There are several actors within the Union that have a hand in processing policies and legislation, all of them demonstrating elements of leadership. However, there is no one individual or group whose powers extend above the rest to lead and have final say on both design and execution of a particular policy. The Union works in the form of both supranational institutions, and through liberal intergovernmentalism in the form of cooperation and teamwork from the member states
Can Russia’s mistrust of NATO enlargement finally be left behind, as the former foes move towards a new strategic partnership? It is obvious that the introduction of a system including Russia as a strategic partner with weighted voting rights will lead to diplomatic horse trading and lobbying. But it is preferable that any “conflict” in this new relationship be conducted in the back corridors and board rooms of Brussels, rather than in Georgia, the road to Pristina or the skies over Sarajevo.
Certain dates in European history are taken to be the significant historical events which changed the course of the continent forever. 1648, and the Treaties of Westphalia; 1815, the Concert of Europe; 1945 the end of the Second World War and 1989, the fall of Communism – these are the events that are attributed to the makeup of modern Europe. But what of the years 1957, 1992, and 2009?
The responsibility of the EU Presidency is first and foremost to play the role of a chairperson, and to listen to the views of different member states. The question is whether member states, during their Presidencies, give priority to their own national interests or to the EU as a supranational institution.
If Britain were to break free of Europe it would flounder as the rest of the world passes by, carrying Britain in its current, with Britain having no control over its heading. This would mean that the citizens of Britain, rather than being active entities whose actions and ideas are amplified by the EU, would be reactive to forces outside of their control in a small and powerless, but foolishly proud, nation state.
The African, Caribbean, and Pacific states-European Union Partnership Agreement, known as the Cotonou Agreement, is a partnership in name, but arguably not in nature.
Examining public EU attitudes is so complex because of the diverse sources of the EU public opinion and the incomplete structure of the EU itself. There is no European polity, no holistic conception of what it means to be a European citizen and no European-level social culture.
The kind of conventional military brinkmanship going on at the common NATO-Russia border is not good news. A phenomenon not seen since the frostiest Cold War periods. If the last East-West confrontation offers a cautionary tale, it is that the situation urgently needs to be de-escalated, before worst-case scenarios become self-fulfilling prophecies.
This essay suggests that ‘Europe’ cannot be primarily identified in terms of shared histories, cultures, or even geographies. Consequently, attempts to define the EU supranational paradigm as a teleological institution have failed, no European grand narrative of ‘unity in history’ (or culture, or religion) exists, nor can it exist.
Whilst the European media is full of stories about the new President of the European Council and the High Representative of the EU for Foreign Affairs, the third development of an EU Ministry of Foreign Affairs appears to have fallen off the radar, despite fierce turf wars erupting across Brussels as to its proper role.
Before you download your free e-book, please consider donating to support open access publishing.
E-IR is an independent non-profit publisher run by an all volunteer team. Your donations allow us to invest in new open access titles and pay our bandwidth bills to ensure we keep our existing titles free to view. Any amount, in any currency, is appreciated. Many thanks!
Donations are voluntary and not required to download the e-book - your link to download is below.