Policies of the European Union

Theories of EU Policy-making and the Policy Cycle

Policy cycle
 The concept:
o a policy cycle is made up of policy stages that have an inbuilt sequential order to
them
o Policy processes can be seen as being located within ‘a set of interrelated stages
through which policy issues and deliberations flow in a more or less sequential
fashion from “inputs” (problems) to “outputs” (policies)’.
 Agenda setting
o which topics are prior
 Policy shaping
 Decision-making
 Policy implementation
 Policy evaluation
  a never-ending cycle

 Agenda-setting
1. an issue begins to attract attention on the policy agenda
2. policy makers give an issue consideration
 governmental agenda: issues being discussed without formal proposal
 decision agenda: proposals on which decisions will be taken
o Many actors in the EU capable of influencing the former
o  low politics (issues not affecting sovereignty or security)

o Proposal is created by the European Commission

o Except for CFSP/CSDP: mostly the High Representative
o Monopoly to table legislative proposals (EU Commission)
 Policy shaping
o Identification of policy goals & formulation of specific policy proposals
o It does not decide EU policy but identifies options (narrows down the number of
realistic policy alternatives)
o Commission – works on the draft of a proposal (or by MPs):
 white papers – general documents
 green papers – more specialized documents
 communications and reports
 Decision-making
o History-making decisions shape the fundamental structure of the EU, by changing
the EU treaties or by specifying fundamental long-term priorities
o Policy-setting decisions concern the choice between policy alternatives in a specific
issue area
o Policy-shaping decisions deal with the details of policies, including the formulation
of policy options and the specification of more general policies.
 o Bargaining tactics
 package deal
 coalition formation
 persuasion and the ‘management of meaning’
 challenging other member states
 issue linkage and side-payments
 splitting through the middle
o hybrid regimes v electoral autocracies
o Policy-setting decision
 Choices between alternatives on a given issue
 Does the EU strive for a reduction of greenhouse emissions or not? If
so, what percentage
 Will the EU participate in a new global navigation satellite system to
compete with the American GSP system?
 Are member states (MSs) governments allowed to give financial
support to banks that are on the brink of bankruptcy?
 major ‘what’ questions
 From a range of possible alternatives, what policy option will be pursued?
o International dynamics in EU decision-making
 Greek George Tsebelis – veto players:
 institutional veto players (institutions that need to approve proposal)
 partisan veto players (actors within those institutions that are
needed to adopt a proposal)
 Implementation
o Transposition problems commonly occur in MSs which:
 opposed or expressed strong reservation in the Council about a directive
 have existing legislation that is very different from the contents of a directive
 and have a weak legislative and/or administrative capacity
o Solution: the Commission keeps a close watch to ensure that national incorporation
does not involve the main provisions of directives being avoided or misunderstood.
 Evaluation
o Three stages of evaluation:
 during policy development (ex-ante evaluation)
 while policy is being implemented
 and after a policy programme has been completed (ex-post evaluation)

Theories about European integration and policies

1. Neofunctionalism
o rational
o spill over effects
o Ernst Haas – ‘The uniting of the Europe’ (1958)
o functional spill overs vs political spill overs
o community method – 4 characteristics:
 Commission accepted by the MSs
 collective decisions
 member states are responsive to each other
 unanimity is the rule but…
2. (Liberal) Intergovernmentalism
o starting point: CDG & the empty hair crisis
 QMV extended but unanimity prevails
 1974 European Council
 member states prevail over the Commission
 Coreper
o Stanley Hoffman
 member states are the main actors of the EC/EU/IR
 states determine the main trends in IR
o governments represent domestic interests
o states are selfish but not too selfish
 a more optimistic version of intergovernmentalism
o member states’ perspectives shapes the governments
o but they say the international relations mostly decided by the governments
3. (Rational choice) Institutionalism
o institutions and organizations have a growing importance in international relations
4. Constructivism (see notes from Theories of International Relations)
o focus on member states’ societies
o each cultures have different regulations
o e.g. the EU
5. Realism (Neorealism)
o EU countries want to boost security or influence
o together they have a bigger effect outside Europe
o inside Europe they gain something from cooperation
o US had a stabilizing effect in Europe
o this is not really fitting in the EU – but it’s a common idea
6. Comparativists
o EU is comparable to the EU states
o often criticized
7. Federalism
o R. Daniel Kelemen – institutional arrangement
1. public authority is divided between state governments and central
governments
2. each level of government has some issues on which it makes final decisions
3. a federal high court adjudicates disputes concerning federalism
 EU Cohesion Policy
Introduction
 Position of the EU Cohesion Policy in EU Budget 2021-2027
o 7-year periods
o 442.4 B of 1279.4 B of Euro

Aims of EU Cohesion Policy

 EU Commission: ‘Cohesion policy is the European Union’s strategy to promote and support
the overall harmonious development of its Member States and regions’
 ‘rich’ and ‘poor’ in the EU? (relative terms)
o richer ones: Germany, Benelux, North-Italy and Paris and its neighbourhood and
Scandinavia ofc
o ‘poor ones’: under 75% of the average EU GDP
 ‘There is nothing like a free lunch.’
 net payers
 net receivers
 Why?
 Christianity
 bc of the common market
o to develop the (market) infrastructure
 if you buy something in one of the EU MSs you contribute to other
countries’ development

What are the principles of EU Cohesion policy?

 concentration
o resources
o effort
o spending
 programming
o multi annual national programmes
o Partnership Agreement
o automatic: operational programmes (Ops)
o etc.
 partnership
o partnership principle as a crucial element of EU governance

Contemporary trends
 setting down the priorities
 new trends after 2007:
o integrated approach
o the money should not be gone to only one entity and on one project
 several projects from different angles is the most beneficial approach
o place-based approach…
 emergence of new regions in programming period 2014-2020
 old regions got in tensions with new regions
 the power of national state is questioned: Is the Westphalian state dead?
 new regions
 proposal of a budget process for the next years
 after 2008 it was needed to convince the Commission to get the money for a new regional
development
 the European Commission wants a slow cooperation not a competition between the states
 but competitive projects to develop the states
 soft space
o new regions which are not hard territories
 establishing new regions related to power distribution
 Common commercial policy of the European Union
Major changes

 Single Market: the area for trading among European countries

 GDP nominal
o given in current prices, without adjustment for inflation
o Current price estimates of GDP are obtained by expressing values of all goods and
services produced in the current reporting period.
 GDP PPP (Purchasing Power Parity)
o measures the volume of GDP of countries or regions. it is calculated by dividing GDP
by the corresponding purchasing power parity (PPP), which is an exchange rate that
removes price level differences between countries

EU Trade Agreements
 free trade agreements
o pushing the customs lower and lower
 Influence

 EU-Japan Economic Partnership Agreement

 EU-Ukraine Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area (based on the EU-Ukraine Association
Agreement)
 economic partnership agreement: Southern African Development Community (SADC –
Botswana, Eswatini, Lesotho, Namibia, South Africa and Mozambique)
 renegotiation of the Cotonou Agreement
  EU-Singapore Trade and Investment Agreements (2019)

Protests
 Berlin-anti-TTIP trade deal protest attracts hundreds of thousands

Investor-state relations
 EU-China Comprehensive Agreement of investment

WTO
 General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT)
o Preferential treatment
o National treatment
 Less tariffs
 No quantitative measures
 Rounds of negotiations

 South-Korean protests + Mexico

 Dawn of a New System
o more and more preference for regional agreements
 WTO

Criticism of free trade

 left wing criticism on free trade agreements
 right wing criticism: mercantilist/protectionist perspective
 liberal criticism: regional trade agreements destroy multilateral trade

EU and China
 ‘EU imposes import duties of up to 73.7% on cheap Chinese steel… The EU has agreed to
impose import duties of between 13.2% and 22.6% on Chinese hot-rolled steel, which is used
in pipelines and gas containers, and 65.1% and 73.7% on heavy plates, which are used in civil
engineering projects.’ The Guardian

Development
 bilateral trade agreements
 free trade area
o e.g. US-Canada (NAFTA: North Atlantic Free Trade Agreement)
o AFTA (Asian Free Trade Area)
 customs union
o unified customs at the border, no customs inside
 common market
o e.g. Single European Market
 political union
 + investors: Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs)
Trade within the EU
 EU has many treaties with different countries around the world
o Free trade areas
o Bilateral investment protection (negotiations with China)
o More complex treaties
o Special relationships: US: regulatory cooperation as well
 state aid: very limited role  states lose their right to support domestic producers

EU commercial policy
 exclusive EU competence
 unlike in foreign policy: no veto rights
 unified customs at the border, no customs inside: EU customs Union

EU commercial policy tools

 tariffs
 not the same as Common Foreign and Security Policy
 nor monetary policy
 nor economic policy
 EU: exclusive competence (mixed agreement?)
o controversies
 rationality of tariffs
 EU agriculture would collapse without protection
 the agrifood sector has 17.5 M employers / 1,1% of total
employment
o two tools:
 Countervailing measures
 restore fair competition
 used when a foreign state helps exports
 Anti-dumping measures
 when non-EU wants to sell below the normal value
 used when an extreme amount of goods arrives to EU
 EU commercial policy tools - other less important measures
o important quotas - not as common
o export measures (tariffs, quotas) – rare
o embargo + political actions

Controversies
 Rationality of tariffs
 EU agriculture would collapse without protection
 EU-China solar panel dispute
o The EU announced on Sept. 16 that it would progressively reduce the minimum
prices that Chinese solar panel makers are allowed to sell their products for in
Europe. The prices will be cut every three months, first on Oct 1 and finally on July 1
next year…. Chinese companies that sell below these set minimum prices are subject
to import duties of up to 64.9 percent.’ Reuters.uk
 The single European market
International Economic Law and Policy Blog

 WTO
 How the US structured the international market

Global Trade Magazine

Development
 Middle Ages: commercial relationships – a kind of interdependence
 20th century: after the industrial revolution:
o extended commerce among countries
o division of labour among countries
 state ‘gives’ duties to market actors
 Friedrich List: protectionism is useful (goes against mainstream economics)
o not very far from the WTO

State introduction
 Economics and commerce
o Night watchman state (laissez-faire)
o Neoliberal policies (Hayek, Friedman)
 the state must be as small as possible
o Keynes: state has an obligation to regulate markets
o Liberal model: less introduction
o Trappista cheese and Hungary:
 only cheese allowed to be sold before
o WTO: worldwide trade
 Single Market
o in theory, free market
o but with certain corrections: tax, social systems, etc.
 social state:
o fascists: more introduction
o socialist-communists: occupy the market
o social democrats: social protection
o conservatives: mostly oppose state introduction (except in Germany, e.g.)
 present disputes have historical roots

The concept of the single market

 originally: common market (Treaty of Rome, 1957)  only an aim to be reached in the far
future
 1968: free movement of goods and common duties, Single European Act (1986) and the
Treaty of Maastricht (‘92-93) 
o Developed common market into single market
o Free movement of goods, services, people and capital
o Many administrative constrains were abolished
 An extended, unified market!
Areas
 customs union: unified customs, no customs inside the EU (EEA)
 single market: four freedoms (goods, persons, services, capital)
o + many rules
 market regulations: competition law, state aid, public procurance
 defense of weaker parties: consumer law e.g. social legislation (relatively rare) safety
regulations, food law

The four freedoms

1) free movement of goods
o Art. 28-37. TFEU
2) free movement of persons
o Art. 45-55. TFEU
1) natural persons (i.e. people)
2) companies (only freedom to establish a company
3) free movement of services
o Art. 56-62 TFEU
4) free movement of capital
o Art 63-66. TFEU
1) transfer money
2) payment/usage of money

Comparative and absolute advantage

 David Ricardo: comparative advantage
 Adam Smith: absolute advantage
 country ‘A’ has advantage compared to country ‘B’ regarding x product
 country ‘A’ should produce that product
 only focuses on one product
 state should try to reach absolute advantage

Pareto-efficiency
 nations start to cooperate w each other
 if one of them get richer is allowable but if one become poorer than the original state 
inadmissible
o efficient system
 issues:
o maybe some other countries are more efficient than the single market
o no one thinks that the single market is an ideal system – sometimes not fair but still
Pareto efficient
 but it’s the most efficient according to pareto-efficiency
o on the other hand: there is a very strong dependency from other national companies
Targets of the market policy?
1. average citizen
o bc they travel  GDP
o and consume products  GDP
2. industry
o in theory, benefits are also useful to everyday people
 Who adopts rules? EU or member states  everyday citizens cannot overview the scale of
exports
 can cause tensions: made in France, Hungarian product, buy Irish cases:
o nationalism, mercantilism or exclusion?
 Hungary: privatisation: was it beneficial?

Deregulation
 the reduction or elimination of government power in a particular industry, usually enacted
to create more competition within the industry
 Single European Act (1986) – until 1992
o abolish physical barriers:
 abolish technical barriers: including health regulations which functioned as
barriers
 abolish fiscal barriers: value added tax harmonization minimum 15%
 Eastern-Europe: for a while, implementing EU law was more thorough than elsewhere – this
later changed

Competition law
 Anti-trust rules
 No state aid
 Fusion control (Mergers and acquisitions – M&A)
 Commission controls the enforcement!

Services/ establishment of companies

 2000 Lámfalussy plan:
o EU adopted a directive to regulate services (in conformity with GATS)
o European Securities Committee: monthly meetings
o Many different laws
 Against insider trading and other fraud
 Information about bonds
 Transparency of certain companies
 Stock market
 Insurance
 Certain forms of companies: Societas Europaea
 Mergers
Social aspect
 European Social Fund: „train people and help them get into work, promote social inclusion,
improve education & training improve the quality of public services” (Website of the
Commission)
 Free movement of workers – free movement of people
 Many rules on working standards
 Equality of men and women
 Anti-discrimination
 Still no redistribution!!!!!!

Free flow of goods

 no customs inside the EU, and customs at the external borders
 had to abolish (exam question!)
o  customs, duties on imports and exports and all charges having equivalent effect,
plus unified customs at the external borders (Art. 28. TFEU)
 also Norway, Switzerland, Lichtenstein + Turkey is really important
o  discriminative taxes (Art. 110. TFEU)
o  quantitative restrictions on imports and all measures having equivalent effect
(Art. 34 TFEU)
 e.g. the price of cell phones
 any kind of measure could retrain EU

Major case law

 customs union
o only from 1968
o ‘stand still clause’: 1957-1968.
 froze a certain level of customs
  Van Gen den Loos-case
o importing chemical products from Germany
o changing the tariff
o payment of extra duty was required
o went against the stand still clause
o  a very impressing turning point in EC (European Commission)

Discriminative taxes
 two aspects
o discriminating foreign good (e.g. has to pay higher tax)
o helping domestic products/companies

 Humblot case - lovely exam question!

o higher taxes for bigger cars is not allowed if it discriminates in a latent (indirect)
manner.
 Case 170/78 Commission v the UK
o ‘wine v beer’
 o cross-elasticity of demand  not the same but in a competition
o ECJ: not allowed
 Case 168/. Commission v France
o cognac v Whiskey
o ECJ: not allowed

Quantitative restrictions and measures having equivalent effect – always in test

 no quantitative restrictions are allowed
 equivalent effect: similar effect like quantitative measure
 Dassonville case and Dassonville formula:
o ‘All trading rules enacted by Member States which are capable of hindwing, directly
or indirectly, actually or potentially, intra-Community trade are to be regarded as
measures having an effect equivalent to quantitative restrictions.’
o Scottish whisky import
o may not ask for certificate from Scotland
 Cassis de Dijon (120/78)
o liqueur import from France to Germany
o 15-20% alcohol, Germany: not allowed to sell under 25%
o violation of European Economic Community (EEC) law
o  ECJ:
 mutual recognition: if a good can be marketed (i.e. sold) in a country, it can
be sold in any member state
 logic: if it is not harmful to customers in France if will not be harmful in
Germany either
 several related cases

The Keck formula: a change of interpretation

 Criminal sanctions against Bernard Kek and Daniel Mithouard
 selling under purchase price
 France: a crime

Exceptions (TFEU Art. 36)

 public morality
 public order
 public safety
 protection of human or animal health, plant protection

Exceptions - 2nd group: mandatory requirements

 All are related to the actual sale of goods
o guns from gun store
o medicine from pharmacy
o tobacco from tobacco sop
o ban of Sunday trading is allowed
o advertising domestic products: if not advertised by the state (see Buy Irish)
o Most of them have some connection with public health, safety, consumer protection
or safety of financial transactions.
 Justice and Home Affairs
What Justice and Home Affairs is
 Area of freedom, security and justice
 Justice and Home Affairs (JHA)
 Justiz und Inneres (in German)
 Justice et affaires intérieures (in French)
  everything is connecting with the free movement of people
o EU doesn’t have rules about immigration. EU has rules about refugee law.
 What’s behind the name ‘International Sales’?

Period 0. (until 1993)

 Complex area - original European Economic Community (EEC) treaty did not contain rules
about it
 Growing importance:
o free movement from third countries
o refugee law
o joint actions against cross-border criminal activity
o judicial cooperation in civil matters
o  first answers
 against terrorism: TREVI network (Terrorism, Radicalism, Extremism and
Violence Internationally)
 international treaties
 Dublin Convention (1990): refugees
 1983: transfer of convicts in Europe (to home countries)
 1968: Brussels Convention (civil and commercial matters)
 1980: Rome Convention (law applicable to contracts)

Periods 0 and I
 1985 and 90: Schengen agreement
o Denmark: opt-out rights
o Ireland and UK: only cooperation in certain fields
 later: SIS (Schengen Information System) and SISII
 SISNET: cooperation of police, judges and custom authorities
o Executive Committee: to adopt new things (cooperation)
o Schengen acquis

Period I & II (until 2009)

 Treaty of Maastricht:
o major changes: EU + three pillars
o Art. K. TEU
 refugee policies / defence of external borders
 immigration, entry, movement, family unification and work of third country
nationals, civil cooperation
 criminal law
  drugs
 international fraud
 customs union - police cooperation
 later: fundamental rights, EU citizenship
 Three pillar system
1. pillar
 EC, EURATOM
 European Coal And Steel Community
2. pillar
 Common Foreign and Security Policy
3. pillar
 Justice and home affairs
o “structure preceding the Treaty of Lisbon”

Period I (1993-1997)
 Intergovernmental decision-making
 Council of the EU
 Features call very important:
o unanimous decision-making
o legal sources were different
 as of 1993:
 common positions, joint actions, conventions
 as of 1999:
 common position, decision (less important)
o third pillar: no direct effect

Period II (1999-2009)
 Treaty of Amsterdam: communitisation
o Important features:
 3rd pillar: unanimity,
 1st pillar: qualified majority (a.k.a. “double majority”):
 55% of MSs
 65 % of EU population
 ordinary legislative procedure
 third pillar: still no direct effect
 UK, Ireland, Denmark – opt-in, opt-out protocols
o Denmark did not join the cooperation, has the right to join all laws at one
o UK + Ireland: enemy-picking
 later PM Cameron wanted to opt out of opt ins

Institutional system
 Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters (PJCC)
 Priorities:
 Organised crime
 Terrorism
 Human trafficking
  Drug and weapon trafficking
 Fraud and corruption
 Money laundering
 Counterfeit

 Europol (European Police Office)

 Eurojust +
 SIS and SISII
 VIS
 European Refugee Fund
 Eurodac
 FRONTEX

Period III. - Lisbon Treaty

 Abolished the pillar system
 Third pillar built into the first:
o direct effect
o preliminary ruling
o qualified majority
o more power to the Parliament
 Result:
o Great developments
o Many different rules on: visas, entry, civil cooperation, cooperation in criminal and
police matters
o Fundamental rights: EU Charter
o Programs: Tampere, Hague, Stockholm

 Free movement in the EU
Groups
 EU citizens (workers, later: also others)
 thirds country nationals
o short term
o long term
o students
o pensioners
 refugees
 family unification
 Illegal migration v irregular migration
o regular migration: happens by pull factors
o irregular migration: happens by push factors

The anti-Enlightenment tradition

 Enlightenment v anti-Enlightenment?
 Zeev Sternhel, Isaiah Berlin
 Western world
 also in Hungary and leswehere in Europe
 universalism is questioned
 pluralism v hierarchical social structure
 open v closed countries (Karl Popper)

Refugee law in the EU/ EU Asylum Law

The born of refugee law
 The case of St. Luis
 1951 international treaty on refugees  refugee protection
  non-refoulement: No one should be returned to a country where they would face torture,
cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment and other irreparable harm.

Geneva convention 1951 (see notes from Introduction to international law)

 To address the situation after WWII.
 basic obligations
  creation of some further amendments in EU law (special statuses were established)
o subsidiarity protection
 giving additional protection to non-refugees
o interim protection: mass influx I
Fundaments: safe third country v safe country of origin
o safe third country: a country which provides safety for the refugee during their
staying there
o safe country of origin: in which, on the basis of their laws, enforcement practices
and general political conditions, it can be safely concluded that neither political
persecution nor inhuman or degrading punishment or treatment exists
 approved by the European Council
 criminalisation – refugees staying unlawfully in the country (Art. 31 Geneva Convention)

Eu law – fragmentation
 Dublin Convention
 Dublin regulations: (Dublin 3 (Dublin 4 in the making))
 2011/95/EU: qualification directive: to qualify for refugee
 Schengen Borders Code
o for people and properties
 VIS, SIS & Eurodac
o special database for refugees
 Frontex, ships in the Mediterranean Sea
 Return directive
 Human right aspects:
o Hungary: Commission takes next step in the infringement procedure for non-
provision of food in transit zones

Dublin 3
 application will be judged in the country where they arrive at the EU
 if refugees go through other states those countries can optionally give them refugee status

Strasbourg law (CoE)

 MSS case: where can refugees be sent back
 Ilias and Ahmed v Hungary (transit zones)
 Ahmed H.: terrorist act?
 Interim measures by Strasbourg regarding the transit zones (hunger off people with diabetes
and children)
o conditions & space
 e.g. in summer: 45 degree, in winter, extremely cold
o detention
o procedural rights
o examinations of applications

Quota system
 Allocation of refugees
 Italy and Greece (+ Hungary)
 Annulment procedure (Hungary, Slovakia): dismissed by the Court
 Infringement procedures
EU-Turkey deal
 We send everybody back to Turkey
 Turkey: safe third country?
 Human marry-go-round
 Financial help for Turkey
 Lifting up visa-requirement
 A „deal” which is in conflict with EU law and international law
 Judgment of the ECJ

Latest tendencies
 Hot spots
 Decision-making in Africa
 Plans to move refugees inside Africa (from Libya Uganda)
 Special agreements (Italy, Germany)

UN pact
 Migration pact
 Refugee pact

 Complex policy-bullshit

Actions against Hungary

 Infringement procedures
 „Stop Soros” legislation (C-821/19):
o Safe third country: no examination of applications
o Attack against NGOs.
 Quota-system(C-718/17)
 Transit zones (C-808/18)
 Free movement of persons
Levels of integration and development of EU
 Preferential trading area
 Free trade area
 Custom union (1958-68) ToR
 Common market
 Internal market (1986-1992)
o Single European Act
o achieved to be more competitive
 EMU 1993-
o TEU
 Political Union 1993-
o TEU
 throughout the integration the sovereignty of member states declined, while the rights of
the EU increased
o  Political Union
 Is it achieved? Will it be ever achieved?

Internal market
 one of the greatest achievements of the European integration
 improvement of (Foreign) economic position and competitiveness, market expansion, job
creation, economic growth and innovation intensity
 trade creation and trade diversion
 implementation issues: extent of relinquishing sovereignty? development of parties?
 political cooperation  multi-step implementation

Free movement of persons: personal scope

 economically passive citizens + family
 indicate economically active citizens
o workers + family
 the concept of the worker
 def: economically active citizens who perform genuine and active activity
under the supervision of another person (+for payment)
o self-employed
  ultimate freedom of self-employment in terms of movement
 def: an effective and genuine activity but not under a supervision
 duration
o a longer period of time than the workers
 7 years?
 regularity
 periodicity or continuity of the services provided
 natural persons + family
 legal persons (companies) + subsidiary
  freedom of establishment/residence
Freedom of Establishment/Services
 e.g. if someone works for abroad they are not recognized neither workers nor self-employed
o key factor is the time
 workers, self-employed, services
 self-employed: conducting an independent activity, long-term, on a stable and continuous
basis
 Article 54 TFEU: concept of company
 head office:
o formal seat (registered office)
o the real seat (the center of the company’s economic activity)
 abuse of EU law by letter-box companies: the freedom of establishment is
limited to the actual seat

Freedom of Establishment: Justified Restrictions

 conductions related to public authorities
 Gebhard-test: the protection of the consumers
o e.g. data-protection
o e.g. regulation of gambling

2004/38/EC Citizenship Directive: Justified Restrictions

 public policy
 public safety
 public health
 2004 Big Bang
o  anxiety – old member states

TFEU Rules on the free movement of persons – citizenship rights (Articles 20-
25)
 1993 Treaty of Maastricht
 Free Movement of Workers (IV. Title, Chapter 1)
o Article 45 Prohibition of (unjustified) restrictions
o Article 46 Union Competence: Free Movement of Workers
o Article 47 Duty to Encourage the exchange of young workers
o Article 48 Union Competence: Social Security
 Freedom of Establishment (IV. Title, Chapter 2)
o Article 49 Prohibition on National Restrictions
o Article 50 Union Competence: Freedom of Establishment
o Article 51 Official Authority Exception for self-employed persons
o Article 52 Legitimate Justifications for National Restrictions
o Article 53 Union Competence: mutual recognition
o Article 54 Legal persons (Companies)
o Article 55 Establishment through Participation in a company’s Capital
 Secondary Law
o Regulation 492/2011 on Freedom of Movement for Workers within the Union
 o Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 on the Coordination of National Social Security Systems
o Directive 2004/38/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April on
the Rights of Citizens (Citizenship Directive)
o Directive 2005/36EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 Septemvber
2005 on the Mutual Recognition of Professional Qualifaticatn

Law Materials
 TFEU
 Directive 2004/38/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April on the rihts
of Citizens (Citizenship Directive)
 Regulation 492/2011 on Freedom of Movement for Workers within the Union

Free Movement of Persons: Personal Scope

 Three distinct constitutional sourced of free movement rights for persons:
1) free movement of workers
2) freedom of establishment
3) (limited) movement right to all citizen of the Union
 each of the three sources complemented by: primary and secondary law, interplay between
negative and postie integration, qualitative and quantitative approach (genuine link)
o negative integration
o positive integration
 workers
o part-time workers?
o job-seekers?
o former workers?
o involuntary unemployment?
o temporarily unable to work?
o beneficiaries beyond workers: family members
 the free movement of persons was initially confined only to workers (and self-employed
persons within the scope of the right of establishment) as economically active persons
 classic economic freedom guaranteeing the citizens
 “Freedom of movement for workers shall be secured within the Union.” (Article 45 (1) TFEU)
 The scope of term ”worker” determined by the European Court of Justice  independently
of the national law of the member states (the concept of the worker thus had to be a
European legal concept) and defined in accordance with objective criteria which distinguish
the employment … Regulation 492/2011 on Freedom of Movement for Workers within the
Union
 1986: Lawrie-Blum-case: a worker remunerated for an “effective and genuine” economic
activity for and under the direction of another person
 According to the jurisprudence of the Court, the concept of remunerated activity should be
codified as including part-time employment provided that the persons are engaged in
effective and genuine work. A good example of the expanded interpretation by the Court is
the case of German citizen Udo Steymann (ECLI:EU:C: 1998:475)
o Udo Steymann-case (ECLI:EU:C: 1998:475):
 not in payment but indirect quid pro quo for his work
  The Court also interpreted this activity as effective and genuine and the
compensation as remuneration, that is, Mr Steymann was considered
worker
 participation in a rehabilitation program, activities aimed at reintegration
into society of the host Member State can also be considered effective and
genuine work

Free movement of workers

 In determining employee status, it is irrelevant:
o the form of employment
o the nature of the relationship between the employer and the employee
o nature of economic activity
o amount of remuneration
o form of remuneration
o duration of employment

Free movement of workers: Non-Employment

 involuntary unemployed persons, former employees and job-seekers under the EU concept
of worker (quasi-workers)
 the right of residence for job-seekers in time, however, as a general rule, this cannot be less
than three months  “reasonable time”  as long as there is…

Free Movement of Persons: Beneficiaries beyond workers: family members

 the member states also granted the right to free movement to the entire range of
economically passive persons
 declare as one of the rights of EU citizens (Article 20 TFEU)

Free movement of Persons: Beyond Workers – Family Members

 Subjects of the right to free movement:
 distinction is made between the family members of EU citizens with EU citizenship and the
non-EU family members with citizenship of a third country (to whom the right is derived
through the EU citizen)
  impact on permanent residence of non-EU members

 According to the Citizenship Directive, family members mean:

o spouse
o registered partnership
 very much equivalent to marriage
o direct descendants
 children
 caretakers – workers
 inherent members of the household
o ascending line

Free movement of Workers: Material Scope

  direct discrimination
 indirect discrimination
 unjustified differential treatment
o  Court cases
 justified differential treatment
 Article 45(2) TFEU – direct and indirect discrimination on the basis of nationality is
prohibited
o indirect discrimination: Bosman-case
 not overly connected to nationality or citizenship
o Groener-case
 entitled to justify different treatment
 proportionate to the legitimate aim of the national provisions
 the right to apply for job offers that effectively and genuinely exist in the Member States,
 to enter the territory of the Member States freely for this purpose,
 to stay in the territory of the Member State for the purpose of employment and
 to remain in the territory of the host Member State after the termination of employment

Positive integration: Coordination of National Security Systems

 Article 48 TFEU: coordination (not harmonization!) of social security systems
 Different social welfare systems of the EU-27: different models of providing social
guarantees
 Member States retain the power to determine in their legislation, in compliance with EU law,
the conditions pursuant to which benefits may be granted under social security scheme
 Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 on the Coordination of National Social Security Systems
 (Title III, Chapters 1-9.) covers all the essential branches of social security:
o sickness benefits
o maternity and equivalent paternity benefits
o invalidity benefits
o old-age benefits
o survivors’ benefits in respect of accidents at work and occupational diseases
o death grants
o unemployment benefits
o pre-retirement benefits
o family benefits
 It does not however apply to social assistance
 Material scope for social benefit: subject to 4 criteria and core principles in coordination
o equal treatment
o aggregation
o no-overlap
o single-legislation and principle of territoriality
 Economic and monetary union (EMU)
EMU: the beginning
 two former tempts:
o Latin Monetary Union (LMU) (till 2007)
 cooperating partners: France, Italy, Spain
o Scandinavian Monetary Union (SMU)
 Denmark, Sweden, Finland
 they harmonised the currency but not a single monetary policy
 1957/58 – Treaty of Rome: no mention of closer financial integration of the MSs
 Bretton Woods System
o US dollar as key currency  stabilized the system
o fixed exchange rates: a currency’s value is fixed or pegged against the value of
another currency
o the collapse of the Bretton Woods System in 1971
 floating (flexible) exchange rates: a currency’s value is allowed to fluctuate in response to
foreign exchange market event
 1969: The Hague Summit Economic and Monetary Union (Pierre Werner: there is a need
for monetary system, LUX Prime Minister)
 1970: Werner Committee (Werner plan):
o Community System for the Central Banks  monetary policy
o Centre of Decision for Economic Policy  economic policy
o remained a plan as obstructed by the collapse of the Bretton Woods system
 1972: European currency alliance: monetary snake (Snake in the Tunnel)
o exchange rates against external currencies were left to market movements (floating
exchange rates)  EC currencies were initially floated in a band of +4.5 and then
+2.25 against the dollar
o 1979: developing the European Monetary System (EMS)

European Monetary System (EMS)

 1979: European Monetary System
 Exchange rate mechanism (ERM)  a system of fixed, but adjustable, exchange rates
(except for the UK that opted out)
 European Currency Unit: ECU: the floating was tied to this unit which was a currency basket
created from all the weighted average value of the currencies of the community (ECU was
not a circulating currency)
 Rules: most currencies could not fluctuate more than +/- 2.25 per cent from an agreed parity,
whereas the bandwidth for those who needed more leeway (for example, Italy) was set at
+/-6 per cent from the parity
 European Monetary Cooperation Fund (EMCF)
 The role of Central Banks increased: If a currency threatened to move outside the agreed
band, central banks intervened by buying or selling currencies in order to keep the currency
from leaving the band
  1979: European Monetary System
o Results:
 exchange rate fluctuations ceased
 anti-inflationary policy operational
 foundations of a single currency created

Delors Report and Maastricht Treaty

 Jacques Delors: President of the Commission (1985-1995)
 1986: Single European Act  facilitated the completion of the single market and sought to
relaunch EMU
 Delors-Report (1989): introducing the EMU in 3 stages:
o I. Stage (1990 – 1993):
 free movement of capital among MSs; capital market liberalization
 increasing the amount of funds aimed at eliminating inequalities between
European regions
 Maastricht Treaty (1992) – convergence criteria
o II. Stage (1994 - 1998):
 the establishment of the European Monetary Institute (EMI)
 preparation of the European System of Central Banks (ESCB)
 Stability and Growth Pact (1997) – ensuring budgetary discipline
o III. Stage (1999- present):
 establishment of the European Central Bank (ECB) - formation of monetary
policy
 the introduction of the euro as currency on January 1, 1999
 the issuance of euro banknotes and coins on January 1, 2002
 complete implementation of the currency exchange by July 1, 2002

Maastricht criteria/convergence criteria

1) Price stability
o The inflation rate cannot be higher than 1.5 percentage points above the rate of the
3 best-performing member states.
2) Sound and sustainable public finances
o Government deficit cannot be higher than 3% of GDP. Government debt cannot be
higher than 60% of GDP.
3) Exchange-rate stability
o The candidate has to participate in the exchange rate mechanism (ERM II) for at least
2 years without strong deviations from the ERM II central rate and without devaluing
its currency's bilateral central rate against the euro in the same period.
4) Long-term interest rates
o The long-term interest rate should not be higher than 2 percentage points above the
rate of the 3 best-performing member states in terms of price stability.

From treaty to reality (1992 – 2002)

 1993: ERM exchange rate bands were widened from +/- 2.25 per cent to +/- 15 per cent
 After the introduction of the euro  a new system, the ERM II, was set up to succeed the
previous ERM. It officially maintained the +/- 15 per cent bands
  1998: EUCO decided that 11 countries = EMU from 1 January 1999 – exchange rates were
fixed between the MSs
 Denmark, and the UK decided to stay out
 Greece – judged ready only in June 2000 and joined the euro area as the 12th member on 1
January 2001

Eurozone
 currently 19 members out of EU-27 (Denmark opted-out)
 currently 5 derogating MSs + ERMII: Denmark, HR, BU
 1999 Belgium, Germany, Ireland,
 Spain, France,
 Italy, Luxemburg, Holland, Austria,
 Portugal, Finland
 2001 Greece
 2002 introduction of notes and coins
 2007 Slovenia
 2008 Cyprus, Malta
 2009 Slovakia
 2011 Estonia
 2014 Latvia
 2015 Lithuania

Component parts of EMU

 Monetary Union – Eurozone
o An independent monetary policy set by the European Central Bank (ECB)
o Single currency in the euro area
o Coordination of the economic policy of the member states
o Oversight of the budget policy, primarily by keeping the public debt and deficit under
control  to secure the euro as a low-inflation currency
o Bases:
 Article 121 TFEU (economic policy coordination, general economic policy
guidelines)
 Article 125 TFEU (no-bail out clause)
 prohibits the printing press to create money to service debt
 Article 126 TFEU (binds MSs to avoid budget deficits in excess of a reference
value)
 Government deficit no more than 3% of GDP
 Government debt no more than 60% of GDP
 Stability and Growth Agreement (EC Regulations 1466-1467/1997)
 maintaining the convergence criteria is mandatory even after the
introduction of the euro

The inherent contradictions of EMU

 Economic & Monetary components
 Two views from 1970s onwards:
 o How to achieve EMU? Disagreement over economic convergence, the design and
role of common institutions, and common currency. Economists (Germany & the
Netherlands) vs monetarists (France & Belgium).
1. Economists: high degree of economic policy convergence had to precede monetary union
2. Monetarists: monetary union would bring economic convergence in its wake.
 This was not a theoretical debate: Germany (w/ its balance-of-payments surpluses) did not
want constantly to bail out countries with chronic balance of-payments deficits; France
wanted to enjoy the benefits of monetary stability at the expense of the more stringent MSs
 EMU institutional design asymmetrical – well-developed monetary union but a much less
developed economic union
a. economic
o in national competence with a cooperation mechanism
o political commitments
o "soft" targets
o "advisory conclusions" only
o lack of control
o (exception: supervision of compliance with deficiency criteria)
b. monetary
o in exclusive competence (EU19)
o institutions
o legal basis
o control
o corrective actions

EMU governance
 European Council – Eurozone Summit
o main strategic issues
 Council of the EU: Economic and Financial Affairs Council (ECOFIN)
o Coordination of the economic policy of the member states and the EU
o Decides on the excessive deficit, possible sanctions, the introduction of Euro
o co-legislator
 Eurogroup
o it prepares the ECOFIN meeting coordinating the interests of the Euro area member
states
 Member States
o Adoption of a budget (which is in line with EU regulations  convergence and
stability programs)
o Coordination of economic policy decisions (European Semester, national reform
programs, EU 2020)
 European Commission
o Examines the economic processes of the member states, whether the member
states comply with EU regulations
o Makes legislative proposals
 European Central Bank (ECB)
o Formulates monetary policy and watches over price stability
 European Parliament
 o Co-legislator with the Council

EMU reforms actions plans

 Short-term action plans
o ECB debt management steps, financial instruments and better alarm mechanism:
 macroeconomic adjustment programs, precautionary programs and loans,
recapitalization of financial institutions:
 ESM - European Stabilization Mechanism (permanent)
 EFSM - European Financial Stabilization Mechanism (emergency
funding)
 EFSF - European Financial Stability Facility (transitional 2010-2013)
 Structural reforms
o Strengthening budgetary discipline
o The widening of supervision spectrum (macroeconomic imbalances)
o Strengthening economic policy coordination: growth, job creation, competitiveness
 Europe 2020
 Euro Plus Pact

Loans to programme countries (“PIGS”)

 Portugal
 Ireland
 Greece
 Spain
 Cyprus

Reforming economic governance

 weaknesses in economic governance
o  Strengthening budgetary discipline
o  The widening of supervision spectrum
o  Strengthening economic policy coordination
  European Semester
 includes the various supervisory mechanisms in a unified framework

European Semester: a deep and genuine EMU?

 a cycle for the coordination of economic, budgetary, labor and social policies within the
Union
 allows EU countries to discuss their economic and budgetary plans and track progress
throughout the year  focuses on the first six months of each year hence the name
'semester’
 Its main purpose member states coordinate their budget and economic policies with the
goals and rules adopted at the EU level
 promoting smart, sustainable and inclusive growth: structural reforms focused on
promoting growth and employment structural reforms included in national recovery and
resilience building plans budgetary policies, ensuring the sustainability of public finances
preventing the development of excessive macroeconomic imbalances
 Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP)
European integration and foreign policy: Marshall Plan
 1947: post-war socio-economic reconstruction (20 billion USD economic relief and foreign
aid)  free market economy and regional cooperation as reconciliation
 1948: Organization for European Economic Cooperation (OEEC)  helped abolish
quantitative trade restrictions in Western Europe, allocated resources among them, and
devised a system for regular consultation on matters of common economic concern
 structural foreign policy: facilitating new structures to govern and cooperate  principle of
the ‘European ownership’  cross-sectoral cooperation paving the way to ECSC and
EURATOM negotiations
 weakening the impact of communist ideology
o Truman’s doctrine and policy of containment
 1950: Monnet plan and Schuman’s declaration: while this proposal had major economic
component, it also went to the heart of foreign policy  solidarity-building  French and
German coal and steel production under a common supranational entity  “…any war
between France and Germany becomes … materially impossible” (peace-based economic
cooperation that translates into reconciliation)

European integration and foreign policy: NATO

 1949: North Atlantic Treaty Organization  new phase of Atlantic alliance: from
demilitarization to massive militarization and from socio-economically-motivated Marshall
Plan phase into direct American military leadership in providing security guarantee for its
Western European allies (1950-53 Korean war featuring in the background)
 Transferring responsibility for security and defence of Western Europe to America
 Globalization of US military presence (US’s role in global meliorism)
 Scaffolding bipolar world order (either ally or enemy of the US  France leaves the NATO in
1966 and re-joins only in 2009)
 US structured not only the security and defence policy but also the foreign policy of
Western Europe (NATO as a patronizing system)  Western Europe to pursue its own
foreign policy interests was dramatically reduced

European integration and foreign policy: EDC and WEU

 1952: European Defence Community (EDC): a plan to increase Western European defence
efforts
o EDC with a supranational character (common institutions, common budget and
common armed forced)  concerns over the loss of national sovereignty
o French Assembly did not ratify the EDC
o After the end of the Korean War and the death of Stalin, urgency to create a
European army waned
 1954: Western European Union (WEU) created and provided the alternative for West
Germany’s military integration into NATO  with the failure of the EDC, Western Europe lost
the opportunity to use its own military capabilities and pursue their own foreign policy
choices
European Integration and foreign policy: EEC and international trade
agreements
 1957/58: European Economic Community (EEC)  custom union and external trade policy
with no foreign, security or defence policy dimensions foreseeable  trade agreements and
associations with third states
 1963: Yaoundé Treaty (predecessor to Lomé and Cotonou Agreements with ACP countries) 
towards international development policy
 1964-67: Kennedy Round of the GATT  European Commission participating on behalf six
member-states in the negotiations
 EEC: primarily economic role in cooperation but growing international presence  gradually
becoming a foreign policy actor

European integration and foreign policy: EPC

 1969 Hague Summit: accession negotiations with the UK, Ireland, Denmark and Norway
underway and bigger dynamism in European political cooperation Amidst changing
international context
 1970: Davignon Report  enhances consultations among six foreign ministers  start of the
European Political Cooperation (EPC)  coordination of foreign policies, harmonization of
views and positions in order to intensify rapprochement with potential members
 1973: Copenhagen Report  ministers of foreign affairs do not take up final positions
without prior consultations with their partners
 1986: Single European Act: EPC legally anchored and linked to some extent to EC Treaties
(internal market project increased external expectations)
 Based on intergovernmental arrangements between member states’ foreign ministers 
member states’ full control over their foreign policy
 Interministerial consultations but until late 1990s lack of common actors and outside of the
EC institutional framework
 Lack of common institutions and instruments
 Objectives:
1) influencing the external environment (Ostpolitik; negotiations with Eastern Bloc
countries through the Helsinki Process)
2) deepening European integration
3) deepening the interrelational nature of EC by supporting community method in
many more policies
4) forming normative for a common European identity (strengthening solidarity)
 An actual and comprehensive structural foreign policy as enshrined by the EPC implemented
first with (Central and Eastern European Countries) CEECs after the change of regime in the
region

European integration and foreign policy: 1993 Maastricht Treaty and CFSP
 1990s: geostrategic change and concerns: reunification of Germany, collapse of the Soviet
Union, Yugoslav wars (refugee crisis)
 Establishment of the CFSP:
1) interrelational objectives: stronger and deeper European integration in an unstable
and turbulent geopolitical environment; and greater interstate operations during the
establishing of the EMU
 2) CFSP in a separate intergovernmental second pillar organized through unanimity to
contain the EU as a foreign policy actor and ensure member states’ full control;
3) as a tool to strengthen European identity so that the EU can become a more
coherent foreign policy actor

European Integration and foreign Policy: 1993 Maastricht Treaty and CFSP
 EU’s Pillar System

 EU strategies and partnerships worldwide: beside CEECs and the Western Balkans, more
attention paid to other regions such as the Mediterranean (launch of the Euro-
Mediterranean Partnership – EMP), Transatlantic (Regional Framework Agreement with
Mercosur), Asia (the EU’s Strategy for Future EU/Russia Relations; Euro-Asian Summit), and
the African, Caribbean and Pacific Group of States (ACP countries)
 Support for structural foreign policy (a transfer of the political, societal and economic norms
that characterized the EU itself  Europeanization)

European Integration and foreign Policy: 1999 Amsterdam Treaty and ESDP
 Previously with both the EPC and CFSP: lack of common actors and common instruments
 Amsterdam:
1) creation of the function of High Representative of the CFSP  CFSP is supported by
a permanent actor who gives face to EU foreign policy (office assumed by Javier
Solana for the first time)
2) creation of “common strategies” as instrument
3) operational capability for humanitarian-, rescue tasks, and peacekeeping tasks
 Security threats at culmination since the end of the Cold War: Kosovo crisis (1998-1999),
then soon after in 2001 terrorist attacks in the US, the wars in Afghanistan (2001) and in Iraq
(2003), later terrorists attacks in Madrid (2004) and London (2005)  invigorating effect on
EU’s CFSP and especially its military dimension  efforts at tackling Europe’s military
dependence on the U.S. and rebalancing transatlantic relations
 EU to facilitate a modernized Atlantic alliance and have the capacity for autonomous action
backed up by credible military forces in order to respond to international crisis
 2002 Berlin Plus Agreement: EU to draw on some of NATO's military assets in its own
peacekeeping operations  the first ESDP missions were launched simultaneously with the
European Security Strategy in 2003
European integration and foreign policy: 2003 ESS
 ESDP (European Security and Defence Policy): action-oriented foreign policy focused on
more proactive crisis management (EU has established since then nearly 30 military aid
civilian crisis management operations and missions)
 2003 European Security Strategy (ESS) by Solana: EU’s first ever security strategy  building
security in EU’s neighbourhood by promoting multilateral cooperation and rule-based
international order (conditionality)
 Its threat-driven approach later also embraced climate change, cyber security and pandemics

European integration and foreign policy: 2004-2007 enlargement and the ENP
 2000s: apart from turbulent geostrategic change, a time of momentum with 10 accessing
countries in the EU  historical enlargement as a first successful event of structural foreign
policy of the EU (and thus the EU strengthens the security situation of the entire continent)
 2004: start of the European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP)  framework for strengthening
EU’s relations with the former Soviet republics and with countries of the Mediterranean 
instead of divisions, emphasis is on economic development and stability in EU’s
neighbourhood

European integration and foreign policy: 2009 Lisbon Treaty and the CSDP
 Lisbon Treaty: aimed at strengthening the institutional architecture of the EU, including
capacities of the CFSP
 EU’s pillar system abolished and the EU as a whole granted legal personality  the
distribution of competences in various policy areas between Member States and the Union
was reorganised into the following scheme: exclusive, shared, and supporting competences
 CFSP part of shared competences (shared competence: Union exercise of competence
shall not result in Member Stat(EEAS)es being prevented from exercising theirs in…)
 Creation of the function of High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security
Policy as also Vice-President of the European Commission (position assumed by Ashton,
Mogherini, and now Josep Borrell)
 Created European External Action Service (EEAS)
 From ESDP to CSDP (Common Security and Defence Policy)

European integration and foreign policy: milestones - summary

 Evolving from economic (trade) endeavour towards political, foreign and security policy
dimensions
 Milestones:
o Marshall Plan of 1947 and the Schuman Declaration of 1950  ECSC (1952)  EEC
(1958)
o NATO
o EDC and WEU
o EEC and the 1958 Treaty of Rome (international trade agreements)
o EPC (European Political Cooperation)
o 1993 Maastricht Treaty and CFSP (pillar system)
o 1999 Amsterdam Treaty and ESDP
 o 2004-2007 Enlargement (EU25  EU27) and the ENP (European Neighbourhood
Policy)
o 2009 Lisbon Treaty and the CSDP

The nature of EU foreign policy: multifaceted

 EU’s foreign policy developed across these various dimensions:
o CFSP (main platform for developing and implementing the political and diplomatic
dimension of the EU foreign policy  actively pursuing EU’s foreign policy interests;
contributing to mediation efforts  HR (High Representative); EEAS (European
External Action Service)  intergovernmental dynamics and shared competence
o CSDP (platform for launching civilian and military management and operation
missions)  relies on the voluntary contributions from the member states
o external action (EU’s trade policy, development cooperation policy, humanitarian aid
policy, sanctions, international agreements, association agreements)
o the external dimension of internal policies (energy, climate and environmental,
migration and asylum policies)  include policy fields and instruments with
important foreign policy dimensions

The nature of EU foreign policy: multi-method

 Multi-method (combining an intergovernmental and a Community method)
 Organized within two different treaty settings
 Treaty on European Union (TEU): objectives, provisions, principles of the EU, including
provisions for the CFSP and CSDP  intergovernmental method
 Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU): organizational, functional details
and the main provisions on the EU’s external action and the external dimension of internal
policies  organized by the Community method

The nature of EU foreign policy: multilevel

 multilevel  interaction between the national, European and international levels, with the
centre of gravity varying according to the issues at hand
 strong synergy between these levels  EU foreign policy as a complex multilevel foreign
policy  cooperation and consensus-building with multi-actors structure
 EU foreign policy also embedded in a context of global governance and in multilateral
settings such as NATO, OSCE and UN specialized organizations  multi-location foreign
policy

The nature of EU foreign policy: areas of tensions

1.) European integration and Atlantic solidarity

o The ‚Atlantic factor’

 Stemming from the pivotal role of NATO (Atlantic Alliance and the American
security guarantee as essential security conditions after WWII)
 Military dependence on the US has defined the parameters of MSs’ national
foreign policies
  MSs aligning themselves to American positions as being part of their identity
 proposals for common foreign policy in the EU member states against the
backdrop of „what do the Americans think?” test

2.) Civilian power and military power

o Core questions: the extent to which the EU should exert power or become a power at
all?
 „civilian power”: transformation of interstate relations enabling the EU to be
conceived in a positive light; the possibility of an actor being a power while
not possessing military instruments  with CEECs and the current
(pre)accession talk with countries of the Western Balkans
 The Cold-War-transition posed new challenges on the above questions 
the EU pressured to transform itself into a civilian AND military power
 Yugoslav Wars of the 1990s  CFSP complemented with a CSDP and civilian
and military management tools

3.) Intergovernmental method and community method

o Core question: whether the EU should organize foreign policy through the
intergovernmental method or the Community method?
 Foreign policy and security policy as raison d’étre of sovereign states 
reluctance of MSs to lose their grasp over this major policy field
 Inter governmentalism as a defining feature of the CFSP/CSDP 
consequence: lack of established institutional and instrumental mechanisms
and dependence on instruments on other EU policy domains to implement
CFSP decisions  foreign policy developed through external policies

4.) External objectives and internal objectives

o External and internal objectives simultaneously at play

o Internal objectives:
1. interrelational objectives aimed at managing MSs’ mutual relations
2. integration objectives aimed at affecting European progressing integration
3. identity objectives aimed at asserting the identity of the EU
 These internal dimensions and the national interests explain favouring or not
favouring strong EU foreign policy  ever-deeper forms of tensions
o Consistency and coherence challenges  in the pursuit of the EU’s objectives and
actions, what is the relationship between external dimension of EU policy and
internal EU dimension  e.g. trade policy and foreign policy: trading conducted for
economic (economic gain) or foreign policy reasons (such as protecting human rights
in trading partner’s country)?

The nature of EU foreign policy: Relational and structural foreign policy

 Relational Foreign Policy
o Seeking to influence the attitude and behaviour of other actors as well as the
relations with and between other actors  normative power, soft power
o Declaratory level: actors position themselves in relation to other actors and with
regard to specific crisis and conflicts (through unilateral declarations, interaction in
the context of bilateral and multilateral relations)
 o Operational level: positions taken are underpinned by actions and instruments
(sanctions, reward or provide support; military and civilian crisis management
operations) depending on interests and capabilities (efforts to negotiate and mediate
in order to support)
 Structural Foreign Policy
o Aiming at sustainably influencing or shaping political, legal, economic, social, security
or other structures in a given space – structural power
o Seeking to promote and support structural changes and reforms in terms of
organizing principles, institutions, norms (e.g.: democracy; rule of law; human rights;
free market economy) that shape interrelated sectors in a society
o Structures situated on various levels: individual, societal, state, inter-societal, inter-
state, inter-regional, international, transnational, global
o Objective to produce sustainable effects so these structures develop an enduring
character  material and immaterial factors  internalization (legitimacy of the
structural reform)
o Example: EU’s enlargement policy with regard to CEECs and countries of the Western
Balkan

The nature of EU foreign policy: summary of the aspects

 Multifaceted (comprising CFSP, CSDP, external action and the external dimension of internal
policies)
 Multi-method (combining an intergovernmental and a Community method)
 Multilevel (entailing the national, European and international levels)
 Areas of tensions in EU foreign policy
1) European integration and Atlantic solidarity
2) civilian power and military power
3) Intergovernmental method and community method
4) External objectives and internal objectives
5) foreign policies of the member states
o Fundamental choices made by MSs with regard to sovereignty, integration, power
and interests
 Relational and Structural Foreign Policy (complementary and mutually-dependant)

Institutional framework: European Council, European Commission & European

Parliament
 European Council
o Strategic directions and interests of the Union’s foreign policy
o Brings together the heads of state and government of the MSs, the President of the
European Commission and the High Representative (HR) takes part in its work 
external representation of the Union on issues concerning its common foreign and
security policy
o Although it does not have a formal role in the foreign policy legislative process,
provides the Union with the necessary impetus for its development and define
general political directions
 European Commission
 o Plays a crucial role in defending, promoting and representing the common interests
in the EU’s external action and in the external dimension of internal policies
o Furthering EU policy through non-binding communication, opinion and other forms
of soft law
 European Parliament
o The role of the EP in EU foreign policy is generally quite limited, the exception being
its budgetary powers and its major powers relating to the adaption of international
agreements

Institutional framework: Foreign Affairs Council

 The institution in which the sectoral ministers and High Representative/Vice President meet
 the main foreign policy decision-making body in the Union, both in political and legal
terms
 The Presidency of these Council configurations rotates between MSs on a six-month basis
 The Council: ensures that the evolution and actions for CFSP and CSDP remain under state
control and supervision  also plays an important role with regard to external action and
the external dimension of internal policies, but embedded in a broader institutional set-up
incorporating the Commission, the EP and the ECJ

Institutional framework: HR/VP and the EEAS

 Designated to bridge the Council and the Commission at the political level  EEAS
(European External Agency Service) and the EU Delegations play the same role at the
diplomatic and operational levels
 A crucial component is the EEAS with the network of EU Delegations (approximately 140
delegations) which represents the EU in third countries and at international organizations
and are under the authors of the HR/VP and act in close cooperation with MSs’ diplomatic
missions
 HR/VP with three functions:
1) as High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy responsible for
conducting the CFSP and CSDP
2) presiding over the EU’s Foreign Affairs Council
3) serving as one of the VPs of the European Commission
 Bridges two different types of interests (European and national ones) and policy-making
methods (Community and intergovernmental method)
 Tasks: decision-making, implementation, representation and consistency
 Strength: accumulation of positions to strengthen EU foreign policy as it breaks down
institutional barriers allowing for the employment of the whole range of EU instruments;
mediates between MSs
 Weakness: structural flaws as runs the risk of schizophrenia through the use of different
methods

Instruments: introduction
 Foreign-policy instruments: means used by policy-makers in their attempt to get other
international actors to do what they would not otherwise do
 3 types:
1. diplomacy (reliance on negotiation)
 2. economic (primarily aimed at affecting other actor’s production and consumption of
wealth, for example, denying or promising aid or trade boycott)
3. military (reliance on hard [violence, weapons, force] and/or soft [peacekeeping,
training sessions] statecraft)

Diplomatic instruments
 can be used unilaterally by MSs (CFSP framework)
 CFSP positions (condemnation, concern, support) carried out by the HR/VP [without an
extensive consultation with MSs] and with support from EEAS official to quickly pursue a
response to events
 Strategic partnerships  aims to deepen the partnership through more intensive dialogue,
the negation of new agreements, cooperation in many areas (many emerging or already
developed powers)

Economic instruments
1. International agreements (trade agreements, cooperation agreements, association
agreements; Generalized System of Preferences [GSP; GSP+])
2. Financial assistance to third countries (aid, grants, loans, and macroeconomic assistance to
help BoP problems)
o Economic instruments as incentives and positive measures to encourage countries to
undertake reforms or comply with EU standards, values  positive conditionality
o Agreements reduced, suspended, or terminated if the state in question violates the
conditions  negative conditionality
 Sanctions: imposed by a unanimous decision taken in the CFSP framework
 EU’s preference for smart targeted sanctions (sanctions target responsible
parties, individuals, while minimizing collateral humanitarian damage)
Military instruments
 Headline Goal 2010: EU to act more rapidly (within 10 days of a decision to launch an
operation) and increase the deployability of EU troops (transporting troops and equipments
to the site of the mission)
 Shortfalls in capabilities remain
 Military missions funded by Athena mechanism (relative to MSs’ GDP)
 Non-EU states contribution (Turkey, USA…)
 EU Enlargement & Neighborhood Policy
Introduction
 Analysing the scope and the substance of EU’s Enlargement Policy (EEP) and
Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) from a foreign policy and external governance perspective,
the following key areas can be identified:
o I.) The Western Balkans, Turkey, Ukraine, the Republic of Moldova, Georgia (EEP)
o II.) Eastern Neighbourhood (ENP)
o III.) Southern Mediterranean and the Middle East  (Extended ENP)
 „Rings of Friends”
o Widening Membership,
o Transforming Would-be Members
o Enlargement policy
1) e.g. Western-Balkan countries – candidates usually
 candidates: Moldova, Serbia, North Macedonia, Turkey, Albany
o Turkey has association agreement
 Ankara Agreement (1999)
 potential candidates
o European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP)
1) e.g. Azerbaijan, Georgia, Armenia
2) provides an alternative relation but no accession
o Extended neighbourhood policy
1) North African countries
2) Middle East – Mediterranean Partnership
 Israel
 Palestine
 On June 23, 2022, Ukraine and the Republic of Moldova have been granted candidacy status.

Steps towards joining

  On July 2022, EU opens accession negotiations with Albania and North Macedonia

Accession negotiations (Serbia)

 Negotiations organized the 35 chapters into 6 thematic Clusters
 Fundamentals is focused mainly on respecting EU fundamental rights, and on reforming the
independent institutions. It will be opened first and closed last.
Pre-accession alignment: frameworks
 (Preferential) Partnership and Cooperation Agreements (PCAs)
o Initially PCAs offered to Eastern Partnership (EaP) countries and successor states of
the Soviet Union (include measures for cooperation on economic and commercial
matters as well as for liberalizing trade  prospect for a future FTA
o Since 2009, the cornerstone of EaP has been AAs and DCFTAs
 Association Agreements (AAs)
o Not limited to countries aspiring to membership but those who does this is a
necessary step on the path to membership set up a closer relationship with a third
country providing cooperation in a wide variety of sectors (e.g.: extend the custom
union [as with Turkey]; or internal market [as in the European Economic Area (EEA)
with Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway)
o Form of privileged partnership but content of agreements also differs between
partners
 Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Areas (DCFTAs)
o free trade areas established between the EU, and Georgia, Moldova, and Ukraine
respectively  the DCFTAs are part of each country's EU Association Agreement
o access to the European Single Market in selected sectors and grant EU investors in
those sectors the same regulatory environment
o opening of markets via the progressive removal of customs tariffs and quotas, and by
an extensive harmonisation of laws, norms and regulations in various trade-related
sectors
 Europe agreements (EAs)
o The main template for association agreements with CEECs in the early 1990s
o Could support economic reform through the Phare, ISPA, SAPARD programmes
  The EU offered to open its market to industrial products faster than the CEECs, but special
protocols covering sensitive sectors (e.g. agriculture, textile) offered slower and more limited
liberalization  to limit competition
 Stabilization and Association Agreements (SAAs)
o First the Stabilisation and Association Process (SAP) sets out common political and
economic goals although progress evaluation based on countries' own merits
o The SAP was launched in June 1999 and strengthened at the Thessaloniki Summit in
June 2003
o Western Balkan countries (WBs) are involved in a progressive partnership with a
view of stabilising the region and establishing a free-trade area  SAA is the
contractual relationship
o SAAs: the agreements are adapted to the specific situation of each partner country
and, while establishing a free trade area between the EU and the country concerned,
they also identify common political and economic objectives and encourage
regional co-operation  the agreement serves as the basis for the implementation
of the accession process
o SAAs modelled on the EAs (Europe Agreements)

The Western Balkans

 With the 1990s’ Yugoslav Wars, the WBs as the site of European foreign policy’s failure
 Since the early 2000s – and particularly after the 2004 big bang enlargement – the WBs as
the site of the EU’s most comprehensive foreign policy  the region as a testing ground of
EU as a normative and structural power
 After the 1990s’ wars, continued military presence through CSDP missions would not alone
achieve sustainable peace  fundamental transformation of the region was needed  it is
through thus transformation process that the EU’s role has been key
 1999: launch of the Stabilization and Association Process (SAP)  Stabilization and
Association Agreement (SAA) and the Instrument for Pre-Accession (IPA) [funds by which
the EU supports reforms in the “enlargement countries” with financial and technical help]
 In the case of the WBs, beyond the Copenhagen criteria (democracy, rule of law, human
rights and marker economy reforms) added further conditions related to the WBs’ specific
post-war situation and the need to overcome regional tensions
 These further conditions include:
1) commitment to good neighbourly relations and a readiness to engage in cross-
border cooperation with neighbouring countries
2) compliance with the obligations under the various peace agreements and with the
ICTY (International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia) in the Hague
3) commitments on protecting minorities and on facilitating the return of forcibly
displaced people (FDPs) and internationally displaced people (IDPs) (e.g.: Sejdić and
Finci contra Bosnia and Herzegovina in 2009 at the European Court of Human Rights)
 „Conditionality dilemmas”: a country’s compliance pattern often differs according to the
issue  this required the EU to reward states in some fields, whereas non-compliance in
other fields led to the need for carrots and sticks
The Western Balkans: Europeanization
 Radaelli (2003): „Europeanization refers to processes of (a) construction (b) diffusion and (c)
institutionalization of formal and informal rules, procedures, policy paradigms, styles, ‘ways
of doing things’ and shared beliefs and norms which are first defined and consolidated in
the making of EU public policy and politics and then incorporated in the logic of domestic
discourse, identities, political structures and public policies” (p.108)
 Copenhagen criteria has proved to be the most effective way for candidates to "bring" their
political system, economies, legal systems, institutions and norms closer to the European
Union, i.e. to „europeanize”

The Western Balkans

 EU’s enlargement policy and state-building agenda face several contradictions:
o between the EU’s technocratic approach and the politics of state-building
o between the external promotion of the EU demands and local ownership
o between state-building and peacebuilding
o between the EU’s focus on institution-building and the local demand for economy-
building
 (Former) disagreement among EU MSs about North-Macedonia (country’s name, language)
and Kosovo (formal status)
 Different pace of compliance with the EU’s conditions explain different status of the various
countries in their relationship to the EU
 Candidates: Albania, the Republic of North Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia and Turkey
 Potential Candidates: BiH and Kosovo
Turkey
 1963: Ankara Agreement  1987: formally applied for membership  2004: the EU finally
decided to begin the Turkish accession process  opening membership negotiations in 2005
 Since 2005?  the support of EU MSs for Turkish membership has waned, and Turkey had
gradually redefined its position and identity as a regional power in the wider Middle East and
Mediterranean rather than a future EU MS  the process of Europeanization proved to have
its limits in a context of an open-ended membership prospect  „privileged partnership”
rather than accession
 EU failed to use accession to solve one of the major problems in EU-Turkey relations: the
conflict over Cyprus

European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP)

 Launched in 2004 and revamped in 2011-2012  EU shall develop a special relationship with
neighbouring countries, aiming to establish an area of prosperity and good neighbourliness,
founded on the values of the Union and characterized by close and peaceful relations based
on cooperation
 Parallel to its CEE enlargement, the EU launched the ENP to strengthen stability and avoid
new dividing lines emerging between the enlarged EU and its neighbours
 Being unable or unwilling to offer the incentive of accession, the ENP offered the neighbours
a deepening of the political, economic, social, cultural and security relations
 The ENP approach is founded on the principles of partnership, common interests, joint
ownership and differentiation
  ENP not only supports structural changes on declaratory level but it also made this policy
operational through a comprehensive set of implementation mechanism, underpinned by
budgetary means  bilateral relations and agreements (AAs – association agreements, PCAs
- Partnership and Cooperation Agreements), additional frameworks (such as the Eastern
Partnership and the Union for the Mediterranean), and the European Neighbourhood
Instrument (ENI)  allowing for a more tailor-made approach for each country
 On the whole, the ENP has not induced the expected structural reforms  promoting
prosperity, security and stability (Arab Spring)? Limiting the feelings of exclusion? A failure to
improve access to the EU market for the products and the people?
 ENP as a way to avoid further enlargement
 In terms of methodology the ENP largely relies on the accession approach:
o conditionality
o Commission-led bureaucratic implementation
o monitoring process
 Advantages offered by the EU generally seen as too little or too ambiguous
 ENP was out of touch with some societal dynamics, including the quest for freedom  ENP
had to deal with the perception that structural changes took place despite rather than
thanks to the ENP
 2011: „new approach” for ENP  the goal to support deep democracy and sustainable
economic and social development and to create Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Areas
(DCFTAs), and to develop partnerships not only with governments but also with civil society
 EU’s new approach principles: „more for more”; „market, mobility and money” „greater
differentiation”

Eastern Neighbourhood
 EU’s enlargement to incorporate the CEECs affected the EU’s relations with countries in the
post-Soviet space  enlargement brought distant conflicts and authoritarian regimes closer
to home and prompted new diving lines and areas of tension  EU and Russia became
competitors, leading to a clash of integration process
o EU’s main emphasis is developing contractual relations as a basis for structural
foreign policy which has been limited by Russia’s influence and global strategic
importance
 Main tools of EU cooperation:
o PCAs, AAs, and DCFTAs (Partnership and Cooperation Agreements, Association
Agreements and Comprehensive Free Trade Areas)
o ENP Action Plans
o ENI (European Neighbourhood Instrument)  consolidation in the direction of
democracy, rule of law and good governance, and market economy principles
 Mixed results of the ENP in the Eastern Neighbourhood:
o In the wake of the democratic revolution in 2003-4 Ukraine and Georgia in particular
saw EU membership as a strategic priority and the ENP as a tool to achieve this goal
 majority of the EU MSs (despite the support of Poland and the Baltic states)
considered the membership politically and economically out of question
o 2009: launch of the Eastern Partnership (EaP) to upgrade political and economic
relations with the Eastern neighbours and accelerated by the 2008 Russian-Georgian
war and Russian-Ukrainian gas crisis in 2009  EU realized that stability in the
Eastern neighbourhood is just as important as in the Western Balkans (WB)
Southern Mediterranean and the Middle East (MEDA Region)
 2005: ENP complemented the Euro-Mediterranean Partnership (EMP)  Barcelona Process:
first major initiative to promote structural changes in the region and to link the EU and the
Mediterranean countries (14 countries from the Maghreb and the Middle East, including
Israel and Palestine)
o Building dialogue and cooperation in 3 dimensions:
1) political and security partnership
2) economic and financial partnership
3) partnership in social, cultural and human affairs
 With the 1993 Oslo Accords, the EU also conducted structural policy towards the Palestine
Territories; support of the „two-state solution”; EU was involved in state-building in view of
the fragility of the Israeli-Palestinian peace process
 2008: launching of the Union for the Mediterranean (UfM) to enhance AAs with most
countries
 2011: the Arab uprising confronted the EU with the limitations of its longstanding structural
foreign policy
o ENP wanted to apply with the partner countries in the region objectives and
methodology that had proved successful with the Central and Eastern European
countries, through without the prospect of accession
o building stronger ties with civil society, yet lack of understanding of the many
traditional forms of CSOs in the regions that does not fit the Western criteria of civil
society
o aimed at promoting the EU’s values but in fact buttressed the authoritarian regimes
in the region
o the economic liberalization process was to improve economic situation, but the
socioeconomic situation of the weaker strata of society deteriorated
 EU international development and humanitarian aid policy
 ECP countries
o the European Canadian and Pacific countries/partnership

Introduction
 Official Development Assistance (ODA)
o global sustainable development objectives
o 57% is provided by the EU itself
o big donor
  strong norm-setting role
 two main components  shared competences
o Member States’ bilateral development policies
o EU’s development policy
 development aid to developing countries in need (from the European
Development Fund (EDF))
 the EU international development in humanitarian aid policy should be a complementary-
type policy
 New European Consensus on Development (2017) has strengthened the EU’s coordinating
role  incapable of sanctioning

History of EU-ACP (African, Caribbean, and Pacific countries) cooperation

• 1957: Rome Treaties provisions on overseas countries and territories
1. The Yaoundé. Conventions (1964-1975)
 practical
2. The Lomé Conventions (1975-2000)
 every five…
3. The Cotonou Agreement (2000-2020)
 unified
 label rights protection
 human rights protection
 prohibition of nuclear arms
 etc.
4. Post-Cotonou??
 getting vetoed from Hungary

Historical overview
 dissemination of human rights, democracy and market economy principles
 Millennium Development Goals
o Sustainable Development Goals (from UN)
o no poverty
o zero hunger - food security
o safety
o supply
  Treaty of Maastricht (1992/1993):
o the principle of 3C:
 coordination
 coherence
 complimentary
 +1 consistency (Amsterdam)
 trade through development
 8 for trade initiative
 a lot of criticism on trade policy
 e.g. Dambisa Moyo - Dead Aid: Why Aid Is Not Working and How There Is a Better
Way for Africa (2009)
 more ownership
 dependency on aid  more dependency

Humanitarian Aid
 humanitarian principles:
o humanity
o impartiality
o neutrality
o interdependence
o very often shadowed by solidarity