Institutional Powers in External Relations

2019 ◽  
pp. 149-184
Author(s):  
Christina Eckes
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
External Action ◽  
International Agreements ◽  
Formal Structure ◽  
Added Value ◽  
Economic Interests ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
External Relations

Chapter 5 identifies the institutional changes that take place when the Union acts under international law and in cooperation with third countries or international institutions, rather than internally. The focus is, in particular, on the role of the European Parliament. The fact that the conclusion of EU international agreements depends on the consent of Parliament gives EU citizens a voice in international relations, which, with all its flaws, draws on a source of democratic legitimation that is independent and separate from the EU Member States. The chapter demonstrates that, in practice, Parliament has also been adept in strengthening its rights to information and its influence at the negotiation stage. Parliament’s powerful position in negotiating and concluding international agreements and its ability to represent EU citizens (and also non-economic interests) in external relations are analysed as an emerging formal structure of bonding. The chapter argues in favour of further explicating the Union’s added value in legitimizing the conclusion of international agreements and thus justifying Union external action, including where it limits the scope of manoeuvre of Member States as international actors. It further shows that facultative mixity (i.e. the conclusion of international agreements as a political choice rather than a legal necessity) deprives Parliament of the ability to represent EU citizens in international relations.

Labour Immigration Policy in the European Union: How to Overcome the Tension between Further Europeanisation and the Protection of National Interests?

2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 198-223
Author(s):  
Jean-Baptiste Farcy
Keyword(s):  
Immigration Policy ◽  
Added Value ◽  
The European Union ◽  
National Interests ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Labour Immigration ◽  
Eu Directives ◽  
The Eu

Abstract This article critically assesses EU harmonisation in the field of labour immigration. It argues that EU directives are limited both in scope and intensity which explains their relatively low effectiveness and added value. Given the current political and institutional context, the article claims that a truly common labour immigration policy is unrealistic. Labour immigration remains a predominantly national prerogative and EU rules have done little to overcome normative competition between EU Member States. Looking forward, the EU should adopt complementary measures to Member States’ policies. The role of the EU in this sensitive policy area should be better defined and justified, in particular in relation to the principle of subsidiarity.

scholarly journals Analysing the Power of the European Union’s Diplomatic Service: Do the eu Member States Control the European External Action Service?

2016 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 26-48 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hrant Kostanyan
Keyword(s):  
External Action ◽  
Principal Agent ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Agent Model ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Principal Agent Model ◽  
European Union Member States ◽  
The Eu

By applying the rational choice principal–agent model, this article examines the European Union member states’ principal control of the European External Action Service (eeas) agent. More specifically, the article applies mechanisms of agency monitoring, control and sanctions that are inherent in the principal–agent model to analyse the establishment and functioning of the eeas. These mechanisms aim to ensure the eeas’s compliance with its mandate, thereby curtailing its ability to pursue own objectives that are independent from the principal. The findings reveal that the eeas is tightly controlled by the eu member states. Moreover the European Commission has tools to exercise horizontal checks vis-à-vis the eeas. The application of the principal–agent model to control the eeas is not without its limits. The model falls short of conceptualizing the role of the European Parliament, which remains an outlier to this model.

Providing for European-Level Diplomacy after Lisbon: The Case of the European External Action Service

2009 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 211-233 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simon Duke
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
External Action ◽  
Lisbon Treaty ◽  
The European Union ◽  
European Level ◽  
Special Issue ◽  
Member States ◽  
External Relations ◽  
The Eu

AbstractThe Lisbon Treaty may well be on ice, may perhaps even be moribund, but there remain compelling reasons to think through the identified shortcomings of the European Union in external relations. Many of the innovations in the area of external relations that are contained in the treaty are dependent upon ratification by the EU's member states, but some are not; the European External Action Service (EEAS) falls into the latter category. Although the actual implementation of the EEAS will face formidable hurdles, as has been outlined in this contribution, the exercise of thinking through these challenges is essential if the EU and its members are to begin grappling with many of the issues examined in this special issue — ranging from the role of national diplomats in today's world to the successful pursuit of structural diplomacy and the effectiveness of the EU in multilateral organizations.

23. EU external action

2020 ◽  
pp. 731-791
Author(s):  
Geert De Baere
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Composite System ◽  
External Action ◽  
International Agreements ◽  
External Representation ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Member States ◽  
External Relations ◽  
Policy Fields ◽  
The Eu

This chapter examines the EU law on external relations. It explores the complex division of competences between the Member States and the Union, and between the different institutions of the Union in the field of external action; the applicable decision-making procedures, including the procedure for concluding international agreements; the Union’s composite system of external representation; and how the Union manages the vertical (between the Union and the Member States) and horizontal (between the different Institutions and policy fields of the EU) division of its external competences.

24. EU external action

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Geert De Baere
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Composite System ◽  
External Action ◽  
International Agreements ◽  
External Representation ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Member States ◽  
External Relations ◽  
Policy Fields ◽  
The Eu

This chapter examines the EU law on external relations. It explores the complex division of competences between the Member States and the Union, and between the different institutions of the Union in the field of external action; the applicable decision-making procedures, including the procedure for concluding international agreements; the Union’s composite system of external representation; and how the Union manages the vertical (between the Union and the Member States) and horizontal (between the different Institutions and policy fields of the EU) division of its external competences.

scholarly journals Inequalities in the European Union—A Partial Order Analysis of the Main Indicators

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (11) ◽  
pp. 6278
Author(s):  
Lars Carlsen ◽  
Rainer Bruggemann
Keyword(s):  
Indicator System ◽  
Partial Ordering ◽  
Disposable Income ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Per Capita ◽  
Educational Aspect ◽  
The Eu

The inequality within the 27 European member states has been studied. Six indicators proclaimed by Eurostat to be the main indicators charactere the countries: (i) the relative median at-risk-of-poverty gap, (ii) the income distribution, (iii) the income share of the bottom 40% of the population, (iv) the purchasing power adjusted GDP per capita, (v) the adjusted gross disposable income of households per capita and (vi) the asylum applications by state of procedure. The resulting multi-indicator system was analyzed applying partial ordering methodology, i.e., including all indicators simultaneously without any pretreatment. The degree of inequality was studied for the years 2010, 2015 and 2019. The EU member states were partially ordered and ranked. For all three years Luxembourg, The Netherlands, Austria, and Finland are found to be highly ranked, i.e., having rather low inequality. Bulgaria and Romania are, on the other hand, for all three years ranked low, with the highest degree of inequality. Excluding the asylum indicator, the risk-poverty-gap and the adjusted gross disposable income were found as the most important indicators. If, however, the asylum application is included, this indicator turns out as the most important for the mutual ranking of the countries. A set of additional indicators was studied disclosing the educational aspect as of major importance to achieve equality. Special partial ordering tools were applied to study the role of the single indicators, e.g., in relation to elucidate the incomparability of some countries to all other countries within the union.

Human Rights in EU Development Policy

2021 ◽  
pp. 682-706
Author(s):  
Jan Wouters ◽  
Michal Ovádek
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Development Policy ◽  
External Action ◽  
Development Cooperation ◽  
Development Programs ◽  
Member States ◽  
Missed Opportunities ◽  
Constitutional Level ◽  
The Eu

This chapter studies the role of human rights in EU development policy. The place of human rights in development policy was solidified at the constitutional level with the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, which made the promotion of human rights in all EU external action a legal obligation. As a result, different institutional mechanisms, thematic guidelines, and dedicated instruments and strategies have been put in place to consolidate a comprehensive operational framework aimed at ensuring that EU development programs advance human rights worldwide coherently and consistently. EU development policy is a shared competence, which means that both the EU and its Member States are entitled to act within this domain, as long as national actions do not undermine EU laws and positions. The sharing of competences, however, makes it more difficult for the EU to live up to the commitment of coherent and consistent promotion of human rights. In any case, substantial amount of coordination between the EU and the Member States is required in order to deliver coherence in development policy. However, the role of the EU as a normative leader in development cooperation remains subject to a multitude of long-standing criticisms and various evaluations of EU human rights policy point to a series of mixed results and missed opportunities.

European Union Rights and Values in Human Health

2019 ◽  
pp. 16-51
Author(s):  
Anniek de Ruijter
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
European Union ◽  
National Policy ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Eu Fundamental Rights ◽  
The Eu

This book looks at the impact of the expanding power of the EU in terms of fundamental rights and values. The current chapter lays down the framework for this analysis. Law did not always have a central role to play in the context of medicine and health. The role of law grew after the Second Word War and the Nuremberg Doctors Trials (1947), in which preventing the repetition of atrocities that were committed in the name of medicine became a guidepost for future law regarding patients’ rights and bioethics. In the period after the War, across the EU Member States, health law developed as a legal discipline in which a balance was struck in medicine and public health between law, bioethics, and fundamental rights. The role of EU fundamental rights protections in the context of public health and health care developed in relation with the growth of multilevel governance and litigation (national, international, Council of Europe, and European Union). For the analysis here, this chapter develops an EU rights and values framework that goes beyond the strictly legal and allows for a ‘normative language’ that takes into consideration fundamental rights as an expression of important shared values in the context of the European Union. The perspective of EU fundamental rights and values can demonstrate possible tensions caused by EU health policy: implications in terms of fundamental rights can show how highly sensitive national policy issues may be affected by the Member States’ participation in EU policymaking activities.

Enlargement Policy

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrea Ott
Keyword(s):  
Eu Enlargement ◽  
Big Bang ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
New Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
External Relations ◽  
Yugoslav Republic ◽  
The Big Bang ◽  
Ongoing Project

The EU enlargement policy was labelled in 2003—shortly before the ‘big bang’ enlargement of 2004—the most successful EU external relations policy. Due to that success, the European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) has, since 2003, copied certain characteristics of the policy and instruments. However, after the 2004 accession of twelve new Member States and the subsequent accession of Romania and Bulgaria in 2007 and finally of Croatia in 2013, a general enlargement fatigue can be diagnosed among the existing EU Member States. EU Member States have become wary of further accession in times of recurring crises of the European Union project and in light of the challenge of post-accession integration of new Member States, especially of Bulgaria and Romania, as an ongoing project. At the same time they are not willing to abandon such an effective tool for influencing and aligning third countries’ policies to EU law and for stimulating reforms in national administrative and legal orders of neighbouring countries in anticipation of accession. Montenegro, Serbia, and Turkey have started accession negotiations, Albania and the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia secured a recognized candidate status, while Bosnia-Herzegovina and Kosovo are being viewed as potential candidates. While the enlargement policy is still in

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document