The Participation of the European Union in the Work of the United Nations: Evolving to Reflect the New Realities of Regional Organizations

2012 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 181-225 ◽  
Author(s):  
Evan Brewer

In May 2011, the General Assembly adopted Resolution 65/276 to provide the European Union with an “enhanced observer status” to participate more extensively in the General Assembly. The EU needed to restructure its participation in international organizations following the Lisbon Treaty, and this resolution effected some of those changes. Numerous UN member states expressed concerns that the expanded participation rights might compromise the integrity of the General Assembly as an inter-state entity. Ultimately, the rights granted pose a minor speculative threat, but offer a considerable opportunity at increasing the ability of regional organizations to better represent the common positions of their member states in the General Assembly and to improve the efficiency of the General Assembly.

Author(s):  
Carla Monteleone

The European Union (EU) and the United Nations (UN) are expressions of a rules-based global order. The EU has enshrined support to the UN in its security strategies, and its priorities indicate an engagement in a wide range of UN programs and activities to maintain the rules-based order and adapt it to face internal and external challenges. The EU and its member states are the largest contributors to the UN budget. Following the adoption of the Lisbon treaty, the EU has increased its representation at the UN, gaining enhanced observer status in the General Assembly. However, because of the intergovernmental nature of the forum, only its member states have the right to vote. This has led scholars to investigate the actorness of the EU at the UN through the analysis of the voting cohesion of EU member states in the General Assembly. Less attention has been paid to the behavior of EU member states in the Security Council. Existing scholarship has tended to analyze how the EU acts within the UN more than inter-organizational cooperation. However, the contribution of the EU and its member states to UN activities in the area of peace and security maintenance is particularly relevant and is a reminder that inter-organizational cooperation deserve greater attention than the one it has received so far.


2019 ◽  
Vol 34 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Katarzyna Woch

The issue of drugs is an important problem for the European citizens and it poses a serious threat to safety and health of the European society. This is mainly due to the fact that one of the basic features characterizing the problem of drugs is its changeable and dynamic nature. Furthermore, the drug-related phenomena haveno borders, they exist everywhere where people live and affect all social classes. The European Union is one of the international organizations which, both by its own activities and the efforts of the member states, attempts to prevent and fight the adverse effects associated with drug abuse. The implementation of such a goal is possible thanks to the activities of the agency responsible for the holistic study of the problem of drugs and drug addiction and for popularization of the obtained information among the EU institutions, Member States and other organizations. The purpose of the article is to present the activities of the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction, whose role is to provide factual, objective, reliable and comparable information of the European standard on drugs and drug addiction as well as their effects both on the European Union itself andthe member states.


2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 26-32
Author(s):  
Eugeniusz Suwiński

Abstract The aim of the paper is to present changes undergone by the Polish education system after the accession to the European Union. In the article the changes are collated together with the main and distinctive trends which had existed in Europe before the accession and the ones that were introduced subsequently. The article shows that the tendency to unify the member states’ education systems is non-existent in the European Union. It also points out that the importance attached to education by the EU member states has not been as considerable as the importance given to economy. The paper is divided into two main parts. The main objective of the first part is to describe the decision-making process in the member states (as far as the common education policy is concerned) and its result, which was the report stating that education was considered to be a peculiar area of social politics and as such required separate arrangements and decisions. Therefore, there are neither specific procedures nor integration requirements for the associated and associating countries. However, as far as Poland is concerned, during the accession process the country was obliged to meet the expected standards, in particular the standards in the reform of the education structure and curriculum. The second part of the paper comprises the analysis of Polish activity in the following fields: –– lowering the age of the compulsory education commencement, –– reforming the structure of the education system and curriculum, –– practising teaching profession. The article further elaborates at length on the significant factor in the process of democratization of education, which is parents’ involvement in the functioning of a school.


Lex Russica ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 112-129
Author(s):  
A. O. Chetverikov

In recent years, Russia has invested significant assets in unique scientific facility of the “Megascience” class that are being built or are already operating on the territory of foreign countries, mainly member states of the European Union: the International Thermonuclear Research Reactor-ITER (France), the European X-ray Free Electron Laser-European XFEL, the Large Hadron Collider (Switzerland and France), etc.How reliable and safe are such investments in the context of the sanctions policy of the West, including the EU, against our country? To what extent are they protected by the principle of immunity of states and international organizations, which is generally recognized, but is not interpreted and applied in different legal systems? The paper considers these issues in the context of the development of the judicial practice of the supranational institution of the judicial power of the EU, namely the Court of Justice of the European Union and the concept of relative immunity (immunité relative) formulated herein.Having conducted a comparative legal review of the current state of the sources of law and doctrine on the issues of immunity of states and international organizations, the author analyses and evaluates the decisions of the EU Court of Justice and the legal positions of its attorneys General: — Mahamdia v. Algeria, 2012: for the first time ECJ formulates the concept of relative immunity in relation to states;— "Rina" and "Suprim" cases, 2020: EU Court clarifies the interpretation of the concept of acta iure imperii (acts of public authority), in respect of which states retain immunity in the EU, and extends its concept of relative immunity to international intergovernmental organizations.The final section deals with legal issues that yet to get a clear answer in the practice of the EU Court of Justice. In this regard, the author highlights possible directions of its evolution, and studies other recent decisions of the EU Court of Justice that may affect Russia’s national interests in the context of cooperation with EU member states in the scientific and technical sphere, including megascience, and in other areas.


Author(s):  
Joris Larik

This chapter compares the law and practice of regional organizations regarding their engagement with international institutions. This includes treaty-making, joining and participating in international organizations, and the question to which extent member states are being replaced by their regional organizations. The chapter uses the European Union and the Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) as case studies given that they represent two radically different forms of regional integration. While the former is a case of deep, supranational sovereignty-pooling, the latter is an example of distinctly sovereignty-friendly intergovernmental cooperation. Both ASEAN and the European Union have codified sets of internal norms for conducting their external relations. Both are avid treaty-makers and interact systematically with international institutions. However, this chapter explains how the difference in the organizations’ internal modes of operation translates into different approaches in their external relations. The European Union’s highly formalized approach leads to taking on a state-like position in many situations, but without always replacing its member states. By contrast, ASEAN’s sensitivity toward national sovereignty results in its member states and the Association never appearing together. It is always either one or the other that engages internationally. ASEAN member states interact with other powers, whereas ASEAN as a legal person interacts with other international organizations, with the one exception—the European Union.


2018 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 652-673 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicolas Burmester ◽  
Michael Jankowski

Existing research suggests that European Union member states are increasingly able to act in concert in the United Nations General Assembly. Based on several hundred co-ordination meetings per year, the European Union ‘speaks with one voice’ on most of the resolutions voted upon in the United Nations General Assembly. However, little is known about instances where the European Union member states do not vote coherently. Three questions remain unanswered. First, what factors determine deviating voting behaviour of European Union member states? Second, who are the most frequent defectors from the European Union’s majority position? Third, which voting blocs within the European Union can be identified? The article answers these questions in a quantitative design by controlling for domestic factors, issues of resolutions and the position of the United States. The results suggest that domestic factors determine deviating voting behaviour far less than agenda-related issues and the position of the United States.


2017 ◽  
Vol 12 (2-3) ◽  
pp. 249-255
Author(s):  
Ioannis Vrailas

The overwhelming majority of the United Nations’ member states remain keen to preserve the traditional intergovernmental nature of the organization in the name of universalism, equality among states and national sovereignty. However, in most negotiating processes, delegations are increasingly content to take part through the groups or sub-groups of which they are members, rather than individually on a national basis. In this regard, the European Union (eu) sets the standards for both organization and effectiveness, especially since the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty and the eu’s Special Observer status, granted by unga Resolution 65/276.


2020 ◽  
Vol 43 (4) ◽  
pp. 83-102
Author(s):  
Anna Katarzyna Drabarz

In the last decade, accessibility has become a buzzword not only among actors of the civil society advocating for the rights of persons with disabilities but also among the legislators in the European Union. The EU has adopted a series of binding regulations aiming at approximating the common understanding of accessibility and Member States’ approach to operationalising the right. Being part of EU harmonised law, the European Accessibility Act has already been considered a milestone in the process. The choice of an approach / approaches will decide about a success of its transposition into Member States legal systems.


Author(s):  
D. Potapov

The article analyses the foreign direct investment cooperation between the European Union and the People’s Republic of China under the Belt and Road Initiative. The initiative is proposed by China and is aimed at developing cross-regional transport and logistics infrastructure connecting China with South-East, South and Central Asia, the Middle East, East Africa and Europe. The author examines the history of the initiative and its assessments by international organizations (e.g. the World Bank and the ESCAP UN) and investigates the structure and statistics of the EU-China investment relations, basing on the examples of the most important China’s investment partners (including France, Italy, Germany and the Vishegrad Group countries). The discrepancy between the conditions for the EU and the Chinese investors is highlighted. The author defines and characterizes the major models of the Belt and Road projects’ development, which are used by China in cooperation with the EU Member States. The EU investors in China face restrictions imposed by the national regulation of foreign investments. In particular, the external investors do not have access to the sectors crucially important for national interest and security (e.g. high-tech sectors and mass media). At the same time, Chinese investors’ access to the EU financial markets is not limited, allowing them to become important shareholders in the EU companies and to transfer technologies. It raises concerns within national governments and the European Union itself. The national governments are establishing and adopting screening mechanisms for foreign direct investments and additional regulations to control important sectors and enterprises. At the same time, the EU Member States are developing a common view on the prospects and mechanisms of cooperation with China under the Belt and Road initiative. The EU countries have not yet reached a consensus upon the Belt and Road initiative and the prospects of the EU participation in it, so the author focuses on the strategies of the examined countries. Germany is calling for a common position for all the EU member states and advocates for using the EU-based mechanisms and platforms for cooperation with China. Such demands are also connected with the promotion of a common EU investment screening mechanism in order to protect the Member States’ interests and security. Italy is deepening its cooperation with China through bilateral mechanisms, mainly based on a memorandum of understanding with China on the Belt and Road initiative. France, on the one hand, shares the common interest with Germany regarding the need for the common EU policy towards the Chinese initiative, but on the other hand, the country is deploying new projects with China. The Visegrad Group states are forging their ties with China through bilateral and multilateral cooperation mechanisms and they are interested in the growth of Chinese investment inflows. This undermines the unanimity of policy towards China and the Belt and Road.


Author(s):  
Jelena Dzankic

Most European Union (EU) Member States participate in the common visa regime, even though there is no common visa policy applicable to all of them. The visa policy explored here covers the Schengen Area (including EU Member States and other countries, as well as EU countries that are still outside the Schengen). The Schengen Area does not include two EU Member States—the United Kingdom (UK) and Ireland—that have opted out from the EU’s visa policies and operate a common travel area between them. Furthermore, the common visa policy in the EU is related to the issuance of short-term visas, while visas of longer duration and residence permits remain in the national domain. Against this background, the visa policy of the EU has four relevant aspects. First, the gradual evolution of the Schengen Area has been driven not only by political developments within the EU and its Member States, but also by broader global developments (e.g., the fall of communism). Second, the consolidation of the internal and external aspects of the visa policy in the EU took place through the growth of the Schengen acquis. Third, visa liberalization has become one of the most powerful tools for policy diffusion beyond the EU’s borders. Finally, securitization of migration has had a strong impact on the EU’s visa policy, particularly in the domains of information exchange and police cooperation.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document