The Institutional and Constitutional Aspects of the Arab Maghreb Union and the Dispute on Western Sahara as an Obstacle: What Role does the European Union Play in Promoting Maghreb Regional Integration?

2019 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 284-318
Author(s):  
Mohamed Riyad M. Almosly

The current era is witnessing a proliferation of challenges of a transnational character that do not recognize the geographical limits of sovereign States, such as human traficking and pollution. Therefore, States have to establish new regional cooperative methods to find effective solutions for these challenges. Although the Maghreb States (i.e. Algeria, Libya, Mauritania, Morocco and Tunisia) have been suffering from the negative impacts of such challenges over the last few decades, they have not yet created an effective regional cooperative framework. In this respect, since its establishment in 1989 among the Maghreb States, the Arab Maghreb Union (AMU, Union) has not been successful in stimulating Maghreb regional integration. The current study addresses a topic that has not yet been fully exploited by legal studies in the English language. It examines, first, the genesis and institutional structure of the AMU as well as the constitutional aspects of the 1989 AMU Treaty; second, the role of the EU’s multilateral and bilateral instruments in promoting Maghreb regional integration; and third, the dispute on Western Sahara between Morocco and the Polisario Front and its effect on Maghreb regional integration. The article concludes that Maghreb regional integration has so far failed due to the institutional and constitutional limits of the AMU Treaty and the political division among the Maghreb States resulting from the Western Sahara conflict. In addition, the EU so far has not followed a consistent and single approach in promoting the Maghreb integration nor did it play any role in solving the dispute on Western Sahara.

2019 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 9-24
Author(s):  
Silvana Mojsovska

EU membership has been a compelling goal for the Western Balkans (Albania, Bosnia and Hercegovina, Kosovo, Montenegro, North Macedonia, and Serbia), related to the bloc’s stability, economic prosperity and higher standard of living. Each of these countries pursues its own process of EU accession while being also a part of the regional initiatives under the auspices of the EU. This paper provides an overview of the EU accession process of the Western Balkan countries, focusing on their individual achievements and challenges, as well as common features and problems. Also, the content andprospects of regional integration of the Western Balkans through the Regional Economic Area (REA) programme, along with the role of the EU in supporting the regional perspective are discussed. The parallel Western Balkans engagement in both processes supports arguments for the prioritisation of the individual countries’ accession to the EU over Western Balkans regional integration, distinguishing also the challenges of both processes. The methodology for the elaboration of this paper includes methods of analysis and synthesis, based on extensive desk research of available materials.


2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 102-130
Author(s):  
Kirill Entin

The article examines the provisions of EU and EAEU law regarding the role and place of international agreements and international customary law in their respective legal orders. The duty of regional integration organisations to comply with international law necessitates the creation of mechanisms allowing incorporating international law norms into the EU and EAEU legal systems while ensuring the independent (autonomous) character of these legal orders. The case law of supranational courts plays a prominent role in resolving this issue. The author focuses primarily on issues that are relevant not only for the EU but for the EAEU at the current stage of its development: ensuring that international agreements with third parties are compatible with the main rules and principles of the functioning of the integration organization; the possibility for individuals to challenge the validity of EU/EAEU institutions/bodies acts on the ground that they are contrary to international treaty or customary law as well as to the binding nature for a regional integration organisation of international agreements concluded by Member States in fields where the competence has been transferred to the supranational level. The author comes to the conclusion that despite the fact that the mechanisms provided by the EAEU Treaty are insufficient, the gaps can be partially filled by the EAEU Court through its case law. In that regard the jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the European Union represents an important benchmark, although it needs to be assessed critically. Thus, the strict approach of the CJEU regarding the direct effect of universal international agreements as well as its application of the functional succession doctrine in relation to international agreements concluded by Member States makes it difficult for individuals to rely on international law in order to protect their rights.


2021 ◽  
Vol 62 (1) ◽  
pp. 505-536
Author(s):  
Ilya Berlin

Abstract: The legal battle between Morocco's influence in Europe and the Front Polisario has persisted throughout most of the European Union's (EU) existence. At the battle's forefront lies the role of international law inside the EU's complex constitutional and institutional frameworks. In the latest legal proceedings, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) rendered its decision in the contested Western Sahara Campaign United Kingdom case. The decision did not assist in resolving the EU's legal position with respect to the Morocco-Western Sahara dispute. On one side, Advocate-General Wathelet's substantive opinion applied international law to the EU's role in the Western Sahara-Morocco conflict stricto sensu. On the other side, a rather short CJEU decision reaffirmed the status quo; that EU-Morocco treaties do not apply to the territory of Western Sahara. This commentary analyses and contrasts the CJEU decision and Advocate-General Wathelet's opinion against the EU's Völkerrechtsfreundlichkeit policy. Furthermore, this commentary suggests that the CJEU cannot be held responsible for implementing international law within the EU's external trade framework, as that responsibility – and any consequences from its failure – fall generally to EU institutions, which have thus far refused to follow Völkerrechtsfreundlichkeit as expected.


2019 ◽  
Vol 18 (Vol 18, No 4 (2019)) ◽  
pp. 439-453
Author(s):  
Ihor LISHCHYNSKYY

The article is devoted to the study of the implementation of territorial cohesion policy in the European Union in order to achieve a secure regional coexistence. In particular, the regulatory and institutional origins of territorial cohesion policy in the EU are considered. The evolution of ontological models of cohesion policy has been outlined. Specifically, the emphasis is placed on the key objective of political geography – effectively combining the need for "territorialization" and the growing importance of networking. The role of urbanization processes in the context of cohesion policy is highlighted. Cross-border dimensions of cohesion policy in the context of interregional cooperation are explored. Particular emphasis is placed on the features of integrated sustainable development strategies.


Author(s):  
David Matijasevich

Outside of some states still struggling with post-communist transitions, Europe itself may be the first European democracy to collapse in decades. Though never a bastion of participatory democracy and even subject to continuous criticism due to its democratic deficit, the European Union (EU) has provided hope to those who envision a post-national democratic political community. As such, whether the EU survives its present crisis or not, cosmopolitan democrats will look to the EU as a vindication of their ideals. Though perhaps surprising given their track record, this paper will argue that political scientists, especially those concerned with democratization, can also be optimistic about what the EU has brought to the table in terms of how we conceive processes of democratic development. Throughout the paper it will be demonstrated that the creation and maintenance of the European democracy has challenged much of the literature's fundamental assumptions of what makes democracy work. Five key lessons from the European democratic experience will be presented in an attempt to disrupt some of these assumptions including lessons regarding the diversity of the demos, the contingency of democratic upkeep, the challenges of the state, the role of elites in political transformation, and the necessity of exclusion within inclusive spaces. Though a general theory of democracy will not be presented, suggestions will be made as to how we can incorporate some of these lessons into the dominant approaches to democracy found in the literature.   Full text available at: https://doi.org/10.22215/rera.v7i1.214


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


Author(s):  
Catherine E. De Vries

The European Union (EU) is facing one of the rockiest periods in its existence. At no time in its history has it looked so economically fragile, so insecure about how to protect its borders, so divided over how to tackle the crisis of legitimacy facing its institutions, and so under assault by Eurosceptic parties. The unprecedented levels of integration in recent decades have led to increased public contestation, yet at the same the EU is more reliant on public support for its continued legitimacy than ever before. This book examines the role of public opinion in the European integration process. It develops a novel theory of public opinion that stresses the deep interconnectedness between people’s views about European and national politics. It suggests that public opinion cannot simply be characterized as either Eurosceptic or not, but rather that it consists of different types. This is important because these types coincide with fundamentally different views about the way the EU should be reformed and which policy priorities should be pursued. These types also have very different consequences for behaviour in elections and referendums. Euroscepticism is such a diverse phenomenon because the Eurozone crisis has exacerbated the structural imbalances within the EU. As the economic and political fates of member states have diverged, people’s experiences with and evaluations of the EU and national political systems have also grown further apart. The heterogeneity in public preferences that this book has uncovered makes a one-size-fits-all approach to addressing Euroscepticism unlikely to be successful.


Author(s):  
Emilios Avgouleas

This chapter offers a critical overview of the issues that the European Union 27 (EU-27) will face in the context of making proper use of financial innovation to further market integration and risk sharing in the internal financial market, both key objectives of the drive to build a Capital Markets Union. Among these is the paradigm shift signalled by a technological revolution in the realm of finance and payments, which combines advanced data analytics and cloud computing (so-called FinTech). The chapter begins with a critical analysis of financial innovation and FinTech. It then traces the EU market integration efforts and explains the restrictive path of recent developments. It considers FinTech's potential to aid EU market integration and debates the merits of regulation dealing with financial innovation in the context of building a capital markets union in EU-27.


2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (11) ◽  
pp. 6278
Author(s):  
Lars Carlsen ◽  
Rainer Bruggemann

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.


Author(s):  
Sergio DellaPergola

AbstractThis paper aims at providing a new systemic contribution to research about perceptions of antisemitism/Judeophobia by contemporary Jews in 12 European Union countries. The perspective – the viewpoint of the offended side – has been less prominent relatively in research literature on antisemitism. The data analysis demonstrates the potential power of Similarity Structure Analysis (SSA) as a better theoretical and empirical tool to describe and conceptualize the contents of chosen research issues. After a brief review of some methodological problems in the study of antisemitism, this paper will re-elaborate data first published in the report of the 2018 FRA study Experiences and Perceptions of Antisemitism – Second survey on Discrimination and Hate Crimes against Jews in the EU (FRA 2018a). Topics include the perceived importance of antisemitism as a societal issue, the contents of anti-Jewish prejudice and discrimination, channels of transmission, perpetrators of offenses, regional differences within Europe, and the role of antisemitism perceptions as a component of Jewish identification. Special attention is paid to the distinction between cognitive and experiential perceptions of antisemitism, and to the typology of practical, populist, political, and narrative antisemitism.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document