Search

Scholars of world politics increasingly recognize the Eurocentric nature of theorizing in International Relations (IR). Yet they continue to lament the impossibility of any "inter-civilizational dialogue" taking place, not to mention the transformative impact it could have. Obstacles range from issues of language to translation to terms of debate to the unequal power relations that frame these exchanges. This paper argues that "inter-civilizational dialogue" occurs daily, intimately, substantively, and self-consciously. Fashion offers one such site. A sure sign of "modernization" for non-Western peoples, for example, is to change from "traditional" to "European" dress. Similarly, postcolonial revolution compels the reverse, as Gandhi and Nehru "disrobed" from Europe when they decided to fight for India's independence. Indeed, any area key to human relations (e.g., eating, speaking, singing, courting, and so on) demonstrates easily what scholars who fixate on "discourse" seem to have such a hard time grappling with: that is, the fluidity of border crossings from one civilizational domain to the next, and back again. Specifically, this paper will examine Karl Lagerfeld's 2009 fashion exhibit in China accompanied by his short film, "Paris-Shanghai: A Fantasy.". [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper argues for the benefits of bridging the debate between rationalism and constructivism to European foreign policy analysis. It is suggested that European Foreign Policy is driven by two interdependent forces, which are defined as security and normative considerations. Security policy is, in this paper, regarded as predominantly driven by intergovernmental and rationalist processes whilst norms are the focus of a communitarian and constructivist approach to European Foreign Policy. The predominance of these two processes is however constantly in a flux, depending on the foreign policy issue at hand and the behaviour of the actors involved. Many regard rationalist and constructivism approaches to foreign policy analysis as opposites. This paper seeks to argue otherwise.The EU is here seen as both an arena and an actor. Foreign policy makers are perceived to be acting along a continuum, moving from the logic of consequentialism to the logics of arguing and appropriateness, as they are been socialised into the foreign policy processes. It is however argued that this movement can in some cases be reversed in which actors move back to favouring a rationalist logic of consequentialism depending on the foreign policy interest at play. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper aims to present a heuristically useful model to analyse the European political cooperation. It is observed that the convergence between the theoretical fields of European Studies and International Relations since the 1990's enabled a greater understanding of political integration not only in Europe. This progressive theoretical convergence in both fields allows the ontological generalization of premises to the development of an analytical model for the study of political integration. In this sense, by outlining a heuristically model to analyse the European political cooperation, this paper offers the first step to observe similarities and differences between political integration processes beyond Europe. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Based on a questionnaire that was administered to 75 defence policy actors in France, Germany, the UK and in Brussels, this paper explores the beliefs system of European defence actors with a view to identifying the main points of convergence and the main fault lines that structure the European security and defence policy (ESDP). This paper's focus on social representations addresses two research questions. First, what do ESDP actors think about ESDP? Second, can we classify their preferences in terms of sociological factors that structure the ESDP domain? ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Surprisingly, the cross-national diffusion of contention over political regimes has slowed down greatly over the last 200 years. Yet at the same time, its rate of success in triggering democratic transitions has increased as clearly. What accounts for these inverse trends and the negative correlation underlying them? After refuting arguments that highlight modernization and globalization, the rise of nationalism, rational learning, and the appeal of norms and values, this paper develops a novel explanation that rests on cognitivepsychological insights and invokes secular organizational developments. In the 19th century, before political parties had arisen, it fell to common people to decide on whether to join challenges to established autocrats. Short on reliable information and political experience, these citizens relied on inferential shortcuts that induced them to follow external precedents of successful regime changes rashly; yet this very rashness, which bred challenges in unfavorable situations, led to limited success. After the rise of parties, by contrast, common people take cues from organizational leaders, who command more information and experience. Before emulating an external precedent and challenging their own rulers, leaders therefore wait for propitious circumstances. For this reason, regime contention in the 20th century diffuses more slowly yet attains higher rates of success. The paper documents these arguments by analyzing the spread of the 1848 revolutions, the impact of the Russian Revolutions of 1917, and the third wave of democratization, exemplified by Chile's transition to democracy during the 1980s. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

With the advancement of the eastern enlargement of the EU in the early 2000s, some experts and advocates of the European social model began labeling enlargement as the “Trojan horse” against Europeanization, for the Americanization of Europe. According to them the idea of the European social model would be seriously challenged after enlargement because the candidate countries from the formerly communist region had developed more liberal regimes in the course of their post-communist transformation, and were practicing a rather different brand of social partnership. Based on such concerns, the EU decided to include special requirements and recommendations for the strengthening of the forms of negotiations among the social partners in candidate countries. This paper reveals four major venues for change of the existing tripartite institutions in accession countries: (1) emphasis on a new philosophy of social dialogue as social governance rather than a more narrow “social peace” and interest intermediation mechanism; (2) broadening the scope of participants in social dialogue, development of social dialogue beyond the existing tripartite structures, as a broader civic engagement; (3) development of autonomous and multi-level social dialogue among the organizations of employees and employers, without the participation of the state, and especially in regard to the lower sectoral and regional levels; and (4) development of the capacity of the social partners to participate in social dialogue at the European level. The concluding section of the paper critically evaluates the development of social dialogue in the new EU member states, and addresses the issue about the extent to which their “revised” structures of social dialogue are able to contribute towards the sustainability of the European social model in an era of increased neo-liberal pressures. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper's aims are twofold: First, to chart - using current studies, ethnic minority surveys and scenario-based population projections (which are ongoing) - the ethno-religious makeup of western Europe in 2025 with particular attention to Muslim populations. Second, to sketch out the implications of these changes for international politics. Constructivist approaches in IR stress the importance of intra-state identity conflicts in determining foreign policy outcomes. The paper moves on to consider scenarios for European foreign policy based on survey-data derived assumptions about non-European immigration, immigrant integration patterns, ethnic minority residential segregation, immigrant voting and dominant party coalition behaviour within states. While the most likely outcome of demographic developments is a polarisation between 'native' ethnic groups, with their secular outlook, and 'immigrant' minorities (especially if Muslim) who are more religious, other outcomes are possible. For instance, one cannot rule out the emergence of a trans-ethnic cleavage uniting moral traditionalists of all faiths against the secular mainstream - a development which characterized American society in the post-1968 period. These domestic scenarios would in turn point toward divergent foreign policy identities - especially with respect to the Muslim world and the general 'war on terror'. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper is intended to set the framework for the entire panel by tracing in broad strokes the place of Asian studies in the field of (post)communist studies and in comparative politics writ large. During the first two decades after World War II studies of China and Japan were commonly carried out within the unifying theoretical framework of modernization theory. The decline of modernization theory in the 1970s, however, led to a more attenuated relationship between specialists of Asian countries and the broader field of comparative politics. In the post-Cold War era, in spite of the common challenges faced by reformers in (post)communist Asia and Europe, there have been even fewer lines of intellectual communication and integration across Asian studies, the study of postcommunist Europe, and the field of comparative politics writ large. A handful of noteworthy exceptions notwithstanding, students analyzing transitions in postcommunist Europe have not taken advantage of the rich empirical analysis coming out of scholarship on Asian countries embarking on reform. Similarly, Asian studies remains comparatively insular, ignoring potentially insightful analyses coming out of transitional settings that emerged out of the former Soviet bloc. This paper argues that a broader, more refined field of comparative (post)communism needs to do a better job of comparing the experiences of Asian and East European reforms, and that this will also help reinvigorate the lines of communication between both fields and comparative politics writ large. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper examines the on-going constitution and enactment of the ethos of the European Union as expressed in its foreign relations, through a reading of the collected speeches made by the High Representative of the EU's CFSP, Javier Solana. I argue that in the articulation and enactment of the subject of Europe, Solana is pushing at the limits of the traditional mode of differentiation of the nation-state, trying to balance a logic of identity necessary for the production of any sovereign subject with one of difference, desiring to imagine a more inclusive form of political community. In doing so, as I show in this paper, a set of contradictions emerge that can be seen as structural by-products of the ethos that is being enacted.The emerging ethos of the EU, as expressed by Solana, inevitably opens to a set of impossible relationships, which in turn make this ethos highly unstable and always at risk of violently folding back upon itself. As a community-building project, the logic of identity can never be completely renounced and a logic of difference can never be fully embraced. Solana's discourse of Europe could be seen as exemplary of a struggle that many Europeans face in the desire for building a new type of political community, one characterized by being more inclusive, that, I argue, nevertheless ends up having to affirm an exclusionary logic of identity. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper critically assesses the concept “‘civilian’/’normative’ power” and intends to clarify what it entails from the perspective of the South Caucasus. This research aims to fill in the gap in the existing literature on the EU as a “‘civilian’/’normative’ power”, which a) provides a self-centered narrative and/or b) justifies that the EU is a normative power by referring to its functions. The paper argues that the narrative and the functions of the EU hardly help to evaluate the EU’s ‘civilianness’/‘normativity’. In the meantime, only by doing this can the difference between the EU and the US supposedly as a “‘non-civilian’ and ‘non-normative’ power” â€" as suggested by the academic literature - be sustained. Moreover, since the concept ‘power’ presupposes an agent-object relationship it cannot be understood if only conveyed through the EU’s internally-driven discourse and automatic mirroring of the latter in the academic literature. A policy-recipient perspective is needed to test whether, to what extent and in what way the EU is a “’civilian’/’normative’ power” as compared to the US. The South Caucasus serves as a case-study for this purpose. The paper suggests that the US can justly be called a “‘civilian’/’normative’ power” if looked at from the South Caucasus, even if its way of conducting policy is different from that of the EU. Nonetheless, provided the EU’s (potential) proximity to the South Caucasus and in case of unequivocal good-disposition of all the actors in Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia towards the EU, the leverage of the Union will grow. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper argues that the concept ‘interiorization’ (Poulantzas, 1974)provides us with a subtler understanding of the interrelated spatial fixesof the contemporary IPE that overcomes the more or less Kautskian/Leninistand Supranational/Intergovernmental dualisms that continue to characterisethe field. With regards to the economic structure, the concept allows usto grasp how it is possible for European capitalism to be subsumeddirectly within the social relations of US capitalism whilst stillmaintaining independent bases of competition. With regards topolitico-ideological structures, the concept allows us to understand why atransnational neo-liberal hegemony at the same time is a distinctly UShegemony, whereby the US state increasingly displaces externalities on therest of the world, including Europe, without this undermining theconsensual aspects of transnational relations. In a concluding section,the paper also demonstrates that the concept of interiorization is centralto the (terminal?) crisis of European social democracy: A Europeanbourgeoisie ‘interiorized’ with American capital is increasingly alienatedfrom European social formations and as a result is not amenable to theclass compromises which social democracy presupposes. This in turnundermines the capacity of social democracy to perform a ‘politics ofmediation’ over a wide range of cleavage structures. This undermining isdangerous as it has been essential to the very essence of European (socialand Christian) democracy in the post World War II period (cf. vanKersbergen, 1995). ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The starting point for this paper is twofold. On the one hand, the authors have recently been involved in a study on European integration and border conflict transformation, which established conditions under which integration and association can have a desecuritising effect on border conflicts. One core condition was an image of the EU as a positive force in world politics. On the other hand, both authors have been involved in the debate on normative power Europe and have argued that this concept is better seen as a discursive self-construction imbuing the integration project with new force and establishing an EU identity against Others, rather than an objective analytical concept. In this paper, we explore the degree to which this self-construction of the EU is shared by others in international society, and in particular in conflict areas. Our basic hypothesis is that the EU's chances to act as a mediator, or to transform conflicts through association agreements and other forms of partnerships, largely depends on this acceptance of the notion of normative power Europe. The paper uses the cases of Cyprus and Israel/Palestine as examples, but also draws from a wider set of cases. Its aim is to develop a theoretical framework with which the basic hypothesis can be studied, to discuss initial examples, and to draw out the political and normative consequences from the relationship between normative power Europe and conflict transformation, especially in light of our earlier criticism of the EU's self-construction. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The high number of undocumented migrants in almost all immigration countries adumbrates the limited success of states to channel migration in primarily legal tracks. Only recently political scientists acknowledged this reality and dealt with undocumented migration, both on national level as well as an issue of intergovernmental and multinational governance. Wayne Cornelius and colleagues were engaged in pathbreaking reseach on the question of migration control. They diagnosed policy gaps, i.e. the failure of migration control policies due to a variety of factors, in almost all immigration countries (Cornelius et al. 2004). The gap hypothesis can be considered as the status quo in scholarship on migration control and the state. A point where authors differ, is more of a moral question: Some advocate for human rights of all migrants, including those without legal status, others prioritize state souvereignity and surveillance of migratory movements, which may end up in combatting undocumented migration.In the paper, I am going to contrast this mainstream political science perspective with another strand of discussion, currently developed in some European countries, i.e. Italy, France, or Germany. There, anti-racist theorists and political scientists also question the nation state’s capability of controling its borders, but they stress the productive power of the migrants themselves. It is assumed that undocumented migrants are counteractors to the state, their unauthorized movements take an existence â€" and legitimacy â€" beyond the state (“autonomy of migration”). The contribution to the panel on “Gender, migration, and the state”, however, argues against simplifications on various levels: While the first strand of scholarship focuses on state policies only, the second one tends to praise a (masculinized?) autonomous subject and opposes ‘migrants’ and ‘the state’. By relating to feminist IR scholarship on global restructuring (e.g. Chang/Ling, Marchand/Sisson Runyan), I am going to argue for a more differentiated concept of ‘migration as wilful practice’ (Eigensinn). This concept takes into account the social embeddednes and the agency of migrating subjects. The limits, both of a state centred perspective as well as of a migration centered perspective, lie in the missing link of a gendered subject. These gendered subjects are neither autonomous nor bound to state regulations or patriarchal family ties. Hence, the paper aims at contributing to an engendered and critically reformulated political science and IR scholarship on migration control. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The agent-structure debate was a debate entered into in the 80s and 90s, but has now silenced. This is largely the case also within constructivism, despite it being the approach that introduced the concept of the mutual constitution of agents and structures. This paper claims that the lack of attention to this fundamental theoretical aspect is diminishing the potential contributions the so-called "bridge building project" between rationalism and constructivism can make to contemporary IR. Today, the project has no metatheoretical fundaments common to both approaches, and is based largely on methodological inventions and theoretical pragmatism. Thus, there exist no theoretical bridge building, and the pragmatic-methodological approach leads to theoretical inconsistencies. Taking as the substantial point of departure the recent International Organization special issue "International Institutions and Socialization in Europe", this paper identifies four concrete problems arising form the lack of theoretical clarity. These are the problem of combining an exclusive use of positivism with constructivism, the conceptualization of mechanisms, the exclusion of interpretative approaches and the rationalist dominance. These problems contribute to the notion of the project as a bridge over troubled theoretical waters. The paper shows how one could approach these problems through revisiting the insights from the agent-structure debate. Values and facts could be reconceptualized as mutually sustaining, mechanisms could be seen as processes and not one-time influences and structures consist of both material and ideational aspects. This new approach might open the ground for a more theoretical coherent and resilient bridge building project. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The European Union’s effort to stabilize its near abroad cannot meaningfully be detached from the United States’ policy of maintaining a strong presence in post-Cold War Europe. The United States has bolstered EU efforts: with the intervention in Bosnia beginning in 1995; likewise with the intervention in Kosovo in 1999; and the decision to enlarge NATO â€" made by and large by the United States in the face of widespread European scepticism â€" created the security framework for the subsequent enlargements of the EU. Conversely, the United States has frustrated the EU policy process: notably so by insisting on the compatibility of the CFSP and ESDP with NATO and US designs. This paper will assess the ENP in light of American designs for European security. Did the ENP evolve in transatlantic harmony or was it a source of transatlantic tension? What is the current status of the ENP in relation to predominant issues such as energy security and missile defence? And, finally, looking ahead, is the ENP compatible with US long-term planning for Eurasia?The first part of the paper will trace the development of the ENP and investigate the points at which Atlantic policy-makers were in dialogue. How did the ENP anticipate American reactions, and how did American policy-makers receive the policy initiative? To what extent was the ENP perceived as something new (distinct from past neighbourhood policies) and also compatible with NATO partnership programs?The second part of the paper provides a snapshot of current affairs and notably two security issues that are at the forefront of transatlantic relations. One is the question of securing reliable supplies of energy for Europe. This was on the NATO Riga summit agenda and is built into the ENP by virtue of its relationship to transit countries such as the Ukraine and to alternative suppliers in the Caucasus. The second is the question of missile defence where the United States outside of multilateral forums seek to develop an American capability in Central Europe. Amidst Russian protests and European concerns, is the ENP a bridge between Russia and the EU?The third and final part of the paper looks to the future and notably the way in which American security planners foresee the United States’ engagement in Eurasia. The Pentagon recently created a new African Command, complementing the Central Command and the European Command (under which NATO falls). What is the logic of this new arrangement? Can the ENP serve as a kind of mechanism facilitating a transatlantic division of labour along geographical lines? If so, are the European states willing to do so? ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Scientific realism has a hard time finding a home. As well as the current gaps meaningfully connecting it to IR, there are looming lacunae in the interface between scientific realism and mainstream perspectives on European integration. This paper focuses upon the key understandings which emerge once the theoretical assumptions of European integration are subjected to the principles of scientific realism. One possible consequence is an ability to probe far more deeply into both the generative mechanisms of European integration and the unobservable structures of the EU itself than various atomistic or idealist views. The paper then suggests that scientific realism has the capacity to launch a robust critique of the underlying assumptions of European integration theory. Indeed, it may be uniquely capable of shedding light on the one issue that continues to bedevil European theorists of all stripes: the reality of the unobservable, which in this case includes the underlying political structures, social processes and economic relations instantiated for half a century. Europe’s success has also been its undoing: integration is still regarded as too ‘virtual’ to be of much ontological interest or epistemological value. Scientific realism however can help move integration debates away from current epistemological quagmires and toward a clearer idea of the independent dynamics of European integration. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Issues about minority-majority relations and about the co-existence of different identity groups have been a permanent feature in the political discourse of individual states and regions (particularly in Europe). Questions regarding ethnic heterogeneity continue to be at the centre of contemporary governance at different levels. Wars continue to be fought over issues that appertain to ethnic minorities, and individuals are still discriminated against on the basis of their distinct identity, membership in an ethnic group, or simply because they are different â€" racially, linguistically, religiously, or culturally. Questions about inclusion and exclusion, prospects for fostering one identity over the other, the apparent inability to think about multiple identities, and competition in the political, economic, or social sphere, continue to touch upon, if not centre on, the existence of ethnic minorities. This is despite the fact that so much scholarly effort has been invested in studying and comprehending minority issues, and despite the fact that mechanisms have been brought about in the contemporary international community â€" at different levels of governance â€" to provide for a peaceful co-existence of different identity groups and their members. The paper will attempt to analyse the discrepancy between various institutionalised attempts to manage peacefully ethnic heterogeneity and minority issues, and the continuing tensions and conflicts between different identity groups and their (political) leaders/representatives. Using the theoretical concept of international regimes and knowledge of negotiations, particularly about the role of (structural) fairness in negotiations, the paper will address the issue of conflict management in cases of complex social conflicts. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Hospitality is rarely discussed as a concept in international politics though it can be seen as an obvious practice of ethics in this context. Yet hospitality is full of contradictions and aporias. This paper argues that such aproias require what Derrida calls 'negotiation', the non-rule governed, context-specific practice of oscillating between equally imperative injunctions before deciding in a way that tries to close least toward difference. The paper examines the EU's discourse of an ethical foreign policy of hospitality through enlargement between 1999-2004. It suggests that an illustration of what might have been possible through negotiation, perhaps, is a reconceptualisation of Turkish accession to the EU. While the current debate on Turkish accession differs over whether Turkey is European enough for entry, this paper argues that a negotiation of hospitality could mean Turkey is allowed entry precisely as different, as other, as not European.While the debate on Turkish accession is rarely made in ethical terms, reconceiving it as a matter of ethics, hospitality and negotiation could lead to an accelerated accession for the EU's Turkish other. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Competing perspectives on the role of the European Union (EU) as a foreign policy actor disagree on whether the EU could (and should) be a successful military conflict manager on the international security arena. Essential to the debate of whether it could be successful is the question of what would constitute success in this new sphere of EU foreign policy. Having undertaken extensive analysis of the institutional framework and policy processes of the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP), and the European Security and Defence Policy (ESDP) within it, the existing literature has yet to agree on a shared notion of success in this realm. In effect, a theoretical framework in which to evaluate the success rate of ESDP military conflict management missions has yet to be developed. This paper therefore discusses how to define and evaluate success in this area of the ESDP and provides an analytical starting point for how to determine different degrees of success in EU military conflict management according to a set of internal and external success criteria. In this way, the paper seeks to advance Foreign Policy Analysis, the study of the CFSP and the ESDP, whilst adding also an EU specific dimension to the existing theories of military intervention and conflict management. The purpose of this undertaking is to inform the current debates concerning whether, when and how the EU should engage in military conflict management beyond its own borders. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As Professor Bull has mentioned, the title of this panel is, "The New Special Relationship?: post-Gaullist France and America." The title of my paper is, "Washington, Sarkozy, and the Defense of Europe." My title is both consistent and misleading. Consistent because in some respects I treat defense issues in the paper; misleading because I go beyond that focus to mention the defense of Europe and Western civilization in a broader sense. This is partly because of my current proclivities, as manifested in my most recent book, "La Republique de Dieu," published in Paris earlier this year. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Against the view that globalization is rendering all developed political economies hybrids, this paper argues that it is still useful to speak of distinctive varieties of capitalism. It substantiates that view by putting the process of 'globalization' in a longer historical perspective that explores the response of four political economies to changes in the international economy since 1945. The cases of Britain, France, Germany and Sweden are examined to assess how each responded to economic challenges in the 1950s, late 1960s-1970s, and 1990s-2000s with an emphasis on three types of problems: the work problem, the wage problem, and the problem of total factor productivity. The paper finds that shifts in the international monetary regime and changes endogenous to the existing institutional structure of the economy were as important as exogenous shocks in posing challenges to the economy and that existing institutions conditioned the nature of the response of firms and governments. It concludes that varieties of capitalism continue to display some distinctive features of importance to economic performance and the distribution of well-being and that those varieties can usefully be thought of as the basis for institutionally-conditioned adjustment paths. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The European Union's Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) and the European Security and Defence Policy (ESDP) encompass enormous resources. In addition to the member states' own military and civilian capabilities and assets, a number of other instruments have been created at the EU level, such as EU Special Representatives and the European Development Fund. Moreover, EU diplomatic initiatives, trade promotions, disarmament and non-proliferation efforts and environmental policies are all instruments that can be employed by the union. However, these institutions, capabilities, resources, instruments and policies each have their own structure, logic and rationale. While some of them work well together, many others do not and may even work counter to each other. This paper argues that the EU must better coordinate all elements of the CFSP and ESDP in order to effectively employ the instruments and capabilities of the Union in a global world. EU policy vis-á-vis Macedonia will be used as an example to illustrate the need for better coherence and why Europe must become more skilled at coordinating and combining analyses and strategies in the CFSP and ESDP, between EU institutions and between member states. The issue of coherence is complex and exists at many stages and on many levels. The paper will outline a model for improving coherence in the CFSP and ESDP by drawing on EU trade policy as a blueprint. The EU has successfully negotiated with one voice for many years during bilateral talks with other countries and in organizations such as the WTO. The paper will conclude by discussing what role the position of an EU Foreign Minister and an EU diplomatic service would play in establishing more coherence in the CFSP and ESDP. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper discusses how the external conditions of foreign policy-making for small EU member states changes with changes in EU institutions and decision-making procedures. The introduction of the paper presents the research problem and the structure of the argument and briefly clarifies the concept of small states and to which extent it is applicable in the study of European Union politics. It is argued that the EU constitutes the most important context for small member state foreign policy-making. Based on this argument, the paper discusses, first, the general implications of European integration for small state foreign policy-making, and, second, the specific implications of EU enlargement. The final part of the paper briefly sums up the findings and concludes the analysis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents the conference paper "The International Politics of Failing States" prepared for presentation at the "46th Annual Conference of the International Studies Association" held in Honolulu, Hawaii from March 1 to 5, 2005. The paper discusses the securitization of failed states with evidence from the U.S., Great Britain and Germany. The author says that the failed states discourse assists to create a bridge between development and security policy.

By focusing on recent manifestations of popular opposition to European integration in Britain, Ireland, and Denmark, this paper will explore the question of why many Europeans oppose further European integration. In Britain, the Blair government, fearing defeat, has delayed a referendum on the European Monetary Union (EMU) indefinitely, In Denmark, the EMU was defeated in a referendum in 2000. Finally, in Ireland, the Treaty of Nice was surprisingly rejected in a 2001 referendum (a result that was reversed in a second referendum in 2002). By focusing on three specific cases where opposition to European integration has been mobilized, we will be able to examine both the individual and institutional factors that have contributed to the success of efforts to mobilize public opinion against European integration. Our three cases have been chosen for this paper because of their differences rather than because of their similarities. Britain has always been a reluctant participant in Europe, and, due to Britain’s history as a great power, the British people may be particularly reluctant to cede sovereignty to institutions dominated by former rivals. Opposition to European integration in Denmark may be motivated by more concrete fears that integration will jeopardize social welfare programs and impose inordinate costs on the wealthier states of Europe, of which Denmark is one. Finally, Ireland is a country considered to be among the most supportive of efforts at European integration, and its participation in Europe has coincided with a period of economic growth. Nevertheless, it is clear that even in Ireland, opposition to Europe can be mobilized if the circumstances are right. Previous research suggests several possible explanations. First, opposition to European integration reflects the continuing strength of national identities and the corresponding weakness of attachments to a larger Europe. Second, many Europeans fear that any benefits accruing from greater economic integration will be outweighed by economic costs, such as higher taxes, the loss of government subsidies, or the loss of employment. Third, opposition to European integration results from dissatisfaction with political elites, either at the national or European level. Finally, the importance of political parties in mobilizing opposition to European integration has been widely noted. We propose to test these hypotheses on two levels. First, using Eurobarometer surveys, we will consider these hypotheses at the individual level. Which social groups oppose European integration and what other values and opinions tend to coincide with such opposition? Second, we will consider the institutional actors, such as political parties, that have worked to mobilize opposition to European integration within these countries. What are the social bases of these parties or interest groups, and what are the primary arguments that they use against Europe? Our working hypothesis is that both the fear of economic costs and anti-elite sentiments can be used to mobilize opposition to Europe by parties and groups; however, such opposition can be mobilized only when national identities are strong and broader European identities are weak. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper explores Western European hegemony and power. The focus, however, is not European hegemony over other parts of the world but over non-European immigrants INSIDE of contemporary Europe itself. The paper is a case study of recent Danish legal, educational, and political attempts to better the integration of particularly Muslim immigrants in Denmark. My focus is on how Europe is constructed through these discourses on Muslim immigrants - and how the immigrants in turn are often constructed as alien to European values and norms. By denaturalizing the concepts which these discursive representations rely on (the citizen, the European, the immigrant, etc.), I tease out the silencing or forgetfulness of these representations (for example that Europe is complicit in creating a world of inequality). And based on a close textual reading of the law, the political initiatives, the mandatory civic courses for immigrants, etc., I argue that non-European immigrants in Denmark are kept in a state of eternal Diaspora inside of Europe - despite an official rhetoric of integration. The ambition is to unpack and politicize the Euro-centrism which informs discourses on Europe and which naturalizes the idea of Europe as a moral, acting subject under extreme pressure from Muslim immigrants. Finally, I discuss the theoretical implications of my study which transgresses the national (Danish) and speaks to the construction of regional or international identities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A number of international institutions such as the Council of Europe, the IMF, the EU, the OECD and the World Bank, have recently developed strategies and mechanisms to deal with corruption in states. This paper investigates how such institutions cooperate and sometimes compete in promoting their anti-corruption policies in East and Central Europe. It argues that the anti-corruption issue is somewhat unique because, none of the institutions that deal with it were specifically designed for this task. The paper discusses how international institutions have found ways to cooperate by carving out somewhat separate tasks, based on their perceived comparative advantage. By doing so, a hierarchy has emerged and some of the global institutions have allowed the EU and Council of Europe to lead their common efforts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The international role that could be played by such a controversial polity as the EU has been hotly debated. From now, the debate has been mainly articulated between three main roles, which are, the Civilian power , Military power and normative power . To handle such a critical issue, this paper will draw on Ole Waever’s work on security, and from this perspective study the EU’s international identity through the link between security, integration and identity. Instead of having different kind of roles, Waevers proposes a distinction between three levels where the EU plays three different roles as a security actor. Based on the constructivist claim, that identity and action are inextricably related, and an approach to the construction of identity that is one which stresses the role of narrative structures within the process, this paper will try to identify a ‘constitutive story’ told for ‘Europe’ about EU’s international identity. In this framework, the first part will establish that EU’s identity is recognized by others, and identified as an actor by acting. It gains identity from without. Thus, the two next sections will focus on EU foreign policy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Constructivism in IR, moderate and radical versions alike, suffers from a superficial understanding of language: Looking only at argumentation and content (what is being said), it overlooks that reality is also being constructed below the surface of texts: it does make a difference, how I say something. Style matters! The proposed paper will point to the crucial role metaphors play in this regard: Metaphors create reality by projecting everyday life-worlds onto international relations. They make sense of and give meaning to strange material phenomena such as the fall of the Berlin wall or the WTC-towers. My paper will come up with a method of analysing metaphors that builds on two strands of literature: post-structuralist theories of discourse on the one hand and sociology of knowledge on the other. In order to illustrate how the method works on the empirical ground, it will be applied to the discourse on EU-enlargement, showing that and how enlargement-metaphors construct European identity. Against this background the paper will finally reflect upon linguistic mechanisms of identity construction more generally. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

How do national parliaments regain some of their influence over policy areas that have been lost to the European Union? National parliaments influence policy as it travels ‘upstream’ to the intergovernmental level or in the ‘downstream’ implementation process. This paper presents a model that demonstrates how national parliaments could strengthen their influence over European policy in the upstream stage by minimizing information asymmetries with their representative at the European level, the national government. The containment of agency losses in the upstream process is a necessary step toward regaining policy influence, but it is not sufficient. Downstream influence is also necessary. This paper uses principal-agent theory to explain why national parliaments establish European Affairs Committees (EAC) and illustrate EAC limitations. It presents a model for the strategic interaction between national parliaments and governments over European policy. The conclusion describes possible empirical tests of the model and gives suggestions for future research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]