The normative role of the EU in the eastern region

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Beatrix Futák-Campbell
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Reform Process ◽  
Eastern Region ◽  
Normative Power ◽  
Eu Foreign Policy ◽  
Normative Role ◽  
The Eu ◽  
Russian Model ◽  
Attention Shifts

This chapter focuses on norms and the functions of norms in EU foreign policy. The analysis presented here offers an evaluation of the EU’s role as a normative power in the region, examining what EU practitioners understand as norms. It also offers insight in the context in which EU foreign policy is practiced through norms which in turn guide the practices of EU practitioners. The following patterns emerge from the data. First, how norms are constructed, what norms the EU can spread to its neighbours and how practitioners can urge neighbouring states to embrace these norms through the EU’s prescribed reform process. Second, practitioners’ attention shifts to the EU model of norms itself. They strive not only to make the specific EU model relevant but also attractive to the neighbours. In addition, they claim to have the necessary expertise to assist these countries to emulate this model. Third, practitioners address two sources of non-compliance: one is non-alignment with the EU model, and the second is the existence of a competing model, the Russian model, that does not quite meet EU standards of norms. Finally, practitioners put forward an all-encompassing EU-centric view that reveals a particular ethnocentric view.

EU foreign policy as a vocation for Europe

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Beatrix Futák-Campbell
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Normative Power ◽  
Eu Foreign Policy ◽  
Support For Democracy ◽  
To Receive ◽  
The Eu ◽  
Do So

This chapter focus on the moral concerns of practitioners regarding the eastern neighbourhood. The normative power literature deliberately decouples norms from values. But this chapter demonstrates that in practice it is impossible to do so. The EU practitioners demonstrate how they operationalise their specific moral concerns for the eastern neighbourhood. Their norm deployments are consistent with Legro, Buzan and Zizek’s claims of norm use. In addition, the analysis reveals instances when practitioners risk sounding moralising rather than moral. This is highly problematic for two reasons. First, moralising endangers alienating neighbouring states who align themselves with the EU but do not want to receive a lecture by EU practitioners. Second, if the EU cannot deliver on specific commitments, this will have implications for its status with regards to support for democracy or human rights in the region.

Introduction

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Beatrix Futák-Campbell
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Methodological Approach ◽  
European Identity ◽  
Public Officials ◽  
Data Set ◽  
Normative Power ◽  
Eu Foreign Policy ◽  
New Type ◽  
Global Affairs ◽  
The Eu

In considering EU foreign policy in practice, this book argues that a specific focus on practitioners’ (diplomats, bureaucrats, and public officials) interactions can offer insight into the way EU foreign policy is practised. An assessment of the practices of practitioners through a new type of data set and a new discursive framework demonstrates the significance of European identity, collective interests, and the role that normative and moral concerns play for EU practitioners when they consider EU foreign policy in the eastern neighbourhood. It also highlights that these four concepts are interlinked when they consider the policy, despite the commonly accepted understanding, even by practitioners, that the EU is a normative power in global affairs. These findings are relevant not only for understanding current developments in EU foreign policy, but also for allowing scholars, as well as practitioners, to move away from considering the EU exclusively as a normative power but perceiving it as a more complex power with a collective ‘European’ identity, collective understandings of European norms that are linked to collective moral concerns that at the same time all link to collective European interests. Currently there is a lot of discussion regarding the EU becoming a resilient, or pragmatic power. Only time and EU actions will tell what these terms mean in practice. However, this book is a testament to the fact that practitioners have always considered EU foreign policy beyond the normative. In this introduction I begin by providing some context for the book, followed by an explanation of, and rationale for, its theoretical and methodological approach, as well as an outline of the rest of the book’s structure....

scholarly journals Lilliput Effect Revisited: Small States and EU Foreign Policy

European View ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 80-87
Author(s):  
Jean Crombois
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Small States ◽  
Eastern European ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Foreign Policy ◽  
Conflicting Interests ◽  
Foreign Policy Strategies ◽  
Small Member ◽  
The Eu

The role of small member states in EU foreign policy is increasingly being challenged, especially in view of the reforms being proposed to make the EU more effective as an international actor. These reforms, if adopted, will require the small Central and Eastern European member states, such as Bulgaria, to rethink their old foreign-policy strategies and practices. Instead of band-wagoning and balancing conflicting interests, these small member states will have to learn to be more proactive, to build their reputations and to form alliances if they want to continue to have any influence on EU foreign policy. These issues are discussed in the light of the EU sanctions adopted against Russia in the aftermath of the Ukrainian–Russian conflict of 2014.

scholarly journals Foreign Policy Dimension of the European Integration: Lessons of COVID-19

2020 ◽  
Vol 99 (6) ◽  
pp. 41-51
Author(s):  
Irina Bolgova ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Political Development ◽  
Political Identity ◽  
Eu Foreign Policy ◽  
The Us ◽  
Promising Area ◽  
External Conditions ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Eu

The European solidarity was challenged by the coronavirus pandemic both at institutional regulations and nation-state levels. The presented analysis is based on a review of the official speeches of the heads of European institutions and expert publications of leading European think-tanks and researches demonstrating that the geopolitical dimension of the EU foreign policy today is a new basis for intra-European consolidation in light of growing frustration about the global role of the US and China. The European foreign policy is nevertheless regarded as a new consensus within the integration alliance. Actually, the EU geopolitical role is an updated foundation for domestic consolidation, as it allows to push aside the contradictions on the value-based internal political development, which were clearly associated with the growth of nationalism, and to articulate the external conditions for political identity. The need for a stable consensus on foreign policy priorities creates the preconditions for the formation of new principles of relations with China, the emergence of Africa as a promising area for the application of the common foreign policy and a decrease of interest in integration projects in Eurasia.

scholarly journals Migration issues in the EU’s common foreign and security policy – selected aspects

2021 ◽  
pp. 43-59
Author(s):  
Tomasz Dubowski
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Security Policy ◽  
Migration Policy ◽  
External Action ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Eu Foreign Policy ◽  
Foreign And Security Policy ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Eu

In the discussion on the EU migration policy, it is impossible to evade the issue of the relation between this policy and the EU foreign policy, including EU common foreign and security policy. The subject of this study are selected links between migration issues and the CFSP of the European Union. The presented considerations aim to determine at what levels and in what ways the EU’s migration policy is taken into account in the space of the CFSP as a diplomatic and political (and subject to specific rules and procedures) substrate of the EU’s external action.

scholarly journals British diplomacy of money and trade

2019 ◽  
Vol 71 (2) ◽  
pp. 137-158
Author(s):  
Ognjen Pribicevic
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Decision To Leave ◽  
The Past ◽  
Gulf Countries ◽  
British Foreign Policy ◽  
The Usa ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Uk Foreign Policy ◽  
The Eu

Leaving the EU is one of the major political decisions made in the UK over the past half-century. Brexit brought about a virtual political earthquake not only in EU-UK relations but also in terms of UK future place and role on the international scene. Immediately after the decision of UK citizens to leave the EU at a referendum held on 23 June 2016, the question arose as to whether the UK will lose some of its international influence, whether Scotland will remain part of the Union, whether the UK will retain its privileged relations and special status with the USA, and what its future relations with the EU will be. The purpose of this article is to point to the basic priorities of the contemporary British foreign policy as well as to place and role of the UK on the contemporary international scene particularly in view of its decision to leave the EU. We shall first try to define the status of present-day Britain in international relations. Second, we shall address the traditional dilemma of the UK foreign policy - what should be given priority - relations with the USA, Europe or the Commonwealth? After that, we shall discuss in more detail the phases the UK foreign policy went through following the end of the cold war. In the third phase, we shall analyze the British contemporary foreign and economic policy towards Gulf countries and China. In the fourth part of the article, we shall discuss relations with the USA. It should be pointed out that the article does not seek to analyze all aspects of British foreign policy, even if we wanted to, due to a shortage of time. Of course, the topic of Brexit will be present in all chapters and especially in the last one and conclusion remarks. By its decision to leave the EU, the UK appears to have given priority to its relations with the USA, China, Gulf countries as well as Commonwealth countries instead of the EU which has been economically and politically dominant over the past few decades. This decision taken by UK citizens will no doubt have a great impact not only on their personal lives and standard of living but on the UK role in international relations. Despite its military, political, economic and cultural capacities, it is highly unlikely that the UK will manage to overcome the consequences of an exit from the single market, currently generating 18 trillion dollars on an annual basis as well as the loss of a privileged partner role with the USA within the Union. We are, therefore, more likely to believe that in the foreseeable future, the role of the UK on the international scene will continue to decline and be increasingly focused on its economic and financial interests. Project of the Serbian Ministry of Education, Science and Technological Development, Grant no. III 47010: Drustvene transformacije u procesu evropskih integracija - multidisciplinarni pristup]

scholarly journals The EU Eastern Partnership Initiative and Georgia

Politeja ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 16 (5(62)) ◽  
pp. 117-140
Author(s):  
David Darchiashvili ◽  
David Bakradze
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Soft Power ◽  
Geographical Area ◽  
The European Union ◽  
The West ◽  
Coercive Diplomacy ◽  
Eastern Partnership ◽  
Eu Foreign Policy ◽  
Long Run ◽  
The Eu

The article views the geographical area between the EU and Russian borders as a battle space of two, drastically different foreign policy and ideological approaches. The authors argue that in the years since the end of the Cold War, a unique surrogate of former clash of liberal and communist worlds emerged, leading to and underpinning current Hybrid Warfare, underway from Ukraine to Georgia. Its roots lay in the Russian interpretation of the Western attitude towards the East as Neo-colonialist. Relying on the income from its vast energy resources, Russia also tries to develop its version of so called “Soft Power”, used by the West in this region. Though in Russian hands, it is coupled with Moscow’s imperial experiences and resentments, and is becoming a mere element in Hybrid or “non-linear” war. Speaking retrospectively, the Eastern Partnership Initiative of the European Union can be seen as a response to Hybrid threats, posed by Russia against its Western and Southern neighbors. But the question is, whether EU foreign policy initiatives towards this area can and will be efficient and sufficient, if continued to be mostly defensive and limited within Soft Power mechanisms and philosophy, while Russia successfully combines those with traditional Hard Power know-how? The authors argue that in the long run, European or Euro-Atlantic Soft Power tool-kits, spreading Human Rightsbased culture farther in the East, will remain unmatched. But in order to prevail over the Russian revisionist policy here and now, the West, and, particularly, the EU need to re-evaluate traditional foreign policy options and come up with a more drastic combination of Soft/Hard Powers by itself. As the Georgian case shows, the European community should more efficiently use Conditionality and Coercive Diplomacy, combined with clearer messages about partners’ membership perspectives.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document