Suchergebnisse

The European Union (EU) is widely considered as a formidable trade power. It represents about one fourth of worldwide trade flows and generally speaks with one voice in its common commercial policies. In addition, policy-makers and scholars often regard the Union as a distinctive, 'normative power' in the world. From this perspective, Europe tries to be at the forefront of promoting values such as human rights, democracy, sustainable development, and social justice, this with a clear preference for supporting international dialogue and cooperation in these areas, rather than for using trade sanctions. This special issue combines both aspects of the EU's international role. More specifically, it concerns the social dimension of the EU's trade policies. It raises the questions of how, why, and with what impact the EU has promoted social objectives through its common commercial policies. These three questions will be addressed in this introduction, followed by a brief summary of the way in which the different contributions of this special issue deal with them. Adapted from the source document.

This report examines the economic partnership between the United States and the European Union. Not only is the U.S.-EU trade and investment relationship the largest in the world, but it is also arguably the most important. Agreement between the two partners in the past has been critical to making the world trading system more open and efficient.

AbstractIn recent years a subtle change has taken place in the policy‐making machinery shaping European integration. The traditional methods for producing collective European Union (EU) policies, typified by the extensive analysis of a problem, extended phases of consultation with stakeholders, the deliberate cultivation of support for proposals, occasional decision‐making moments and their long‐term implementation, now share space with what is best described as crisis‐oriented methods for arriving at collective decisions. These methods prioritize the early identification of the next crisis, specific kinds of actors and technologies, abbreviated decision‐making procedures and new narratives on the raison d'etre of European integration. This article treats this development as a kind of crisisification of EU policy‐making – a change in the processes by which collective decisions are made – and explores its implications for practice and research by drawing on both classical EU studies approaches and insights from critical security studies.

The influence of the Nordic countries on the European Union's (EU's) policy processes has been researched from various angles, but there is a lack of research that comprehensively examines all policy positions advanced by Nordic actors within a given policy context. This article introduces a new design for studying policy positions and influence in the EU and examines the phenomenon from a multilevel perspective using an original data set compiled in connection to three directives: the Floods Directive on the assessment and management of flood risks, the Environmental Liability Directive, and the Restriction of Hazardous Substances Directive. The analysis reveals that the Nordic countries follow a certain pattern of influencing EU policy that deviates from other states participating in the consultations. Nordic governmental actors exert a strong technical but weak directional influence in the chosen context but are, overall, more successful than Nordic organizational actors at influencing the policy process. ; Peer reviewed

Since the changes introduced in Turkey's foreign policy during the 2000s, it has reached a stage that calls for an urgent review of its regional and global strategic choices. This article analyzes Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu's foreign policy doctrine, examines its limitations and critically evaluates its relevance to current foreign policy-making. Recent events in the Middle East pose a challenge to the soft power, 'zero conflict' policy introduced by Davutoğlu. Consequently, Turkey's foreign policy rhetoric over the past two years has hardened, triggered by uncertainties in Turkey-European Union (EU) relations, the deterioration in its relationship with Israel, and the Arab Spring events that have engulfed countries in its periphery. Since the EU plays an important role in terms of the democratic and economic transformation of Turkey, the country's accession to the EU would be important in ensuring both the continuance of its soft power strategy and its security strategy in line with Davutoğlu's 'strategic depth' doctrine.

ÖZETBu çalışma Avrupa Birliği'nin Ortak Dış ve Güvenlik Politikası çerçevesinde 1991' de Madrid'de Amerika ve Sovyetler Birliği'nin ortak çalışması sonucunda toplanan Uluslararası Konferansta ulaşılan Orta Doğu Barış Süreci içinde oynadığı rolü açıklamayı amaçlamaktadır. Madrid Konferansı, Orta Doğu'da kalıcı ve adil barışın sağlanması için temel prensip olarak Birleşmiş Milletler Güvenlik Konseyi'nin 242 ve 338 No'lu kararlarında ortaya konan "barış için toprak" ilkesini kabul ediyordu. Arap-İsrail uyuşmazlığı Orta Doğu'da istikrarsızlığın temel nedenlerinden birisi ve en önemlisidir. Avrupa kıtasında güven ve istikrarın sağlanması Orta Doğu'da güven ve istikrarın sağlanması ile direkt olarak alâkalıdır. Bundan dolayı Avrupa Birliği, barış süreci içersinde etkili bir siyasi rol üstlenmek istemektedir. Sovyetler Birliği'nin uluslararası alanda etkisizleşmesinden sonrasında özellikle Araplar, daha çok İsrail yanlısı politikalar izleyen ABD'ye karşı, onu dengelemek ve kendi politikalarına destek bulmak için Avrupa Birliği'nin barış sürecine katılmasını memnuniyetle karşıladılar. Diğer yandan, Avrupalı stratejistler, AB'nin girişimlerinin ABD'nin girişimlerine tamamlayıcı olması gerektiğini düşünüyorlardı. İsrailliler, Avrupa Birliği'nin barış süreci içersindeki rolünü siyasi olmaktan çok ekonomik olduğu görüşünü benimsiyorlardı. Çünkü, Avrupa Birliği barış sürecinin en büyük mali destekçisidir. 1996'da Avrupa Birliği barış sürecinde daha aktif siyasi bir rol almak için İspanyol diplomat Miguel Angel Moratinos'u barış sürecini izlemesi için Birliğin Özel Temsilcisi olarak atadı. Avrupa Birliği, diplomatik çıkmazların aşılmasında ve bölgede istikrarlı ve güvenli ortamı sağlayacak kalıcı ve adil bir barışın sağlanmasında önemli bir rol üstlenmiştir.Anahtar Kelimeler: Orta Doğu Barış Süreci, Avrupa Birliği, Ortak Dış ve Güvenlik Politikası, Özel Temsilci, Arap-İsrail Uyuşmazlığı, "Barış için Toprak" ilkesi.ABSTRACTThe aim of this study is to examine the role of the European Union in the Middle East Peace Process within the context of the Common Foreign and Security Policy. The Middle East Peace Process was launched in Madrid in 1991 under joint co-sponsorship of the United States of America and Union of Socialist Soviet Republics on the basis of United Nations Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338 which enshrine the principle of "land for peace". The Middle East in general and the Peace Process in specific will be a common denominator to reach a common foreign and security policy for the EU. Arab-Israeli conflict lies in the hearth of the region problems that cause instability. Security and stability in the European continent are directly linked to the security and stability in the greater Middle East region. The EU therefore wants to play a significant political role within the peace process, while it is the largest financial contributor to the peace process. After the decline of the Soviet Union, especially the Arabs welcomed to the EU's involvement to the process to counterweight the USA that pursues pro-Israeli policy. On the other hand the European strategists stress that the EU's initiatives should be complementary to the initiatives of the USA. The Israelis describes the role of the EU as economic rather than political. In 1996, the EU appointed a Special Envoy, Miguel Angel Moratinos to take active part in the process. The EU's efforts will be helpful to break diplomatic stalemate and will pave a way to the achievement of a just, lasting and comprehensive peace in the region that bring stability and create secure environment to the Europeans. Key words: Middle East Peace Process, European Union, Common Foreign and Security Policy, Special Envoy, Arab-Israeli Conflict, the principle of the "land for peace"

Italy in International Relations -- Acknowledgements -- Contents -- 1 Introduction -- 2 Italy in International Relations: European Benchmark Dates and National Critical Junctures -- 2.1 The European Understanding of the International System: A Proposed Set of Benchmark Dates -- 2.2 A Diverging Country? Italy Through European Benchmark Dates and National Critical Junctures -- 3 March 1861. The Challenging Myth of the Post-Imperial Legacy -- 3.1 The (Re)birth of Italy in a Changing Europe -- 3.2 Unified Italy: The Legacy of the Past and the Role of Foreign Policy -- 3.3 The Myth Betrayed: The Collapse of Italian Foreign Policy -- 4 September 1943. Democratic Transition and International Adjustment -- 4.1 The Tragedy of Capitulation as a Critical Juncture -- 4.2 Democratic Italy: A European Middle Power -- 4.3 Italy in the Mediterranean: A Problematic (Re-)adjustment -- 5 February 1992. Italy in a Post-Bipolar World -- 5.1 The Republican Turn in the 1990s as a Near-Miss Critical Juncture -- 5.2 The Changed Nature of the vincolo esterno -- 5.3 A Middle power in Search of Itself -- 6 Conclusion -- Glossary -- Bibliography -- Index

Bringing together leading experts in trade law and policy, this volume investigates the coherence between the European Union's trade policy and its non-trade objectives. Adopting an interdisciplinary approach, it highlights previously unaddressed dimensions of EU policy objectives and outcomes. With a range of illustrative case studies, the contributions offer in-depth analysis while making key issues and policy conclusions accessible to readers without specialist training. Pushing the frontiers of research on trade, investment, and non-trade issues, the volume advances debates concerning the reform of the international trade regime and the EU's adoption of a new trade policy. Bolstered by a diverse range of contributors and perspectives, this expansive collection recognises the achievements of the current EU trade policy, assesses its limits, and puts forth actionable recommendations for how it may be improved