This chapter examines the adaptations that have occurred in Sweden’s political and administrative system following its admission to the European Union on 1 January 1995. Sweden became a member of the EU on 1 January 1995 after a long period of hesitation. After fifteen years of membership, reticence has given way to a more positive stance, best characterized as pragmatic support. The chapter first considers patterns in Sweden’s membership in the EU before discussing Swedish public opinion towards the EU and the impact of Sweden’s EU membership on the country’s political parties, political institutions, public administration, and sub-national actors such as the civil service. The chapter goes on to explore Sweden’s approach to EU public policy and concludes by comparing its experience with those of other member states, including Austria and Finland.
This chapter explores the central government departments, executive agencies, and other public bureaucracies in operation in the UK today, such as those in local and territorial governments. These bodies help make and implement public policies and run public services. The chapter reviews more general work on bureaucracy and public administration, and sets out the theory of politician–bureaucrat relationships (going back to the principal–agent model), before addressing the classic question of civil service influence over public policy. It then takes account of the diversity of bureaucratic organizations operating in Britain today. The chapter also looks at the evidence of how politicians manage to satisfy their political objectives through delegating authority to these bodies.
Dimitris Papadimitriou and Sotirios Zartaloudis
This chapter explores Greece’s turbulent and ambivalent relationship with European integration. Despite initial hesitation during the initial stages of EU membership, Greece grew into one of the most pro-European member states. This enthusiasm ended abruptly after 2010 with the eurozone crisis and resultant EU–IMF bailout agreements that necessitated unpopular reforms and austerity. Consequently, Greece witnessed a seismic change in its party system, with a dramatic increase in the popularity of anti-system parties on both the Left and the Right of the political spectrum. Euroscepticism became more prevalent among Greek voters who blamed foreign actors (such as the EU, the IMF, Germany) and their domestic interlocutors for the country’s economic hardship. Greece’s Europeanization has been difficult, not least because of endemic weaknesses in public administration and the public policy process. EU-driven adaptational pressures on policy, polity, and institutions have been severely mitigated by entrenched veto points at the domestic level.
Joseph S. Nye Jr.
This chapter examines US foreign policy as ‘smart power’, a combnation of hard and soft power, in the twenty-first century. The beginning of the twenty-first century saw George W. Bush place a strong emphasis on hard power, as exemplifed by the invasion and occupation of Iraq. This was evident after 9/11. While the war in Iraq showcased America’s hard military power that removed a tyrant, it failed to resolve US vulnerability to terrorism; on the contrary, it may have increased it. The chapter first considers the Obama administration’s reference to its foreign policy as ‘smart power’ before discussing Donald Trump’s ‘America First’ policy, the role of power in a global information age, soft power in US foreign policy, and how public diplomacy has been incorporated into US foreign policy.