ASEAN

and
European Union
Anaviso, Nina
Buenaflor, Bronz
Enriquez, Thea
Fadrique, Jhemina
 Objectives

To deepen knowledge on the European Union

(EU) and the Association of Southeast
Asian Nations (ASEAN) as international
organizations.

To grasp and analyze the article reviews

designated for both EU and ASEAN.

To examine the case studies on the EU and

ASEAN.
 EUROPEAN
UNION
Reporters:
Niña Anaviso
Thea Enriquez
 II. Obligations

The EU operates comprehensive approval

procedures that ensure new members are admitted
only when they can demonstrate they will be able to
play their part fully as members, namely by:

● complying with all the EU’s standards and rules

● having the consent of the EU institutions and
EU member states
● having the consent of their citizens – as
expressed through approval in their national
parliaments or by referendum.
 II. Obligations

Copenhagen criteria:

● stable institutions guaranteeing

democracy, the rule of law, human
rights and respect for and protection
of minorities;
● a functioning market economy and
the capacity to cope with competition
and market forces in the EU;
● the ability to take on and implement
effectively the obligations of
membership, including adherence to
the aims of political, economic and
monetary union.
III. Compliance

● Following a request made in 1984 by the

European Parliament, the European
Commission presents every year a report
on the monitoring of application of EU
law during the preceding year. The
European Parliament then adopts a
resolution on the Commission’s report.
 IV. Enforcement

● The Commission has law enforcement powers. It can take a

member country to the EU court for breaching EU law. The
Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) interprets EU
law to make sure it is applied in the same way in all EU
countries and settles legal disputes between national
governments and EU institutions.

● The Commission also enforces EU rules that restrict member

countries from giving subsidies to businesses which could
distort competition (‘state aid’ rules).
 V. Case Study

A Case Study on Brexit

● Introduction

The purpose of conducting this study is to

analyze and better understand the cause
and effect of Brexit. It is essential to study
Brexit as it will affect the EU and the whole
world.
 Background Information

● June 2016 referendum

● Result of 52 percent voted to leave with only 48 percent

voting to stay.

● The UK legally withdrew its membership from the EU

on January 31, 2020.

● The idea of Brexit started way back in 1957 when it first

joined the European Economic Community.
 Identification of problems

● A hard Brexit is considered as a withdrawal from the EU with some

trade talks from both sides.

● The problem with a hard Brexit is that the UK will consume much
time to get used to their new freedom, and they will be under the
rules of the World Trade Organization.
Identification of problems

● According to economists, a soft Brexit is

the least dangerous path that the UK can
take because they can stay in a close
relationship with the EU.

● The problem with a soft Brexit is that the

UK will be forced to sustain people's free
movement rule by the EU to access the
single market.
 Identification of problems

● The refugee crisis is also an important topic discussed in this study, as

it will affect millions of refugees.

● The UK is one of the largest destinations for refugees, and it has a

large amount of immigration compared to its emigration.

● Xenophobia and Euroscepticism, which has existed since the start of

the UK's relationship with the EU, plays a significant role in the rise of
the refugee crisis.
Solutions

● There are two paths that the UK can take to

solve the problems caused by Brexit. The first
one is a soft Brexit, and the second is a hard
Brexit.

● The UK can also satisfy the citizens who see

immigrants' influx as a problem by closing or
tightening their borders.
 Recommendations

The UK should rebuild its economy and explore

trade deals with other countries outside of
the EU.

The UK can take control of all its money used for

the EU membership on pressing domestic
issues.
 VI. Conclusion

The European Union mainly focuses on promoting peace, values and the
prioritizes the well-being of its citizens and as well as offering freedom,
security and justice without internal borders. It also strives to manage
out a sustainable development based on balanced economic growth and
price stability, a highly competitive market economy with full
employment and social progress, and environmental protection.
Article Review

● The EU’s Future: The

Federalism/Intergovernmentalism Debate

● Ash, Thomas (n.d). The EU’s Future: The

Federalism/Intergovernmentalism Debate.
http://www.bigissueground.com/politics/as
h­eufuture.shtml
Article Review

● The EU’s Future: The

Federalism/Intergovernmentalism Debate

● Ash, Thomas (n.d). The EU’s Future: The

Federalism/Intergovernmentalism Debate.
http://www.bigissueground.com/politics/ash­
eufuture.shtml
 Introduction

● The author opens the article by mentioning that the European Union is the most significant
project in post-1945 Europe, and the most advanced example of institutional cooperation
between countries in the world as of the time the article was produced.

● It is only natural that such a fast-growing international organization would be facing

dilemmas. The article focuses on the European Union’s identity struggle due to a specific
internal debate of Federalism versus Intergovernmentalism.
 Context of the Debate: Federalism vs.
Intergovernmentalism

● A number of the European Union’s founding fathers (the French statesman: Jean Monnet,
foreign minister: Robert Schumann, and many in the 1950s government of the 6 founding
countries: France, Germany, Italy, Belgium, Holland, and Luxembourg) shared a ‘federalist’
vision for Europe.

● However, many disagree with such a vision of the EU. They are skeptical about the EU
becoming too supranational an organization, often because they see this as an intrusion on
nation-states’ rights and are concerned that it is not democratic enough.
 Main Arguments

● Federalists’ Vision

-Decisions and negotiations will not be between governments but in the EU’s central institutions.

-The Federalists argue that the Commission should serve as the executive, as it has the
community’s broader interests at heart.

-Some suggest more radical democratization, with a directly elected President who might be able
to choose his Commission.

-Some suggest a second chamber representing member states and their regions to take its place.
 Main Arguments

● Intergovernmentalists’ Vision

-Control over joint projects should be firmly in national governments’ hands.

-Their vision would keep a reformed Council of Ministers and the European Council as the most
powerful bodies, with ministers agreeing on matters in their responsibility and heads of the
government deciding the most difficult questions and steering the EU. The Commission and
Parliament would take a less prominent role.
 Projected Developments by the Author

● He mentions that enlargement is a key factor in the EU’s development. He sees around 10
post-Communist countries, including Cyprus and Malta, that will join the EU in 2004-¬2008.

● He brings to the table the 2004 Intergovernmental Conference that will likely produce a
constitutional document.

● Impact of Globalization
 The European Union at Present
(Relating Salient Points and Issues)

● Present articles recognized that the European Union developed both components of
Federalism and Intergovernmentalism into its governance.

● Instead of removing or lessening the powers of any institution to favor one side, the
preferred institutions of each side were improved to serve.
 The European Union at Present
(Relating Salient Points and Issues)

● According to Sedef Topal, the present dispute now lies in if the EU will become a political unity in
the future. The present form of EU is between the lines of Federalism and Intergovernmentalism.

● Above all internal disputes in the EU form, the institutions must focus on cooperating instead.

● Multiannual financial frameworks

● Europe’s Green Deal

 The European Union at Present
(Relating Salient Points and Issues)

● The reviewed article also presented the European Union’s projected outcomes after the EU’s 2004
enlargement and the 2004 Intergovernmental Conference.
 ASEAN
Reporters:
Bronz Buenaflor
Jhemina Fadrique
 I. Key Facts

● Founded on August 8, 1967, in

Bangkok, Thailand.
● It is placed third in the World's
largest Market after China and India.
● ASEAN's labor force is 9% of the
World's population, making it the
third-largest labor force.
● Fastest GDP growth per capita since
1970 and projected to continue until
2030.
● ASEAN's gross exports are
anticipated to reach 1 Trillion USD in
2020.
Headquarters Members
● Jakarta (Indonesia)
• Brunei (January 7, 1984)
• Cambodia (April 30, 1999)
• Indonesia (August 8, 1967)
• Laos (July 23, 1997)
• Malaysia (August 8, 1967)
• Myanmar (July 23, 1997)
• Philippines (August 8, 1967)
• Singapore (August 8, 1967)
• Thailand (August 8, 1967)
• Vietnam (July 28, 1995)
 Website Mandate
● asean.org • Find innovative ways to increase its security and establish
modalities for the ASEAN Security Community, including in
the area of post-conflicting peacebuilding (ASEAN, 2013).
• ASEAN gives a role in post-conflict building article, which
mandates the organization to respond effectively, in
accordance with the principle of collective security, to all
form of threats, international crimes and transboundary
challenges.
• ASEAN also mandates the pursuit of measures that promote
humanitarian relief activities, such as cooperation with the
U.N. and developing the capacities of people in affected areas.
 Key Structure

● ASEAN Summit
● Organizational Structure
● ASEAN Coordinating Council
● ASEAN Community Councils (comprised of 3
pillars)
● ASEAN Sectoral Ministerial Bodies
● Committee of Permanent Representatives
● National Secretariats
● ASEAN Committees in Third Countries and
International Organizations (ACTCs)
Key Obligations

● Equal Rights and Obligations are the most

essential obligations that ASEAN member
states receive.
● Proper domestic legislation is highly required
among ASEAN member states to establish
order.
● Compliance with all membership
responsibilities is strictly implemented to
avoid punishment and conflict among the
ASEAN member states.
 Enforcements

● Different Enforcement Regimes

● Investigation Powers
● Safeguards
● Commitments
● Interim Measures
● Sanctions
● Calculation of fines
● Leniency
● Settlement
● Private Enforcement and Action
for Damages
 Key Clauses

Chapter I Purposes and Principles

Chapter II Legal Personality
Chapter III Membership
Chapter IV Organs
Chapter V Entities Associated with ASEAN
Chapter VI Immunities and Privileges
Chapter VII Decision Making
Chapter VIII Settlement of Disputes
Chapter IX Budget and Finance
Chapter X Administration and Procedure
Chapter XI Identity and Symbols
Chapter XII External Relations
Chapter XIII General and Final Provisions
 II. Obligations

The Member States will have equal Rights and

Obligations.

Member States are required to take all

essential measures.

Non-compliance or a breach of the charter

will be handled properly.
 III. Compliance

● ASEAN's Secretary-General, assisted by the

secretariat or any assigned ASEAN body, is in
charge of monitoring the compliance with the
findings, recommendations, or decisions because
of an ASEAN dispute settlement mechanism and
submitting a report to the ASEAN summit.
● Member-states affected by non-compliance
regarding the findings, recommendations, or
decisions because of an ASEAN dispute settlement
mechanism must raise the problem to the ASEAN
summit to get a verdict.
 IV. Enforcement

● Different Enforcement Regimes

- ASEAN Member States (AMS) is required to have
basic human, financial, legal and other assets to
provide for the competition regulatory body.
● Investigation Powers
- Power to order the production of any necessary
document and information for investigation.
● Safeguards
- Granting judicial redress to people under
investigation.
 ● Commitments
- In cases where the proceedings might lead to an agreement,
conduct or merger being prohibited, undertakings may offer
(behavioral or structural) commitments to encounter the
regulatory body's concerns to avoid penalty.
● Interim Measures
- Power to create a law enforcement body with authority to
implement interim measures or injunctions for urgent
situations.
● Sanctions
- AMS's can use different types of sanctions (punitive and non-
punitive coercive measures, criminal, civil, or administrative)
 ● Calculation of fines
- The power to decide or calculate the fines to be
imposed based on factors such as (The gravity and
duration of the infringement, aggravating circumstances,
mitigating factors).
● Leniency
- Leniency program for undertakings that participated in
infringements like drug cartels but want to come clean
and provide information against the cartel.
● Settlement
- Settlement between parties under investigation and the
competition regulatory body for their removal of their
involvement in the investigation.
 ● Private Enforcement and
Action for Damages
- Applicants can bring a law suit to
the appropriate judicial authorities
for compensation on the damages
they suffered from infringements.
V. Case Study
 VI. Conclusion

The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) provides a stable

international regime through their competition regulatory body. ASEAN implements
equal rights and obligation to all of their member states. ASEAN member states create
a stable regime by providing basic human, financial, and legal resources for their
members. Strict rules are implemented to discourage infringement and leniency is
given to encourage change for offenders of the law. Strict compliance of the law is
highly required to establish peace and order among ASEAN's member states. A stable
international regime can then be acquired with the work done by the competition
regulatory body.
 Article Review

Schneider, Christina J. 2011. Weak States and

Institutionalized Bargaining Power in International
Organizations. International Studies Quarterly 55
(2):331-55.
 Introduction

● According to Historical Records, the policies of International Organizations are controlled by

the Dominant Member States.
● Institutional bargaining creates an environment for weak member states to have political
influence that is usually beyond their capabilities.
● Enlargement and reforms of International Organizations require unanimous approval from
its member states.
Weak States and Bargaining in International Organization

● International Organization bargaining's outcome varies depending on its phase.

● There are two phases of bargaining.
1. Routine bargaining
2. Extraordinary bargaining
 Phases of Routine Operation (routine bargaining)

● States join International Organizations because of the benefits that come from its policies.
● Problems arise because of distributional conflicts that emerge from the member state's
disagreements.
● International Organizations mitigate problems by using formal rules like the MFN principle
and Anti-dumping rules.
The Case of Enlargement (extraordinary bargaining)

● When International Organizations undergo enlargement extraordinary bargaining cases

emerge.
● Enlargement requires all member states to have a unanimous approval for it to commence.
● Unanimity rule - makes sure that states will not suffer or become worse after the
enlargement.
● The downside of Enlargement is that it gives weak states more competition and they don’t
have enough power to compete with them.
 Enlargements and EU Budget Negotiation

● The EU provides a nearly ideal cases for empirical tests to eliminate the need to rely on
proxies or indirect measures like policies or economic outcomes.
● The data consists of 25 EU members states which includes 4 enlargement rounds: 1981
(Greece), 1986 (Spain and Portugal), 1995 (Austria, Finland, and Sweden), and 2004 (Czech
Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Slovakia, Slovenia, Malta, and Cyprus).
● In dependent variable, the EU’s member budget receipts as percentage of the overall EU budget
appropriations for that year as my first dependent variable, “Total Budget Shares”.
● In independent variable, the weak states can use accession negotiations to increase their
bargaining leverage within the EU Council if (and only if) they expect that enlargement will lead to
economic hardship.
 Estimation Procedure

● Apply panel-corrected standard errors to correct for the heteroscedasticity of the error
terms across EU member states (Beck and Katz, 1995).
● The size of the coefficients in a LDV model cannot be interpreted directly because the
coefficient of the LDV includes the first lags of all the coefficients of the other independent
variables (which are correlated with the variables on the right hand side of the equation).
 Empirical Results

● Table 2 presents the main results.12 all models fit the data very well. The results of the Wald
test indicate that the variables together exert a significant effect on EU budget shares.
● The Budget Shares model explains almost 87%, and the Net Receipts model explains about
69% of the variation in the data.
 Phases of Routine Bargaining

● Turning now to the statistical significance of the estimated coefficients, I find strong support
for the existence of different bargaining environments in the EU.
● I test for both possibilities by (i) conditioning the effect of income on whether the country is
a cohesion country and by (ii) conditioning the effect of cohesion countries on their
population size (estimation results in the appendix).
 Phases of Extraordinary Bargaining

● A 0.5% increase in budget shares should substantially be more important for cohesion
countries than non-cohesion countries.
● Economic and political power is very important in explaining bargaining outcomes in routine
negotiations, politically weak countries can increase their shares during 24times of
expansion.
 Enlargement of Credibility of Threats
● Recall that weak member states can only increase their shares during phases of enlargement
if (i) enlargement is decided unanimously, (ii) the current member’s threat to delay
enlargement is credible, and (iii) the international organization’s promise to solve conflicts is
credible.
● This indicates that any concession is renegotiable once the weak states revert to their
subordinate political status. The gains obtained in the extraordinary phase dissipate over the
years.
● Even though weak states seem to acquire more power during phases of enlargement, their
actual power remains quite limited.
 Conclusion

The outcomes of distributional negotiations depend on the specific bargaining

environment.
Although international organizations are supposed to favor countries in need,
politically or economically powerful member states can influence the
bargaining outcomes to their advantage.
The result of the study has focused on Enlargement as an instance of an
Extraordinary bargaining environment.
Accounting for different bargaining environments in the study of international
organizations can help scholars answer questions about international
cooperation more generally.
 Connection of the article's points with ASEAN

● Enlargement is one of the essential strategy used by ASEAN to stay relevant Internationally
and garner local cooperation.
● Enlargement is also one of the most controversial problem that ASEAN is facing.
● As stated in the article, strong member states will always dominate and fight for more
benefits at the cost of weaker states.
● Cooperation is a crucial element for ASEAN to survive and it is in danger because of
Enlargement's problem.
Insights as to how these points shed light on the issues ASEAN is facing

● The points stated in the article highlights the problems that Enlargement brings to ASEAN.
● The dangers of accommodating new members and how they will affect the old and weaker
member states is a problem that Enlargement brings.
● Highlighting the problem that Enlargement brings to weak member states allow ASEAN's
council to review their actions.
● Reviewing Enlargement's problems will benefit all of ASEAN's member states.