From Friction to Free Trade Negotiations: Australia's Engagement with the European Union

2019 ◽  
Vol 52 (4) ◽  
pp. 448-454
Author(s):  
Philomena Murray
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Free Trade ◽  
Trade Negotiations ◽  
The European Union

TTIP, CETA, and TiSA Behind Closed Doors

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Panagiotis Delimatsis
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Global Governance ◽  
Early Stage ◽  
European Parliament ◽  
Trade Negotiations ◽  
The European Union ◽  
The Us ◽  
The Eu

Secrecy and informality rather than transparency traditionally reign trade negotiations at the bilateral, regional, and multilateral levels. Yet, transparency ranks among the most basic desiderata in the grammar of global governance and has been regarded as positively related to legitimacy. In the EU’s case, transparent trade diplomacy is quintessential for constitutional—but also for broader political—reasons. First, even if trade matters fall within the EU’s exclusive competence, the EU executive is bound by the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) to inform the European Parliament, the EU co-legislator, in regular intervals. Second, transparency at an early stage is important to address public reluctance, suspicion, or even opposition regarding a particular trade deal. This chapter chronicles the quest for and turning moments relating to transparency during the EU trade negotiations with Canada (CETA); the US (TTIP), and various WTO members on services (TiSA).

Free Trade Agreement between Tunisia and the European Union, Do Institutions Matter?: An Empirical Validation by A Gravity Model

2015 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 19-36
Author(s):  
Anis Kacem
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
International Trade ◽  
Gravity Model ◽  
Free Trade ◽  
Spatial Econometrics ◽  
Free Trade Agreement ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Institutional Dimension ◽  
North And South

Tunisia has signed a free trade agreement with the European Union in 1996, which provides for the reduction of tariff barriers between Tunisia and the EU. In this article, we aim to know and test whether the similarity of the institutional framework has to stimulate international trade between Tunisia and the European Union. In this context, we built a variable called “Institutional distance” to valid the institutional dimension of international trade, near borders effects reported in the literature. To this end, a gravity model was used initially (Tunisia and 21 European countries). Secondly, the estimate shows the existence of spatial autocorrelation. The latter has been corrected using spatial econometrics. The results show that the geographical distance remains more important than the institutions in this type of agreement between north and south shores of the Mediterranean.

Ein ökonomisches Happy End aus geostrategischen Gründen? Erfolgsaussichten für den Freihandel zwischen der Europäischen Union und Indien

IG ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 44 (4) ◽  
pp. 301-317
Author(s):  
Mariano Barbato
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Free Trade ◽  
Free Trade Agreement ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
Positive Outcome ◽  
Good Chance ◽  
Economic Factors ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Decisive Reason ◽  
Climate Crisis

The talks that have been resumed for reaching a free trade agreement between the European Union and India have a good chance for success. Both partners, especially India, have to achieve new economic dynamics in order to be able to face the challenge posed by China. This decisive reason is supported by Brexit, the pandemic and the climate crisis, which also spark an exogenous, geostrategic dynamic that gives new impetus to the paralyzed liberal paradigm of free trade. Taken together, it is likely that exogenous geostrategic factors realign the endogenous economic factors and thus promote a positive outcome despite the ongoing weakness of liberal free trade ideas.

OPINION 2/15 OF THE CJEU: DELINEATING THE SCOPE OF THE NEW EU COMPETENCE IN FOREIGN DIRECT INVESTMENT

2018 ◽  
Vol 77 (1) ◽  
pp. 29-32
Author(s):  
Rumiana Yotova
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Foreign Direct Investment ◽  
Free Trade ◽  
Direct Investment ◽  
Free Trade Agreement ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
The Eu

ON 16 May 2017, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) delivered its Opinion 2/15 concerning the competence of the EU to conclude the Free Trade Agreement with Singapore (EUSFTA) (ECLI:EU:C:2017:376). The Opinion was requested by the Commission which argued, with the support of the European Parliament (EP), that the EU had exclusive competence to conclude the EUSFTA. The Council and 25 of the Member States countered that the EUSFTA should be concluded as a mixed agreement – that is, by the EU and each of its members – because some of its provisions fell under the shared competence of the organisation or the competence of the Member States alone.

Singapore and Its Free Trade Agreement with the European Union: Rationality ‘Unbound’?

2017 ◽  
Vol 18 (5-6) ◽  
pp. 858-889
Author(s):  
Mahdev Mohan
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Free Trade ◽  
Free Trade Agreement ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Next Generation ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Investment Treaties

Abstract Querying Poulsen’s view that some States negotiate investment treaties in ‘bounded’ rational ways, this article focuses on how the recently concluded European Union-Singapore Free Trade Agreement (EUSFTA) illustrates the evolution of Singapore’s treaty practice. Singapore has abandoned the ‘old’, and has joined the bandwagon of next-generation FTAs; yet, shrewdly, it is not fully convinced about the ‘new’ either. For example, the EUSFTA does not include a most-favoured nation clause, and does not commit to an appeals mechanism, unlike its Canadian and Vietnamese counterparts. Singapore’s caution appears to be motivated by a pragmatic desire to avoid the pitfalls that these provisions could bring with them, as Investor-State arbitration (ISA) jurisprudence demonstrates, and to study the implications of a recent decision by the EU’s highest court regarding the FTA. Indeed, that shows that the EU itself is now equally wary of the ISA regime removing disputes from the jurisdiction of national courts.

scholarly journals ANALYSIS OF RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE EUROPEAN UNION AND THE UNITED STATES IN THE PERIOD THE PRESIDENCY OF DONALD TRUMP (2017-2020)

2020 ◽  
pp. 35-39
Author(s):  
Andrei Martynov ◽  
Sergey Asaturov
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
European Union ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Free Trade ◽  
United Arab Emirates ◽  
Migration Policy ◽  
Free Trade Area ◽  
The United States ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Trade Area

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