1-20 of 31 Results

  • Keyword: Lisbon Treaty x
Clear all

Chapter

This chapter examines the problem of coherence in the European Union's international relations. The EU consists of an extremely complex system of institutional structures. One of the implications of this complexity is coherence, or the ambition and necessity to bring the various parts of the EU's external relations together to increase strategic convergence and ensure procedural efficiency. The chapter first provides a historical overview of the concept of coherence and the debates around it before discussing different conceptual dimensions of coherence. It then describes the neutral, benign, and malign ‘faces’ that coherence assumes in political and academic debates. Based on this conceptual framework, the chapter explores the current legal basis of the Treaty of Lisbon as well as the EU's comprehensive approach to external action in crises and conflicts as one of the key political initiatives aimed at fostering the objectives laid down in primary law.

Chapter

This chapter examines the new strategy adopted in March 2000 by a special European Council in Lisbon to make the European Union (EU) more competitive, culminating in the signing of the Treaty of Lisbon. The Amsterdam Treaty had scarcely entered into force before further Treaty reform emerged on the agenda. Throughout the year 2000, a new intergovernmental conference met to address outstanding institutional issues that had not been settled at Amsterdam. It concluded in December 2000 with the longest European Council in history, which led to the Treaty of Nice. The chapter first considers the Nice Treaty, before discussing the Lisbon Strategy, the European Security and Defence Policy, the Constitutional Treaty, the issue of enlargement, the European Parliament (EP), and the nomination of a new European Commission. It ends with a discussion of the Treaty of Lisbon.

Chapter

This chapter examines the European Union’s (EU’s) policy activity in the area of freedom, security, and justice (AFSJ). Introduced mainly by the Maastricht Treaty of 1992, the AFSJ was initially given the name Justice and Home Affairs (JHA). The AFSJ was greatly enhanced by the Treaty of Lisbon and has matured over time, despite the controversy surrounding the way in which it strikes at national sovereignty. A key characteristic of JHA, later AFSJ, has been the use of differentiated integration. The chapter first provides a historical background on the AFSJ, focusing on the policy dynamics and JHA structures under the Treaty on European Union (TEU) as well as the reforms of the Treaty of Amsterdam. It then considers the AFSJ’s institutional character and policy content, before examining the refugee crisis. It concludes with an assessment of key explanations and debates relating to the AFSJ.

Chapter

This chapter examines the evolution of the European Union’s (EU) environmental policy. The environment is a relatively new policy area of the EU. It was not officially created until 1973 and acquired a sound legal basis in the Treaties only with the passage of the Single European Act (SEA) in 1987. When the EU was established, environmental issues were low on the political agenda. However, they have become increasingly important at both national and European levels, and there is now a comprehensive environmental policy at the EU level and the EU has developed a reputation as an environmental leader in international environmental diplomacy, especially on climate change. The chapter first explains the main drivers for the development of the EU’s environmental policy, before discussing recent developments, and some of the major issues of current concern. It concludes by evaluating the theoretical leverage of the key integration theories for explaining and critiquing this policy sector.

Chapter

This chapter discusses the extent to which decision-making in the European Union can be considered democratic and legitimate. The chapter clarifies the concepts ‘democracy’ and ‘legitimacy’, and describes how, although initially the legitimacy of the European polity was not perceived as a problem, it became more problematic as the EU gained more competences. The European democratic deficit became an important issue of debate only during the 1990s after the Maastricht Treaty had transferred considerable powers to the EU. The main solution to the democratic deficit has been inspired by the parliamentary model of democracy and involves strengthening the European Parliament (EP), while also paying attention to the role of national parliaments and regional and local authorities. The chapter also shows how the governance debate at the start of the twenty-first century broadened the conceptual understanding of democracy in the EU by addressing the complexity of European governance (see also Chapter 7). By looking at different stages of policy-making and different modes of governance, while dealing with issues such as transparency and the role of civil society, the chapter discusses a wider range of issues associated with the democracy and legitimacy of the Union. It assesses the impact on EU democracy of the Constitutional Treaty and the Lisbon Treaty. The chapter concludes by warning that three main crises, namely the economic, migration, and security crises, have revived nationalist and populist movements exacerbating the challenges to the EU’s legitimacy.

Chapter

3. The European Council:  

the Union’s supreme decision-maker

Luuk van Middelaar and Uwe Puetter

This chapter discusses the central role of the European Council in European Union (EU) politics and policymaking. Even though it was not listed among the EU’s core institutions until the Treaty of Lisbon, the European Council regularly intervenes in EU decision-making to make other institutional actors follow its guidance. Initially, it was meant to be predominantly an informal institution for direct exchanges between the heads of state or government of the member states. Yet it assumed responsibility for landmark decisions which paved the way for key steps in integration, such as EU enlargements and the euro. The European Council has arguably saved the Union from break-up by acting as its ultimate crisis manager and, at times, has skirted the boundaries of EU law by finding institutional compromises and fixes. The institution plays a guiding role, especially in relation to the Commission and the Council of the European Union, which was formerly known as the Council of Ministers. The European Council devises strategic guidelines for policy development, shapes processes of institutional reform, and breaks impasses when agreement cannot otherwise be found. Since the Treaty of Maastricht, European Council intervention has become a routine in new EU policy areas, such as euro area economic governance and foreign policy. The Treaty of Lisbon assigns the European Council its own full-time president and places the institution right after the European Parliament (EP) in the list of EU institutions. Even though it has shaped European integration since 1975, the European Council did not find much recognition in traditional theories of European integration. This has changed more recently, with renewed debate about intergovernmentalism in EU politics.

Book

Simon Bulmer, Owen Parker, Ian Bache, Stephen George, and Charlotte Burns

Politics in the European Union examines the theory, history, institutions, and policies of the European Union (EU). The EU is a unique, complex, and ever-changing political entity, which continues to shape both international politics and the politics of its individual member states. The text provides a clear analysis of the organization and presents a well-rounded introduction to the subject. Complete and detailed in its coverage, including coverage of the eurozone, refugee crises, and Brexit, along with the latest theoretical developments, the text provides a comprehensive assessment of EU politics and policy at the start of the 2020s. The book is divided into four parts: Part One provides the student with a strong foundation in political theory and analysis; Part Two charts European integration from 1995 through to the 2010s; Part Three addresses the distinctive character of the EU institutions; and in Part Four, key EU policy areas, both internal and external, are covered.

Chapter

9. The Budget  

Who Gets What, When, and How?

Brigid Laffan and Johannes Lindner

This chapter examines the European Union’s budgetary procedures with an eye towards elucidating the characteristics of budgetary politics and policy-making. Where EU money comes from, how it is spent, and the processes by which it is distributed are the subjects of intense political bargaining. Budgets matter politically, because money represents the commitment of resources to the provision of public goods and involves political choices across sectors and regions. The chapter first provides a thumbnail sketch of the EU budget before looking at the major players involved in the budgetary process. It then considers budgetary politics over time, focusing on two phases, one dominated by budgetary battles and other by ordered budgetary decision-making. It also discusses the relevant provisions of the Treaty of Lisbon with respect to budgetary procedures and concludes with an assessment of the budget review and how the EU manages a larger budget.

Chapter

Clive Church and David Phinnemore

This chapter explores how the EU ended a long period of constitutional change by agreeing the Treaty of Lisbon and used it to face new challenges of financial crisis, Brexit, and Covid-19—the latter events leading to thoughts that further treaty change might be needed. The process started with the 2002–03 Convention on the Future of Europe leadin to the Constitutional Treaty of 2004 and in October 2007 produced the Treaty of Lisbon which eventually entered into force on 1 December 2009. Its implementation was complicated by the eurozone crisis, resulting in extra-treaty arrangements and another treaty amendment. Although the official appetite for treaty reform all but evaporated in the 2010s, the UK’s June 2016 vote to quit the EU raised the hopes for further changes. The end of the 2010s and into the 2020s saw Brexit being negotiated within the terms of the Treaty of European Union the EU’s treaty agreeing measures to deal with the Covid-19 pandemic. Calls for treaty revision continued but active steps to re-negotiate the consolidated treaties have not yet begun.

Chapter

This chapter examines a European policy, Justice and Home Affairs (JHA), and its transformation into the Area of Freedom, Security, and Justice (AFSJ). The AFSJ, one of the newest additions to the European Union mandate, seeks to engage the EU in the areas of immigration and asylum policy as well as police and judicial cooperation. Cooperation in the AFSJ has evolved into a fully fledged and vibrant EU policy. The chapter first considers the early years of cooperation in the AFSJ and the Schengen Agreement before discussing the procedural steps taken by the Maastricht Treaty (1993), Amsterdam Treaty (1999), and Lisbon Treaty. It then turns to policy output, taking into account the Tampere European Council meeting, the Hague Programme, and the Stockholm Programme. It concludes with an overview of various challenges specific to AFSJ cooperation, with a particular focus on the EU’s post-2014 migration crisis. cooperation

Chapter

This chapter explores the emergence and implementation of the Treaty of Lisbon. Its origins lie in the Constitutional Treaty of 2004 and its rejection in the French and Dutch referendums of 2005, which led to a period of so-called reflection. Then, mainly under the German Council presidency of early 2007, there was an emphatic drive to produce not a constitution, but an orthodox amending treaty to carry forward the basic reforms of the Constitutional Treaty. A deal was reached in October 2007. However, while parliamentary ratification went successfully, an initial referendum rejection in Ireland in June 2008 cast doubt on the new Treaty’s future. In part, this symbolized a rejection of some elements of the Treaty, but it also owed much to a deeper unease about the EU. Once Irish concerns had been assuaged, a second referendum produced the necessary ‘yes’ to ratification and, following some last-minute concessions to the Czech Republic, the Treaty of Lisbon entered into force on 1 December 2009. Its implementation proceeded relatively smoothly but was complicated by the eurozone crisis, which in turn pushed the EU to pursue some further treaty reform. In the face of increasing Euroscepticism, and persistent question marks over the popular legitimacy of the EU, the appetite for treaty reform all but evaporated for much of the 2010s, even if for integrationists the eurozone crisis demanded further reform. Towards the end of the decade, with Emmanuel Macron as French President calling for a ‘re-founding’ of the EU and the UK negotiating its withdrawal from the EU, opportunities for and some interest in a new round of treaty reform appeared to be emerging.

Chapter

This chapter looks at Justice and Home Affairs (JHA), and its subsequent transformation into the Area of Freedom, Security, and Justice (AFSJ). The AFSJ comprises the policy areas immigration and asylum, and police and judicial cooperation. This chapter focuses on the early years of cooperation in this policy area, providing an introduction to the Schengen Agreement before reviewing the procedural steps taken by the Maastricht Treaty (1993), at Amsterdam (1999), and institutional developments culminating in the Lisbon Treaty. The chapter also concentrates on policy output, looking beyond Maastricht, Amsterdam, and Lisbon, at the Tampere European Council meeting, the Hague Programme, and the Stockholm Programme. The chapter argues that, although some progress has already been made toward Europeanizing AFSJ policy, this field continues to be laced with intergovernmentalism and numerous challenges remain to be resolved, especially in light of broader challenges facing the Union.

Chapter

EU cooperation in foreign, security, and defence policy has developed rapidly since the launch of the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) in the early 1990s. The first section of this chapter charts the first steps towards a common policy in this area, including the development of the Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) and the gradual militarization of the EU. The chapter then reviews the key theoretical debates on the EU’s role as a foreign and security actor. The subsequent section analyses the main actors involved in the CFSP, focusing in particular on the role of the member states and EU institutions in the development of the policy. The next section of the chapter evaluates the range of military and civilian CSDP operations and missions that the EU has undertaken to date, before examining the key challenges that the EU faces in this area.

Chapter

This chapter focuses on the European Council as a locus of power. Created in 1974, the European Council plays a key role in the development of European integration. It gives political guidance and impetus to the European Union and, by virtue of the Lisbon Treaty, has the formal status of an EU institution under the leadership of a full-time President. This chapter discusses the European Council’s origins, composition, meetings and euro summits, and legal nature and characteristics. It also provides an overview of the debates and decision-making that take place at the Council, along with its functions, which can be grouped under: strategic guidelines, decision-making, economic governance, foreign policy, Justice and Home Affairs, and Treaty amendment. The chapter considers whether the European Council is an intergovernmental or hybrid institution before concluding with an assessment of its strengths and weaknesses.

Chapter

EU cooperation in foreign, security, and defence policy has developed rapidly since the launch of the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) in the early 1990s. The first section of this chapter charts the first steps towards a common policy in this area, including the development of the Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) and the gradual militarization of the EU. The chapter then reviews the key theoretical debates on the EU’s role as a foreign and security actor. The subsequent section analyses the main actors involved in the CFSP, focusing in particular on the role of the member states and EU institutions in the development of the policy. The next section of the chapter evaluates the range of military and civilian CSDP operations and missions that the EU has undertaken to date, before examining the key challenges that the EU faces in this area.

Chapter

12. The institutions of Justice and Home Affairs:  

integrating security interests

Andrew Geddes

This chapter analyses the institutions of EU member state cooperation on issues such as asylum, refugee protection, migration, border controls, police cooperation, and judicial cooperation. Once seen as the prerogative of member states and as defining features of states’ identities as sovereign, complex incremental institutional change established new ways of working on internal security issues and reconfigured the strategic setting from which these issues are viewed. The recent history of these developments provides insight into the EU’s institutional and organizational development, while also demonstrating how, why, and with what effects these issues have become politicized in EU member states. The politicization of migration and asylum, in particular, complements this chapter’s focus on institutional developments by identifying the source of key pressures and strains to which these institutions have been exposed. The most recent COVID-19 pandemic restricting the free movement of people across Europe, the 2020 fire that broke out at the Moria refugee camp at Lesbos, and the European Commission’s ‘New Pact on Migration and Asylum’ of September 2020 raised serious questions about the content and viability of key components of the EU’s approach to security and human rights. From being a policy arena that was not even mentioned in the Treaty of Rome or Single European Act (SEA), internal security within an ‘area of freedom, security, and justice’ (AFSJ) is now a key EU priority. This chapter pinpoints key developments, specifies institutional roles, and explores the relationships over time between changing conceptualizations of security and institutional developments.

Chapter

6. The European Parliament:  

powerful but fragmented

Ariadna Ripoll Servent and Olivier Costa

The European Parliament (EP) symbolizes many of the struggles that characterize the process of European integration and is at the core of many theoretical and empirical debates about representation, accountability, and legitimacy. This chapter draws on a variety of theoretical approaches to explain the complex role the EP plays in the political system of the European Union (EU). It starts with a brief overview of the history and functions of the assembly, followed by a theoretical explanation of its empowerment over time. Then, it determines the extent to which the EP is capable of influencing policymaking, both in legislative and non-legislative domains, as well as for the appointment of the Commission. It presents the political structure of the assembly and underlines the role of parliamentary groups and committees. It discusses the representativeness of the EP and the democratic quality of its internal functioning. Finally, it addresses current and future challenges for the EP.

Chapter

This chapter examines the external dimension of the European Union's internal security, with particular emphasis on the Justice and Home Affairs that has evolved from a side product of European economic integration to a complex and dynamic policy area. It begins with a discussion of the internal process of constructing both the EU's Area of Freedom, Security, and Justice (AFSJ) and its external dimension, along with the normative, national, institutional, policy, and legal challenges that have emerged from this process. It then considers the policy dynamism and institutional developments that have taken place since the Treaty of Lisbon before proceeding with an assessment of how the EU copes with the global security challenges of counterterrorism, migration, refugees, and cybercriminality. It also explores how the EU pursues its security policy within the international arena and the effect it has at the global level.

Chapter

Jolyon Howorth

This chapter examines the European Union's efforts since the late 1990s to become an increasingly autonomous security and defence actor, albeit one that focused overwhelmingly on overseas missions connected with crisis management and embryonic nation building. It first provides an overview of EU security and defence in the context of international relations before discussing the theoretical approaches to the emergence of the EU security and defence policy. It then considers the factors that drove the EU to tackle new and significant security challenges, along with the implications for international relations of the EU's overseas interventions, both as a military and as a civilian crisis management entrepreneur. It also explores the ramifications of the Treaty of Lisbon, the 2016 European Global Strategy, and Brexit for the further development of Europe's security and defence policy, in the context of new and serious security threats in its Southern and Eastern neighbourhoods.

Chapter

This chapter examines how the power of the democratic idea drives change in the European Parliament’s (EP) powers. The EP, the only directly elected institution of the European Union, derives its authority from national electorates rather than national governments and is therefore a transnational institution. Since the first direct elections in 1979, the EP’s powers and status have grown dramatically, culminating in the changes agreed under the 2007 Lisbon Treaty. Nevertheless, the EU is perceived to be suffering from a ‘democratic deficit’. This chapter first traces the historical evolution of the EP before discussing its decision-making. It then considers how the EP aggregates interests, what influence it exercises, and what kind of body it is becoming. It concludes by assessing various perspectives about the EU’s democratic deficit. The chapter stresses the importance of consensus mechanisms within the EP as well as those that link it to other EU institutions.