欧债危机与当前欧洲一体化面临的困境

欧债危机暴露了欧盟经济治理体系的内在缺陷,使得欧洲一体化建设面临严峻的挑战。伴随欧债危机的社会经济动荡和欧盟内部纷争将是近期欧洲政治生态的主色调。同时,欧债危机也促使欧盟内部、特别是欧元区必须加快财政经济政策一体化的步伐。完善和强化经济治理体系,意味着欧盟需要进行必要的条约修改,展现更强有力的政治意志,并需要推动政治联盟建设的配套措施。因此,欧债危机也可能成为深化欧洲一体化建设的催化剂和契机。     

Japan and the European Union: shared foreign policy interests

Background  Japan and the European Union (Reiterer (2004b) 2:33–42) are both interested in enhancing their international standing in order to overcome their perceived status as economic giants but political dwarfs. While the reasons for this endeavour as well as the inherent characteristics of the actors involved—a traditional nation state as compared to the most advanced integration structure world-wide—are quite different, both entities see themselves primarily as civilian powers (Whitman (2006) 11(1):1–15) without neglecting the need to endow themselves with a military capacity in order to be more effective and credible on a world-wide scale. The ‘EU is emerging as a key regional actor in certain global affairs, particularly in such areas as finance, trade, environment and development, and current policy is directed towards enhancing the role of the European Union in the global governance system. To this end, the European Commission is actively engaged in such issues as the global governance of trade, the protection of human rights, the promotion of democracy, strengthening of regional and global security communities, and encouraging regional integration in other parts of the world.’ (Farrel (2005) 10(4):452–453)—all areas, except the latter task, where the EU and Japan could potentially cooperate closely.Objectives  Before identifying shared foreign policy interests between the EU and Japan, I will first bring to light some of the interests the EU has in East Asia in general; secondly I will chart the major Japanese foreign policy interests which will allow me to map out areas of potential common interest and concern.Adjunct Professor for International Politics, University of Innsbruck; Minister and Deputy Head of the Delegation of the European Commission to Japan; the author expresses his own views which should not be attributed to the European Commission. The author whishes to recognize the research assistance of Ms. Sachi Claringbould.

---

The Crystal Curtain: A Postscript on Europe’s North-South Divide

The European Union’s sovereign debt and banking crisis has made apparent a gnawing gap between the northern and southern parts of Europe. Over the course of this past half decade, this divide has been brought into the public debate through a myriad of perspectives, from social trust to competitiveness. Yet, the governance sources of the divide are underestimated in policy practices and misrepresented in the political discourse. A governance approach can help clarify why the pursuit of convergence underpinning EU crisis-resolution mechanisms has become a contributing factor, rather than a prospective solution to the North-South gap. In doing so, governance also forms the basis for recommendations to policymakers in both halves of the continent, especially when confronted with the challenge of populist Euroscepticism.     

Transformation of the roles of social partners through EU governance

The EC/EU institution-building has changed the preferences, interests and ideas of the social partners, and thus attracted them into the “European social policy community”. Under the “Community method”, the traditional mode of EU governance, the social partners developed social dialogues, participated in the Tripartite Conferences and provided consultations for legislation. Along with the signing of the Maastricht Treaty, the social partners at the EU level have gained the right to participate directly into the legislating procedure recurring to social partnership. Under the Open Method of Coordination (OMC), the new mode of EU governance, the social partners, together with the civil society, are playing pivotal roles in the formulation, implementation, and overseeing EU policies. This paper intends to make a detailed analysis of the different roles played by the social partners under the three types of decision-making mechanisms, that is, the normal legislating procedure, the social partnership procedure and the OMC, thus trying to illustrate some of the characteristics of EU governance.     

Aid darling and the European Union’s aid allocation policy: the case of Vietnam

This paper analyses the motivation determining the European Union’s (EU) aid allocation to Vietnam. Existing literature and EU official documents are used to build upon four models with respect to new aid allocation: donor interest, recipient interest, recipient capacity and potential donor influence. The paper concludes that the EU’s aid policy in Vietnam has a long-term objective in conformity with Vietnam’s development strategy—poverty alleviation. Moreover, the EU’s political and economic interests, a successful economic reform and development strategy, a high level of ownership (good governance) and potential donor influence are identified as contributions to make Vietnam an ‘aid darling’.     

Organizing international armaments cooperation: institutional design and path dependencies in Europe

Abstract

Few issues are more important to scholars of Europe's emergence as a foreign policy actor than whether the European Union (EU) can forge a common defense-industrial policy out of 27 states' procurement policies and defense industries. Overlooked in most scholarly analyses of European defense-industrial cooperation, the story of Europe's international armaments organizations stretches back more than six decades. In this article, we examine the impact of past institutional outcomes on the defense-industrial field by applying the concepts and analytic tools of historic institutionalism to European armaments organizations. Because past institutional dynamics have channeled the subsequent development of armaments cooperation, what has emerged is a polycentric governance architecture wherein organizations with transatlantic, pan-European and restrictive-European memberships dominate distinct components of the cooperative process. We demonstrate that this maturing institutional pattern will likely limit the opportunities for the EU – and especially its Commission – to shape the future contours of European defense-industrial cooperation.     

Leadership, decision-making and governance in the EU and East Asia: crisis and post-crisis

The global financial crisis of the late 2000s has affected the EU and East Asia differently. The EU has seen its economic, political and social structures undermined by the problems derived from the global crisis and subsequent eurozone sovereign debt crisis. In contrast, East Asia has gone through the global crisis relatively unscathed and has seen its standing at the global level reinforced. As a result, there has been a reconfiguration of leadership, decision-making and governance structures in both regions. In the case of the EU, Germany has emerged as the clear leader of European efforts to solve regional economic problems. Meanwhile, intergovernmentalism has replaced supranationalism as the decision-making and even implementation procedure of choice. Differently, there is no single leader in East Asia. China has become one of the most important powers at the global level, but at the regional level, different countries have shaped East Asia’s response to the crisis. Concurrently, there has been some move towards increasing integration, even though intergovernmentalism still defines governance structures in the region. Thus, the global financial crisis of the late 2000s has helped to shape new leadership, decision-making and governance structures in both regions.     

The EU and the Peacebuilding Commission

What can the world hope for from the Peacebuilding Commission, given the record of the United Nations in this area? And what contribution can the European Union (EU) offer, given its own record in engaging with countries emerging from violent conflict? The essential task in peacebuilding is to restore a war-torn society's capacity to manage its own conflicts. The priority for the Peacebuilding Commission should be to develop international support and legitimacy for this task, avoiding muddying it with the foreign policy objectives of donor states. The EU has much to offer and much to gain from establishing this growing area of global governance on sound principles and internationally accepted lines. The paper argues that the EU can and should play a leading part in developing the Peacebuilding Commission. It reflects on principles that could be applied and practices that should be avoided.     

欧盟数字治理:理念、实践与影响

在全球科技竞争日益激烈的背景下,近几年来欧盟加速推动数字化转型,提出了"数字主权"的战略理念,在全球引起强烈反响。欧盟在规范数字市场发展方面持续发力,密集出台了一系列新的监管规则,成为全球数字治理规则的制定者、贡献者和引领者。依托于庞大的数字经济市场和先进的技术基础,欧盟将数字治理理念推向世界,产生的影响值得重视:一是在全球数字治理规则制定中的"欧洲色彩"愈加浓重;二是欧盟数字单一市场对全球数字经济格局的塑造力不断提升;三是"消费者主权"正在成为全球数字治理领域的新特征。     

Resilience as the new EU foreign policy paradigm: a pragmatist turn?

This article examines the rise of resilience discourses in EU foreign policy. The European Union Global Strategy (EUGS) refers to building state and societal resilience in its neighbourhood as one of the key strategic priorities of the EU. This article argues that the discourse of resilience that permeates the EUGS chimes well with a pragmatist turn in social sciences and global governance. The EUGS introduces resilience-building alongside an emphasis on flexibility, tailor-made approaches and the need for local ownership, capacity-building and comprehensiveness. More importantly, the new EUGS proposes “principled pragmatism” as a new operating principle in its foreign policy. While this might suggest a more pragmatic EU foreign policy, a closer examination of the EUGS discourse reveals significant tensions between a pragmatic and a principled foreign policy, which undermine the added value of resilience-building as a new foreign policy paradigm.     

Small carrots,few sticks: EU good governance promotion in sub-Saharan Africa

The European Union has developed a one-size-fits-all approach to promote good governance reforms in African countries, focusing on strengthening the effectiveness of state institutions while increasingly asking for reforms that also target their democratic quality. Assessing the EU's policies in Angola and Ethiopia reveals, however, that the implementation of this approach is more differential. While the EU has a hard time making the two governments address governance issues, it has been more successful in implementing its policy approach in Ethiopia than in Angola. These differences are largely explained by these countries' different degrees of interdependency with the EU rather than differences in stability and democracy. Unlike Angola, Ethiopia heavily relies on EU development aid, giving the EU greater leverage to push for governance reforms. While conditionality is more effective in making African governments address governance issues, it undermines the legitimacy of the EU's development cooperation, which emphasizes partnership and ownership.     

The Japan-EU Economic Partnership Agreement—economic potentials and policy perspectives

After more than 4 years of negotiations, Japan and the EU have reached an agreement for bilateral free trade. The intended liberalization of trade in goods, agriculture, and services would create the world’s largest free trade area. Japan and Europe are sending a strong signal against protectionism and in favor of free trade and modernizing global trade rules. While free trade in the transatlantic and the transpacific context will remain an illusion for some time to come, the Japan-EU Economic Partnership Agreement (JEEPA) is a realistic option for trade partners at the western and eastern side of the Eurasian continent. The expected overall positive effects of JEEPA should not obscure the limitations and risks of the intended trade integration. There will be economic losers of the agreement both in Europe and in Japan. There is plenty of fuel for political and social conflict. And in light of the many informal barriers, market access to Japan will remain extremely difficult for European companies. Beyond trade policy, JEEPA has a political dimension, too. It shows the political will to counteract economic disintegration and the loss of political substance in the bilateral relationship. The aim is to intensify cooperation, which would benefit both sides economically and politically.     

The substance of EU democratic governance promotion via transgovernmental cooperation with the Eastern neighbourhood

Existing studies of the European Union’s (EU) democratic governance promotion via transgovernmental cooperation in the EU’s neighbourhood seem to take the substance of what is being promoted by the EU for granted. In filling this gap, this article examines the substance of EU democratic governance promotion by assessing (1) to what extent norms of democratic governance appear in EU Twinning projects implemented in the Eastern neighbourhood, and (2) what factors account for differences in the presence of democratic governance norms across those projects. To explain possible variation, the article hypothesizes that the democratic governance substance of Twinning projects will vary with the country’s political liberalization, sector politicization, sector technical complexity, and EU conditionality attached to reform progress in a given policy sector. Data are retrieved from a content analysis of 117 Twinning project fiches from the Eastern neighbourhood and analysed via standard multiple regression. The article finds that the EU mostly promotes moderate, mixed democratic governance substance, which varies across different projects. This variation may be best explained by the level of political liberalization of the beneficiary country and the politicization and technical complexity of the policy sectors and institutions involved in respective Twinning projects.     

The European Programme for the protection of critical infrastructures – meta-governing a new security problem?

Critical infrastructure protection (CIP) constitutes a paradigmatic as well as challenging case for EU security governance, which has received limited academic attention to date. This article draws on a heuristic framework to survey the EU's capacities to ‘meta-govern’, that is, to stimulate and steer governance efforts across multiple sectoral and political divides, in this complex issue area. The main part of the paper assesses the European Programme for Critical Infrastructure Protection (EPCIP), which comprises a variety of policy instruments and initiatives, on this basis. It is shown that the attempt of an authoritative regulation of European critical infrastructures has remained narrow and of questionable effectiveness. Scientific networks have developed more dynamically, while the participation of private companies and corresponding EU financial instruments are yet to show their potential. Finally, the EU's organizational capacity in CIP suffers from a lack of coordination structures in the European Commission, but also needs to take the scarcely known Joint Research Centre (JRC) into account. The conclusions highlight the barriers to comprehensive governance of as well as large research gaps on European critical infrastructure policies.     

德法和解历史对中日建立战略互惠关系的借鉴与思考

中国和日本是东亚地区两个重要国家,处理好中日关系符合两国人民的共同利益,对于东亚地区的和平与繁荣具有十分重要的意义。在中日建立战略互惠关系初显曙光的时候,通过比较研究汲取德法和解的经验,将使我们获得有益的启迪。人们期待中日关系能借鉴法德在欧洲和解的智慧、创造出东亚地区中日和平与合作的奇迹。在战后以来六十多年的时间里,中日和平友好与法德和解在亚欧不同地缘政治环境中也出现了明显的发展差异。法德关系经历并超越了相互憎恨的历史,走向了真正和解。法德和解奠定了欧洲合作的基石,两者伙伴关系的进一步深化则开创了从欧共体到欧盟的欧洲合作新局面。与德法和解带动欧洲国家整合的硕果相比,中日和平友好表现出了明显的滞后性和局限性。中日关系超越"战争历史"问题、国家地位身份认同问题、共同战略利益基础和政治互信问题等方面也都落后于法德和解的发展,法德和解取得了创建欧盟的硕果,中日则刚刚取得建立战略互惠关系的共识。中日矛盾的深层症结就在于没有战略合作的共识和目标,从而导致双方缺乏政治互信和在战略上相互猜疑。法德和解的经验告诉我们,推动中日战略互惠关系的发展必须构建中日战略合作的共识,在中日关系中制定并推行"和平、合作与共赢"的外交政策新理念。中日走出历史问题争论和民间对立情绪困境的出路在于中日政治家们是否有智慧搭建两国战略合作和战略互惠的目标与框架。中日需要开展面向未来的共同事业,推动地区共同体形成的过程中实现并深化两国关系的和解与合作。     

Peripheral or Powerful? The European Union's Strategy to Combat the Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons

Abstract

The European Union has since 2003 developed both a security and a Weapons of Mass Destruction strategy, and it has become the primary interlocutor of Iran in the dispute related to Iran's nuclear development. These are signs of significant policy progress. However, the fact that four years of nuclear diplomacy have brought few results invites a critical appraisal of EU strategy. This essay undertakes this appraisal, arguing that the EU is notably ambivalent regarding its underlying conception of international order. The EU wishes to be pluralist (in the tradition of sovereign equality), but is also anti-pluralist (in the liberal–democratic tradition). The essay lays out how the EU has coped with pressures for reform—arising notably from the United States—within the current international nuclear non-proliferation regime, and how this has made the EU problem apparent. The essay finally suggests that to salvage its policy of effective multilateralism the EU must acknowledge its anti-pluralist bias and promote a common transatlantic approach to nuclear non-proliferation.     

Globalization,Integration, and the European Welfare State

This paper considers three challenges to the mature European welfare states posed by economic and social integration, demographic changes, and the alleged decline of state capacity in the form of fiscal extraction in an era of globalization. I argue that the experiences of the older member states in the European Union are difficult to reconcile with the common assertions that globalization necessarily leads to a “race to the bottom” where welfare spending is downsized to the lowest common denominator. I develop a set of hypotheses on plausible linkages between demographic challenges, globalization, political capacity, and welfare spending, and test the propositions in an empirical analysis of 14 European Union member states from 1983 to 1998. My empirical results suggest that economic integration does not pose a threat to European welfare states. Rather, demographic changes such as low fertility rates and the aging of the population and their political implications for political leaders’ incentives are more serious challenges for the continuation of the welfare state in Europe.     

Italy and the new international economic order

In order to make it more effective as an actor on the international scene, the European Union is being urged to reverse its foreign policy priorities. EU enlargement policy has fallen out of grace and many want to see Europe acquire a “normal” foreign policy with a global rather than merely regional reach, significant military means and centralised governance. Management of various conflicts in Africa and Asia is also in vogue. Such a policy shift will define the nature of Europe's actorness. It is argued that, with all its defects, the EU performs quite well as a civilian regional power and efforts to transform it into a traditional military power with a global reach could make things worse rather than better.     

Unintended Consequences of EU Democracy Support in the European Neighbourhood

ABSTRACT

The European Union’s (EU) impact on the political governance of the European neighbourhood is varied and sometimes opposite to the declared objectives of its democracy support policies. The democracy promotion literature has to a large extent neglected the unintended consequences of EU democracy support in Eastern Europe and the Middle East and North Africa. The EU has left multiple imprints on the political trajectories of the countries in the neighbourhood and yet the dominant explanation, highlighting the EU’s security and economic interests in the two regions,cannot fully account for the unintended consequences of its policies. The literature on the ‘pathologies’ of international organisations offers an explanation, emphasizing the failures of the EU bureaucracy to anticipate, prevent or reverse the undesired effects of its democracy support in the neighbourhood.     

A more martial Europe? Public opinion,permissive consensus,and EU defence policy

EU defence policy has been extremely popular over the past three decades, averaging around 75% public support. In fact, no other policy domain is as popular and robust as the idea of pooling national sovereignty over defence. However, public support for EU defence has been dismissed as mere “permissive consensus”, rather than genuine support. Scholars have often assumed that public opinion towards European integration is passive and shallow, especially over foreign policy issues, where the public has limited understanding of the complexity of issues. Consistent with contemporary findings about the complexity of comparative foreign policy attitudes, the authors contest the permissive consensus logic and demonstrate that European publics have held coherent preferences over the use of force at the European level. The authors conclude that the slow progress of integration in this area is due to the reluctance of elites rather than to the reticence of Europe’s citizens.