Differentiation has evolved into a systematic feature of European integration. Still, EU member states have been eager to maintain unity and not let differentiated integration (DI) be reflected in... Show moreDifferentiation has evolved into a systematic feature of European integration. Still, EU member states have been eager to maintain unity and not let differentiated integration (DI) be reflected in institutions and processes of EU governance. The sovereign debt crisis was a turning point, triggering an unprecedented reinforcement of euro area specific institutions and policies. So far, few contributions have studied the institutional implications of DI in the EU. This dissertation examines whether and, if so, how and with what implications DI has been institutionalised in EMU governance. It analyses the organisational inclusiveness of crisis management structures, the evolution of the Eurogroup and Eurogroup Working Group, procedural norms and elite ideas. The findings suggest that the distinction between euro area insiders and outsiders has become embedded in how member state representatives perceive political reality, determine mutual role expectations and organise governance processes. While this institutionalisation of DI in EMU was facilitated by particular circumstances of the sovereign debt crisis, its implications are evident in EMU governance and reform processes until today. The dissertation makes theoretical and empirical contributions to account for DI in institutional and political developments in EMU and, thus, aims to enrich institutionalist debates in EU studies. Show less
There has been much recent debate over whether the European Union is or should be a ‘militant democratic’ actor in order to respond to democratic backsliding in EU member states. This article... Show moreThere has been much recent debate over whether the European Union is or should be a ‘militant democratic’ actor in order to respond to democratic backsliding in EU member states. This article argues that the EU is a militant democracy in a specific and limited sense, but that this may be normatively undesirable from a democratic perspective. I first develop a definition of militant democracy that focuses on the militant democratic paradox. I argue that the strongest justifications for militant democracy require that two conditions are met: an ‘existential threat condition’ and a ‘necessity condition’. Next, I analyse four ways in which the European Union has been said to be empowered to act in a militant democratic fashion to combat democratic backsliding in EU member states. I show how some, though not all, of these warrant the label ‘militant democracy’. Moving from the descriptive to the normative analysis, I then consider whether the necessity condition can ever be met since there is always the possibility of non-militant responses through forms of EU disintegration. If we accept this argument, EU actors should prioritize robust non-militant measures where possible while pro-democratic member states should disassociate from frankly autocratic member states where non-militant measures fail. Show less
On 31 January 2020 the United Kingdom (UK) left the European Union (EU). In the European Parliament (EP), Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) cried together and folded flags. It marked the... Show moreOn 31 January 2020 the United Kingdom (UK) left the European Union (EU). In the European Parliament (EP), Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) cried together and folded flags. It marked the end of an era. At the end of that year, after much agony, the EU-UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA) was signed on 24 December 2020 and the ratification was completed in April 2021. The TCA allows both entities tariff-free, quota-free access to markets for goods. Services are not part of the TCA. Part of the agreement are also fishing rights as well as cooperation in the area of security (e.g., in the area of information sharing security related to matters of internal security), but no mention of security and defence collaboration. There are still many unresolved issues. Some of these issues involve fishing matters (Reuters, 2021). But collaboration in security and defence matters is also crucial as demonstrated by the need to deal with the war in Ukraine that erupted following the Russian invasion on 24 February. Show less
This chapter charts the position of the European Union (EU) in the global political economy (GPE), identifies key dimensions of change and development, and evaluates the EU’s impact on the... Show moreThis chapter charts the position of the European Union (EU) in the global political economy (GPE), identifies key dimensions of change and development, and evaluates the EU’s impact on the operation of the contemporary GPE. It does so by outlining key ideas in international political economy (IPE), by relating these to the growth of the EU, and by assessing the EU’s role in the GPE in three areas: European integration itself, the EU’s engagement in the GPE, and the EU’s claims to be a major economic power. The final part of the chapter brings these together an examination of global economic governance—in particular, the EU’s role in the financial, multilateral state system with its principles of global governance, and pays some attention to recent crises (such as the Covid-19 pandemic) and the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Show less
The study of why and when governments are caught out by strategic surprise has been a major occupation of intelligence studies, international relations, public administration and crisis management... Show moreThe study of why and when governments are caught out by strategic surprise has been a major occupation of intelligence studies, international relations, public administration and crisis management studies. Still little is known, however, about the structural vulnerabilities to such surprises in international organisations such as the European Union (EU). EU institutions themselves have not undertaken rigorous investigations or public inquiries of recent strategic surprises, instead relying on internal review processes. In order to understand the most common underlying problems causing surprise in the EU context, this paper adapts and tests insights from the strategic surprise literature. It elaborates a theoretical framework with five hypotheses about why the leadership of EU institutions has been prone to being caught by surprises in foreign affairs: limitations in collection capacity, institutional fragmentation of policymaking, organisational culture, member state politicisation, and cognitive biases arising from collective ideas and norms. These hypotheses are tested using a post-mortem approach investigating two significant strategic surprises: the start and spread of the Arab uprisings of 2010/11 and Ukraine–Russia crisis of 2013/14. Show less
How do crises produce changes in specific European Union foreign policy areas, and how should we conceptualise these policy changes?This book provides a novel analytical framework that serves to... Show moreHow do crises produce changes in specific European Union foreign policy areas, and how should we conceptualise these policy changes?This book provides a novel analytical framework that serves to investigate the way in which the EU changes its foreign policy after crisis. Ikani adapts the existing theorising of foreign policy change to a single framework applicable to the EU context, providing readers with a toolbox to both explain the process of change and measure the policy change that follows. The framework is developed through an investigation of two important EU foreign policy change episodes, taking place after the Arab uprisings and the Ukraine conflict, and test- driven in three recent cases of EU foreign policy change after crisis. Show less
This article develops a theoretical framework for analyzing the implications of de-Europeanisation for decision-making processes and policy outcomes in EU foreign policy. As de-Europeanisation... Show moreThis article develops a theoretical framework for analyzing the implications of de-Europeanisation for decision-making processes and policy outcomes in EU foreign policy. As de-Europeanisation progresses, EU foreign policy decision-making is less likely to fit the sociological theories of Normative Suasion, Policy Learning, Normative Entrapment, and Cooperative Bargaining and more likely to fit the intergovernmentalist theories of Logrolling and Competitive Bargaining. These same dynamics will make it more difficult for the EU to achieve unity on complex and sensitive foreign policy issues and create opportunities for foreign powers to manipulate divisions among EU member states as they seek to shape a new world order radically different from the EU’s professed commitment to effective ‘rules-based multilateralism.’ Show less
One of the most important determinants of the European Union’s role in international affairs is the community’ own definition of the border between states eligible for membership and states that... Show moreOne of the most important determinants of the European Union’s role in international affairs is the community’ own definition of the border between states eligible for membership and states that are not eligible. Contrary to what one hears in official pronouncements, this definition has been repeatedly contested and changed significantly since the founding of the community. Prior research (Thomas 2017) has established that contestation from domestic and supranational forces within the community has changed the normative definition of the limits of Europe three times since the 1950s. This paper introduces a new database of all fifty EU decisions on membership eligibility of aspirant states from 1957 through 2017, some positive, some negative, and some reversing an earlier decision. It then uses three analytical techniques – cross-tabulation, regression, and qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) -- to evaluate the relative contribution of these changing membership norms, as compared to other legal, political and economic factors, to the EU decision-making in these fifty cases. All three methods indicate that membership norms exert a powerful effect on EU decisions that cannot be attributed to other factors. Show less
One of the most important determinants of the European Union’s role in international affairs is the community’ own definition of the border between states eligible for membership and states that... Show moreOne of the most important determinants of the European Union’s role in international affairs is the community’ own definition of the border between states eligible for membership and states that are not eligible. Contrary to what one hears in official pronouncements, this definition has been repeatedly contested and changed significantly since the founding of the community. Prior research (Thomas 2017) has established that contestation from domestic and supranational forces within the community has changed the normative definition of the limits of Europe three times since the 1950s. This paper introduces a new database of all fifty EU decisions on membership eligibility of aspirant states from 1957 through 2017, some positive, some negative, and some reversing an earlier decision. It then uses three analytical techniques – cross-tabulation, regression, and qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) -- to evaluate the relative contribution of these changing membership norms, as compared to other legal, political and economic factors, to the EU decision-making in these fifty cases. All three methods indicate that membership norms exert a powerful effect on EU decisions that cannot be attributed to other factors. Show less
