10. Delegating Upwards

2021 ◽  
pp. 270-293
Author(s):  
Peter John

This chapter highlights the challenges presented by international politics. Much of what happens in British politics occurs because of Britain's relationship to the international stage. Relationships to other states, international bodies, and the international economy need to be managed by the UK's political leaders and foreign and defence bureaucracies, to manage how to deploy Britain's voice in international matters. Then there is the delegation of powers to international organizations and the making of treaties. The chapter specifically examines foreign policy and focuses on how functions are delegated to international organizations. It tells the story of the European Union (EU) as one of the most important international delegations culminating in the story of Brexit. This leads to a discussion of the UK's defence and security role. One key theme of the chapter is how success and failure in international politics feed back into domestic politics.

2007 ◽  
Vol 42 (1) ◽  
pp. 18-45 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hans Agné

AbstractThis paper presents an argument as to why democratic states are unable to delegate authority to international organizations. Influential attempts to justify democratically such international bodies as the European Union by means of delegation are found to be untenable. At a more general level of theorization, it argues that the theory of delegation as involving the recoverability of delegated authority leaves us unable to identify democratic reforms for international organizations. As a remedy to the latter problem, the article proposes an alternative theory of democratic ‘delegation’– one that applies equally well to national and to international politics.


Author(s):  
Daniel Finke ◽  
Thomas König ◽  
Sven-Oliver Proksch ◽  
George Tsebelis

For decades the European Union tried changing its institutions, but achieved only unsatisfying political compromises and modest, incremental treaty revisions. In late 2009, however, the EU was successfully reformed through the Treaty of Lisbon. This book examines how political leaders ratified this treaty against all odds and shows how this victory involved all stages of treaty reform negotiations—from the initial proposal to referendums in several European countries. The book emphasizes the strategic role of political leadership and domestic politics, and it uses state-of-the-art methodology, applying a comprehensive data set for actors' reform preferences. The book looks at how political leaders reacted to apparent failures of the process by recreating or changing the rules of the game. While domestic actors played a significant role in the process, their influence over the outcome was limited as leaders ignored negative referendums and plowed ahead with intended reforms. The book's empirical analyses shed light on critical episodes: strategic agenda setting during the European Convention, the choice of ratification instrument, intergovernmental bargaining dynamics, and the reaction of the German Council presidency to the negative referendums in France, the Netherlands, and Ireland.


Author(s):  
S.A. Shein

The “populist wave” in the EU member states is no longer a phenomenon isolated in domestic politics. It has a projection on the sphere of foreign policy of national states and the European Union. The article aims to “shed light” on the barriers arising on the way of conceptualizing and typologizing the foreign policy orientations of populist actors, relying on an ideological approach to populism. The study revealed that the main constraints for the conceptualization and typologization of populists' foreign policy are the fragmented nature of populism as an ideology, the limited ability to translate their attitudes into the political course, and gradual mainstreamization after coming to power.


2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (10) ◽  
pp. 1980-1996
Author(s):  
T.S. Malakhova

Subject. Foreign economic and trade ties among countries are getting tighter and less predictable in the early 21st century. This directly stems from a growing disparity of partners, especially if it goes about their future cooperation as part of integration groups or international organizations. Communities of experts suggest using various approaches to locally adjusting integration phases, especially implementing the two-speed integration in the European Union. Objectives. The study is an attempt to examine an improvement of foreign economic cooperation and suggest its implementation steps for the European Union. This all is due to considerable inner controversies and problems within the EU, which grow more serious year by year. Methods. The methodological framework comprises the historical logic, dialectical principles, scientific abstraction method. The process and system approach was especially important for justifying the implementation of the above steps. It was used to examine foreign economic relations of partners in the European Union. Results. The article sets forth the theoretical and methodological framework for the geostrategic economic bloc, including a conceptual structure model. I present steps to implement a foreign economic cooperation of partners in the EU in terms of its form. Conclusions and Relevance. Should the form of the foreign economic relations among the EU countries be implemented, counties at the periphery of the EU will be able to become active parties to the integration group.


2019 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 74-79
Author(s):  
Nargiza Sodikova ◽  
◽  
◽  

Important aspects of French foreign policy and national interests in the modern time,France's position in international security and the specifics of foreign affairs with the United States and the European Union are revealed in this article


Author(s):  
Antoine Vandemoorteele

This article analyzes the role of the European Union (EU) and Canada in the promotion of Security Sector Reforms (SSR) activities in two regional organizations, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). The concept of SSR seeks to address the effective governance of security in post-conflict environment by transforming the security institutions within a country in order for them to have more efficient, legitimate and democratic role in implementing security. Recent debates within the EU have led to the adoption of an SSR concept from the Council and a new strategy from the European Commission on the SSR activities. Within the framework of the ESDP, the EU has positioned itself as a leading actor, in this domain, including in its crisis management operations. On the other hand, Canada, through its whole-of government and human security programs has also been an important actor in the promotion of SSR activities. Yet, even though several international organizations (including the United Nations, the OSCE and NATO) are effectively doing SSR activities on the ground, there does not exist a common framework within any of these organizations despite the role of the EU and Canada. As such, it is surprising to found no global common policy for SSR while this approach is precisely holistic in its foundations. Taking these elements into consideration, this paper analyzes two specific aspects : a) the absence of a common policy framework within international organizations and b) the major differences between the approaches of the OSCE and NATO in the domain of SSR and the implications for the EU and Canada’ roles.   Full extt available at: https://doi.org/10.22215/rera.v3i2.186


2020 ◽  
pp. 35-39
Author(s):  
Andrei Martynov ◽  
Sergey Asaturov

The European Union has met Donald Trump's presidency in a crisis, caused by Britain's exit, quarrels over migration policy and prospects for European integration. Trump has abandoned a project to create a transatlantic free trade area. He demanded a one-sided trade advantage for the United States. The rejection of the liberal project of multilateral foreign policy contributed to the deepening of contradictions between the EU and the US in the field of trade, environment, the regime of international disarmament treaties, the algorithm for resolving regional conflicts. The Trump era in US foreign policy was a time of abandoning liberal globalism. But it is impossible to realize this task in one cadence. The question is whether it is possible for Democrats to fully restore liberal globalism in equal cooperation with the European Union.Trump has abandoned the project of a transatlantic free trade area between the United States and the European Union. This shocked the European elites. Differences in approaches to world trade contributed to the coolness. The European Union is promoting a liberal approach. Trump insisted on the priority of the patronage of American interests. As a result, the tradition of relationships has suffered. Until 2017, the United States bought European goods and paid the most to the NATO budget. Trump demanded trade parity and more European funding for NATO. European elites perceived Trump's approach to migration issues as unacceptable. Trump's policy on international conflicts has become another reason for mutual misunderstanding. Trump recognized Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and helped establish diplomatic relations between Israel and the United Arab Emirates. This has become a challenge for the European Union's Middle East policy.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document