ENP has appeared to be a vital synergic component linking the EU member states and its partners. This paper considers the potential of the ENP to constitute as an instrument for the fight against terrorism engaging joint participation of the European Union and its neighboring region. .


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document